zBlogging the Literary Life - AP College English

Metaphor-Off

Well, now that I'm done taking finals in AP classes, I've begun to catch up on my over-one-month-long Daily Show and Colbert Report backlog on Tivo.  And, this afternoon, I got to a funny clip on the Colbert Report with actor Sean Penn in which the two engage in a metaphor-off.  Actually, that whole week Colbert prepared on the air by using metaphors as well as other literary devices such as hyperbole and allusion, but the culmination of this act ended in his face-off with Penn.  Check out the video clip yourself. Click here.

My Villanelle

I can't think of anything else to post so here's my lame Villanelle. As Mr. Heidkamp called it, it's simple yet efficient. I actually don't remember if he called it that or not but it is. I got a check mark. I hope that's a good thing.

He was just a crazy old man
With a pencil-thick neck and a beard
And his body was shaped like an oil can

He still drove an old hippie van
Everyone thought he was weird
He was just a crazy old man

They all called him Dan
Spiders were all that he feared
And his body was shaped like an oil can

The last thing they called him was bland
He only ate his cream cheese smeared
He was just a crazy old man

His house was simply grand
When he first saw it, he cheered
And his body was shaped like an oil can
He was just a crazy old man

Poetry & Music

I chose to compare two songs for the poetry comparison paper and while writing it I started to think about the similarities between the two mediums. Back when poetry was really, really popular, they didn't have songs with lyrics, only classical music. However poetry was probably more popular than music at the time (music had no real method of playback back then, and you could read poetry whenever and wherever). Thus, poetry had a much more widespread appeal and was therefore used to reach a wider audience of people. Today, music is obviously extremely more popular than poetry. However, it is used much in the same way poetry was. Just like how poets would many times contain a message within their poem that required in-depth analysis to figure out, so do many songs today. Songwriters will often write lyrics based off of their own views on the world and situations that many people find themselves in to reach the masses and convey a message, much in the way poets did. Thus, songs are used today in the way poetry was way back when. The medium changes but many of the messages stay the same.

Can Poetry Be Bad?

Well, of course, I will be brave enough to take on poetry.  What makes poetry really good and how do we tell the difference?  I mean let's say we have Shakespeare and some Hobo on the street and they both write poems, wouldn't each one be brilliant in there own right.  Poetry I think is just a way for people to simply express themselves or an idea or something they have just been thinking about.  Some are in a scheme others are just in random lines.  Poetry is great to someone so there is no such thing is bad poetry.  Or is there?

Poetic Questions

So what makes poetry teachable? What gives value to a poem? What makes a poem about the Iraq war more teachable than a poem about the blue sky? When Mr. Heidkamp started asking these questions today my thoughts came down to this:

The blue sky is there. We can see it every cloudless day. I know the blue sky. When discussing something like the sky, there isn't going to be much controversy. As far as I'm concerned, unless there is an extended metaphor or some journey in the poem there isn't much to learn. There is no question or perspective that can be reviewed or analyzed. No questions asked.

Whereas a poem about the Iraq war could have some discussable qualities. Someone may not agree with the viewpoint presented, some may. Some people's ideas may even change through the course of the poem. I think that a teachable poem has to ask questions, challenge ideas, have a more meaningful meaning.

I guess I'm not actually answering what gives a poem value, because I think a poem about the blue sky can still have plenty of value, the beauty of nature or what have you-- it is neither more or less valuable than the poem about the Iraq war, there is just less to say about it, less to discuss I guess. My idea is that the hypothetical blue sky poem is more likely to be a statement, whereas the Iraq war one is more likely to be a question. Teachers will teach what gets minds going and its always the question. Thats just my thoughts though, any others? 

Which Art Tickles Your Heart?

