Random
Varieties of Contempt (a guest response from Christian Lorentzen to JC)
Christian Lorentzen sends word post-occasion of Jimmy’s hipster post; via “Varieties of Contempt”:
Would I accept several thousand dollars in exchange for shooting
myself in the kneecap? Yes, and when the bald man asks for my head on
a stake, hand it to him. He didn’t earn his vulgarity, so we had to
mark him a B+. You can blame the 70s, but it was really the 60s. Much
besides your life depends on exhibiting your best behavior in that
brothel. I myself prefer polite mediocrity to rude talent, but there
are plenty of nice restaurants in this city. He’s not a great chef,
he’s a good chef who shined a great chef’s shoes for years. What’s
funny is when they release those studies that show they are reading
less. Wasn’t the first thing we learned in school the fact that
they’re mostly a silly bunch of guys? He must be stopped before I get
slapped with a health-code violation. Mother, may I have a second can
of soda today? No, it will rot your syntax. I feel lonely when I look
in the mirror but not as lonely as I feel when you are here, so just
stretch your toes into the sea. If it demonstrates form, some people
will take an axe to it. Style is the ultimate weapon, and if you can
combine it with authenticity, you’ve got a great scam going. Welcome
to my femininity, and let me tell you about the dental plan. Two
Californians walk into a bar, and a Mississippian tells them their
problem is that they didn’t first love apple pie. I construct
narrative arks, that’s what I do. The crucial hour begins at three in
the morning. He failed to turn his neck as they were coming out of the
shade, so now they’re stuck with each other. I’m sorry about your
baby. The scandal will be good for your health. Look forward to a
cleansing effect. I feel unable to connect with it, so let’s just play
it up really big and make it sell. Hold the center or it will hold
you. Summer’s surprise was a feeling of generalized hatred, like a man
standing over you and threatening your life, or someone who thanks you
for your attention and cites it as a valuable service to the
community. I called it nihilism, and he called it several forms of
negation. You like to say it’s complicated, but actually it’s simple
to the point of crudity. It’s all right, but I wish it was as big as
my ego, which will now take off his shirt. That winter, the worst ever,
all the snowflakes were identical. I gave myself to you but never got
a receipt. Now for the worst moment of your career. Go away, go away.
Tags: christian lorentzen
i like this
i like this
Inaugurals. One after the next.
Inaugurals. One after the next.
i have to be honest, this is really good.
i have to be honest, this is really good.
i like this a lot
i like this a lot
First question: Is this a poem with deliberate line breaks or prose with narrow margins?
Second question: What’s he trying to say?
First question: Is this a poem with deliberate line breaks or prose with narrow margins?
Second question: What’s he trying to say?
excellent.
excellent.
He has no idea what he’s trying to say. That’s why it’s so good.
He has no idea what he’s trying to say. That’s why it’s so good.
how come i can google-find a lot of reviews and articles
but no other examples of christian lorentzen’s poetry on the interwebs?
i want more christian lorentzen poems
how come i can google-find a lot of reviews and articles
but no other examples of christian lorentzen’s poetry on the interwebs?
i want more christian lorentzen poems
he’s trying to say what he said
he’s trying to say what he said
That’s the way it should be.
That’s the way it should be.
I guess asking what someone is trying to say is a stupid question. Clarity is such an old fashioned notion.
I guess asking what someone is trying to say is a stupid question. Clarity is such an old fashioned notion.
“clarity” is not the same thing as “what is he trying to say”
it’s not Lassie, it’s a poem
“clarity” is not the same thing as “what is he trying to say”
it’s not Lassie, it’s a poem
“it’s not Lassie, it’s a poem” for the win (yeah, i spelled it out)
“it’s not Lassie, it’s a poem” for the win (yeah, i spelled it out)
So, as long as I’m clear about this: no one really knows what this guy is saying? Right? And that is…good?
