Workshop...

I have to agree that the current checklist seems to be somewhat detrimental to the workshopping process. I feel that, by asking questions which try to encompass all facets of poetry, the result is to take attention away from the poem being workshopped. Instead of thinking about the effectiveness of the author's techniques and possible areas of improvement, we are forced to try to squeeze the poem into a category where it does not necessarily belong in order to respond to the questions. I like Dylan's question suggestions, but I think they should respond to the more technical aspects of the poem as well. But rather than try to identify plot and speaker when there often is none, I would suggest a question along the lines of: "How do the line breaks, rhyme scheme, meter, etc. or lack thereof contribute to the author's message?" I think that this would adequately adress the technical aspects of the poem without micromanaging the workshopping process. Additionally, there I one question I have about the checklist. I am unclear as to whether the purpose of it is to have a concrete critique of the author's work so that one's feedback is written down for them, or if the purpose is to act as a reminder to the workshopper of what his thoughts were while reading the poems. I think that the answer to this question determines the way in which these checklists are written and how effective they are.

Suggestions

I completely agree with what has been said about the workshop checklist. I do see the usefulness in asking questions about a piece of writing, especially when it isn't yours. I also like how we get together and discuss our observations as a group, as this act of sharing ideas often sparks new ideas by students. However, some of the questions we are asked to answer in the checklist are not of much use to the author. I think that if the questions acted more as a guide, or a starting point, they may be more effective. From there, students could pick and choose which questions would be suitable, to the specific poem and poet, to be answered. A longer list of questions would be more interesting too. Some suggestions for questions that I have thought of include:

1. How emotionally attached to this poem are you? Does there need to be a deeper connection with the reader, or is it effective how it is?

2. How can the poet capture the reader's interest and attention more?

3. What kind of audience is the poem written for right now, and could the poet benefit from reworking the piece with other audiences in mind?

4. What specific techniques could be incorporated to enhance the poem?

5. Is the title appropriate? Does it give too much away? Or is it too vague?

These questions have come up in my mind as I was reading other classmate's poems. Does anyone else have any other suggestions for questions while workshopping??

Workshopping

From the whispers and murmurs I hear from the underground, the general consensus is that our workshop checklist is undoubtedly an entangling hassle. I have to agree with Gary when he says, “it seems (at least to me) that the workshop checklists are too geared for discussing every aching detail of a poem no matter how long it is, or if it is one of many.” Details can get lost and ultimately, a large majority of the workshop checklist is ignored or left disregarded during the workshop time.

However, I feel that the workshop checklist is a great starting point for developing thoughtful and provoking guidance for an aspiring poet. Indeed not every question on the checklist may be appropriate or of a good use for a certain poem, but often times one or two questions may be particularly useful for helping the author with valuable, constructive and in-depth criticism and/or worthwhile feedback. To the questions that I find most applicable, often times I find myself writing their answers directly on the poetry itself or in the margin.

A writing style is always unique—obtuse would be the word I would use to describe someone who does not support that claim—accordingly, the questions that stand out the most are unique to that author or poem. Nonetheless, the workshop checklist remains an active part of the poetry process and must be respected for the insights that it gives us. Perhaps what one student finds to be of use is not held in similar esteem by another, and vice versa.

Thoughts on Upcoming Workshop

As Tuesday rolls closer I have been thinking more about this upcoming workshop session, I must admit I have been thinking harder about the entire workshoping process as well. While, personally I love the idea of the class splitting up into small groups to discuss and review each other’s poetry and the techniques we used. However, I still feel that some aspects of the workshop could be more efficient, namely the workshop checklists. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not attacking the checklists because they are forms of homework, or even because they take time. The real reason I point them out is because of their efficiency and usefulness when compared to the time that goes into them.

Ultimately, I think the workshop checklists are great in theory, I think it’s crucial to read each other’s poems with a keen eye, open mind, and ready pen. But still it seems (at least to me) that the workshop checklists are too geared for discussing every aching detail of a poem no matter how long it is, or if it is one of many. While the numerous questions on the details of a poem maybe just too important to cut down on, the truth is almost everyone in the class prefers reaching a 42 line poem requirement with multiple poems. And when your spending over an hour an half doing one person’s checklist because they have several good poems, (knowing in the end that only a tenth of that time will be discussing the important aspects of what you wrote) it can seem a little frustrating.