Recently, I have liked to deem myself an appreciator of poetry. It is fun to say, "Poetry is a man's mind on paper," and I do enjoy writing my own. Then again, maybe I am just a fool pretending to be an artist. Whatever. However, music has claimed an importance in my life that is unmatched by most anything. I find my musical experiences as almost religious.
Still, some poems really, really hit hard. I think the first one in "Sound and Sense" to knock me down was "Dulce et Decorum Est," about the man who died in the gas attack. It is one of the most beautifully powerful collection of words I have ever read. While certain songs reach this level of intensity, I do not think that the words have enough time or spotlight to create these images/ideas.
"the blood come gargling from the froth-corrupted lings, bitter as the cud." I still cannot get over that line.
I think poetry's main handicap is that people cannot get together and read the poem together. Listening to a song and singing along with your buddies/alone/the universe is a majestic experience. You can't really learn a poem and perform it in your own style like you can a song, and you can't really find poetry on CD that you want to listen to while going for a run. Unless we put all of our attention on a poem, we can't really appreciate it all, but we can listen to music while walking, working, driving, eating...pretty much anything that affords us our ears.

Then again, art is not a competition, so why can't we appreciate and enjoy all forms?

An Awkward Fit.

  I think that some of the songs chosen ould easily transcend as poetry.  But on the other hand as I went through the 9th period packet I noticed numerous songs that I deemed to much of a stretch to be considered poetry.  I'm not going to name names but I think that it would be more valuble if certain verses or choruses were used intstead of just forcing entire songs into a poetry catagory that doesn't fit.  I'd like to know if anyone else (especially classes other than 9) in thought of this as they were reading through the packets or listening to songs in class.

Sestina

So after the long conversation yesterday and today in class about poetry and different types in still a bit confused. I understand the Villanelle form but somehow to Sestina doesn't click. What's all the ABCDEF order about? If you understand it and wanna recap what it means that'd be much appreciated.

That is so confusing

The poetry we read is so confusing and the literary techniques that we learned are supposed to make understanding poetry and literature easier to read and understand. But it is the opposite that's happening here. The meanings of these literary techniques are very abstract and ill defined that they could basically fit anything. Today when we did that fun quiz, i was very confused with a lot of things: is that an overstatement or a verbal irony? metaphor or hyperbole? I was confused to the extent that i was so focused on the literary techniques, i did not even notice the funny parts and i think i missed some of the events that occurred. The Simpsons is the kind of thing that would be ruined if analyzed or broken apart. On the other hand poetry and literature is obscure and almost always meaningless unless explained by the author himself. For example we always try to come up with possible themes for something try to prove the argument, however, people can always ignore what opposes their points of view and exaggerate the evidence for the ideas they support. I think every book should be preceded or followed by an explanation by the author him/herself, since this is the only individual who fully understands the work.

Spoken Poetry Isn't Boring

Why is that? In all honesty, we've read a pretty large amount of poems over the last week. The poetry has the same solemn, content feel. The surprising thing is not necessarily the topics, as much as the tone.

Is it because of the way we read the poems? I know we've been taught to read poems a specific way, but is that the right way? According to Sound and Sense, this is the correct way. I’m questioning the integrity of the book I guess, which is a pretty large bound, but is the book really right? I've seen plenty of poets perform with an incredible sense of emotion and gesture, of which the book would be completely opposed to. I simply can’t come to the conclusion that when some of our local poets, or more national renowned poets are belting their hearts out, that they’re reciting their own poetry incorrectly. In fact, that sounds completely ridiculous.

To be honest, this idea of reading a poem presented in Sound and Sense sounds a lot like the structured idealism people have been putting on music and art for years. I mean, if you painted abstract art during the renaissance period, or dropped acid before a symphony, well, that would be simply ridiculous. Modern artists have changed their performing styles, and just because Sound and Sense says one way works doesn’t mean it is the only way to approach the reading of a poem. Sure, you should understand the poem before you go reading it, but if poems have as much emotion as they do, presenting them shouldn’t always be in “regular speech” with “excite where implied”. There’s emotion and excitement applied everywhere in a good poem.

What do you think?