So, as long as I’m clear about this: no one really knows what this guy is saying? Right? And that is…good?
no, you are being silly
the poem is “saying” different things in every line, if you want to call it that
1) it is very enjoyable for me to read each line and each linebreak and allow those lines to send me places in my head and to cause feelings in me, and to connect the places i’m sent and the feelings i get as they accumulate
2) it is enjoyable because often the places and feelings are surprising and exciting
that is the clearest way i can put it
the poem is not saying any one thing
no one is in danger
heads are tricky
lassie vs. poem
no, you are being silly
the poem is “saying” different things in every line, if you want to call it that
1) it is very enjoyable for me to read each line and each linebreak and allow those lines to send me places in my head and to cause feelings in me, and to connect the places i’m sent and the feelings i get as they accumulate
2) it is enjoyable because often the places and feelings are surprising and exciting
that is the clearest way i can put it
the poem is not saying any one thing
no one is in danger
heads are tricky
lassie vs. poem
Well, I disagree. I don’t find anything “surprising” or “exciting” about it. Random juxtaposition is not a wormhole to the excellence. I’m still not sure how lassie figures in, but I do think that conflict or danger are elements that make a poem or story interesting.
Well, I disagree. I don’t find anything “surprising” or “exciting” about it. Random juxtaposition is not a wormhole to the excellence. I’m still not sure how lassie figures in, but I do think that conflict or danger are elements that make a poem or story interesting.
Poetry isn’t a matter of starting with “something to say”, feeding it through the poem-machine, and ending up with a mixed-up version of that original “something”. It does sort of get taught that way in high school, so it’s understandable why people have trouble. Good poems are made up as they go along–I mean, even the ideas are made up as they go along. In the process of writing one line you discover what the next line will be. A constant chain of little discoveries popping like, uh, popcorn, in the brain.
Poetry isn’t a matter of starting with “something to say”, feeding it through the poem-machine, and ending up with a mixed-up version of that original “something”. It does sort of get taught that way in high school, so it’s understandable why people have trouble. Good poems are made up as they go along–I mean, even the ideas are made up as they go along. In the process of writing one line you discover what the next line will be. A constant chain of little discoveries popping like, uh, popcorn, in the brain.
Thanks for that explanation of what poetry is Matt…what teacher taught you this ridiculous theory?
Thanks for that explanation of what poetry is Matt…what teacher taught you this ridiculous theory?
poetry like popcorn…big impact stuff…
poetry like popcorn…big impact stuff…
Nobody, it’s my own ridiculous theory.
Nobody, it’s my own ridiculous theory.
Ok. Not popcorn. Hydrogen bombs. Satisfied?
Ok. Not popcorn. Hydrogen bombs. Satisfied?
Hydrogen bombs that explode like popcorn…no, I am not satisfied…
Hydrogen bombs that explode like popcorn…no, I am not satisfied…
i don’t think he has to “say” something in this poem. after something is written, it’s the reader’s burden and no longer the creator’s possession. that’s how i view it at least.
personally i don’t really dig the poem. i like a few lines in it. most other lines i kind of just shrug my shoulders and think i must be dense or see things differently than the author.
i don’t think he has to “say” something in this poem. after something is written, it’s the reader’s burden and no longer the creator’s possession. that’s how i view it at least.
personally i don’t really dig the poem. i like a few lines in it. most other lines i kind of just shrug my shoulders and think i must be dense or see things differently than the author.
Mather, there are many feelings in the world and they don’t have to be loud to be interesting.
From what I’ve read of your thoughts, there are very few things in the world you seem to think are poems, and then there are even fewer things you think are good poems, and then there are many many more things that people write that they call poems, and some of those things are what other people call good poems.
Listen: you are going to be bewildered and angry forever if you are waiting for people to admit that they’ve been lying all along about what they like.
I like this poem.
There are a lot of poems I don’t like because they are not exciting.
You might have a lot of namecalling to throw down and a lot of things to say about institutions or authenticity, but none of that has anything to do with me or my feelings toward a poem.
It would be one thing if I believed you were honestly trying to figure out why people like this poem, and then I would probably say more. But all I sense is scorn. Every time I have replied to you today, I feel as if I’ve had to put a blanket over the sneaky Dumpster fires of your definition hustle. For example, I never said—nor do I feel—there is anything “random” about the arrangement of this poem. I never said “it’s good because it’s random.” If you think it’s random, and if you think so in such a bitter way, then we’re probably unable to communicate at all, at least in this context, so it’s probably better at this point if we don’t.
Mather, there are many feelings in the world and they don’t have to be loud to be interesting.
From what I’ve read of your thoughts, there are very few things in the world you seem to think are poems, and then there are even fewer things you think are good poems, and then there are many many more things that people write that they call poems, and some of those things are what other people call good poems.