To recap, I think workshops are an awesome tool for improving our poetry, and I full heartedly agree that the checklists are important aids in helping them run smoothly, I just believe there should be a more effective way of completing them for author who has multiple poems.

Striving to improve

In relation to what Tory said about expanding ones writing style, I definitely feel in a way that I too do very similar things in most of my poetry. I have a perception in my head that better poetry is all about showing more than one is telling. If there is a concept that I want to get across, whether it’s a feeling or something grander, I’ll try and see how I can do it visually. However, since being in this class I’ve learned that there really is no acute definition to “good” or “better” poetry in a general sense, except in terms of what one likes. It seems to be in some cases just personal choice. However, the fact that we are being graded on our poetry seems, in one sense, to contradict that. I feel that one can grade poetry, just as one can evaluate good art from bad art. One can make such distinctions not necessarily by a formula of color, amount of feeling induced, or topic, but can distinguish between high and low quality art based on how well one was able to transmit the desired goal/effect. Someone with no prior experience to painting or writing can make art and poetry, but as it would make sense they would have frustration over not being able to fully express their feelings. Therefore, one can, in sense, grade poetry and art, and therefore strive to make it better. However, it still all depends on the context of what one is striving to improve, whether it be imagery, rhyme scheme, comprehensive structure, or a feeling.

Sister Corita!

I thoroughly enjoyed Tuesday’s class at the Brush Art Gallery to analyze Sister Corita’s pop art. I found her work incredibly inspiring because it combines the elements of poetry and visual art, and it transforms the work into something very profound. After carefully looking at each of the works, I felt connected to Corita and her message of peace. I love how she incorporates both worldly subjects and the teachings of her faith into her work. She softly manipulates fundamental Christian beliefs in her art so that they can be relatable to a secular audience. Her art has the ability to connect to a wide-variety of people, which is a goal that every artist and writer possesses.

One particular work of hers that I loved was the print with Thoreau’s face on a stamp, and quotations from his works Civil Disobedience and Walden. Corita shows her appreciation for nature and Thoreau’s own example of embracing the nature in his life. During his time, Thoreau was a source of light in the flourishing era of industrialization in the mid-1800s. He represented freedom and independence—he was free from the burdens of technology, and he did not conform to the standards of American modernity. Since Thoreau was a revolutionary for his time, I found it very appropriate that Corita used his face and words in her piece. She wants to portray how essential its is for every individual to exhibit his or her liberties, especially during periods of time that are undergoing change. Both Thoreau and Corita are advocates of simplicity and hope for community, and through their art, they are able to make an important connection with every reader and viewer.

I enjoyed so much the class we spent in the art gallery on Tuesday.  I thought looking at the kind of art/poetry that Sister Corita created was beautiful.  I felt somewhat similar to Gary when I first came into class having read the packet for that day, and I wasn't sure how I felt about some of the pieces that we had read/looked at.  There seems to be a fine line between some of these "poems" and it seems difficult to distinguish between poetry and art.  

I have been thinking about this difference a lot, wondering how I could specifically define or differentiate the two.  I think poetry for the most part plays with words and their meaning collectively, whereas art like Sister Corita and others plays with letters, expressions and visual representations more.  Poetry is dominated by words whereas, this art is a collection/collage of all of the above.

On the other hand however, there is still a part of me that believes that art is always spread across a spectrum, and there are always different variations and techniques.  So to say that what Sister Corita does is not poetry does not sit well with me either.

Whatever it is however, I loved it.  I liked not being able to know exactly what she was trying to say at first glance, but piecing together all the different pictures, words, colors, and styles you could draw your own conclusion.  She had strong opinions, but did not push them on us.  She questioned us rather, pushed us to think which I thought was very impressive.

I also loved the activity, picking out words and phrases, images and colors of our own, but we didn't have enough time! I wish we could have had this as an assignment, or one of our poems because I thought it was a great variation on the usual technique we are used to.