Listen: you are going to be bewildered and angry forever if you are waiting for people to admit that they’ve been lying all along about what they like.
I like this poem.
There are a lot of poems I don’t like because they are not exciting.
You might have a lot of namecalling to throw down and a lot of things to say about institutions or authenticity, but none of that has anything to do with me or my feelings toward a poem.
It would be one thing if I believed you were honestly trying to figure out why people like this poem, and then I would probably say more. But all I sense is scorn. Every time I have replied to you today, I feel as if I’ve had to put a blanket over the sneaky Dumpster fires of your definition hustle. For example, I never said—nor do I feel—there is anything “random” about the arrangement of this poem. I never said “it’s good because it’s random.” If you think it’s random, and if you think so in such a bitter way, then we’re probably unable to communicate at all, at least in this context, so it’s probably better at this point if we don’t.
carpet bombs might be closer.
It’s not your own theory, Matt, it’s an old academic theory. People have been spouting this for decades: that the words and sentences, by ignoring meaning, somehow transport the reader onto some other plane, where linear thought, logic and common sense are rendered obsolete…give me a break…these kind of writers are not privy to any special plain of existence than the rest of us, and the writing is fake, put on and pretentious. It is nothing but a game for people with nothing to say, but think they are showing us a higher view of reality by putting sentences together that don’t seem to belong together. What brilliance and genius in their banal collages! Nobody except a college educated cowlick would write like this or commend writing like this.
carpet bombs might be closer.
It’s not your own theory, Matt, it’s an old academic theory. People have been spouting this for decades: that the words and sentences, by ignoring meaning, somehow transport the reader onto some other plane, where linear thought, logic and common sense are rendered obsolete…give me a break…these kind of writers are not privy to any special plain of existence than the rest of us, and the writing is fake, put on and pretentious. It is nothing but a game for people with nothing to say, but think they are showing us a higher view of reality by putting sentences together that don’t seem to belong together. What brilliance and genius in their banal collages! Nobody except a college educated cowlick would write like this or commend writing like this.
*blankets, not “a blanket”
*blankets, not “a blanket”
To be fair, I imagine similar things were said when “The Wasteland” was published. Not that I’m necessarily comparing this to “The Wasteland,” only your sort of critique.
Like Jereme, I don’t particularly like this as a poem, but certain lines affect me and I’ll take that for what it is, and on the same token, I can also appreciate why other people might like this poem for larger reasons. If it doesn’t affect you, if you don’t like it, fine. No one is saying you have to–nor even that you should. Just that they do. And, when you’ve asked them to elaborate why they do, and they have, you simply shat on their opinion. But granted, some came off at initially patronizing to you, too, so you’re probably just reciprocating. I hate justice.
Ah, hell. It’s mean week. We should all just get drunk and punchsex. Look into it.
To be fair, I imagine similar things were said when “The Wasteland” was published. Not that I’m necessarily comparing this to “The Wasteland,” only your sort of critique.
Like Jereme, I don’t particularly like this as a poem, but certain lines affect me and I’ll take that for what it is, and on the same token, I can also appreciate why other people might like this poem for larger reasons. If it doesn’t affect you, if you don’t like it, fine. No one is saying you have to–nor even that you should. Just that they do. And, when you’ve asked them to elaborate why they do, and they have, you simply shat on their opinion. But granted, some came off at initially patronizing to you, too, so you’re probably just reciprocating. I hate justice.
Ah, hell. It’s mean week. We should all just get drunk and punchsex. Look into it.
Sorry, Mike, didn’t mean to ignore you…But when you start talking about lassie, what the hell am I supposed to say to that? I wasn’t even sure if this was a “poem” or just a piece of prose with narrow margins. I guess it’s a poem.
I am not saying people are lying when they say they like a poem. Where did I say that? It’s great you like this poem. Recommend it for the Pushcart Prize.
I don’t need to prove to you that I am “honestly trying to figure out why people like this poem”…ha ha…I know why, Mike: because they are gullible and easily fooled by artifice. Sorry if that seems “sneaky” to you. If there’s anybody trying to “put a blanket over the sneaky Dumpster of your definition hustle” it’s Lorentzen.
Sorry, Mike, didn’t mean to ignore you…But when you start talking about lassie, what the hell am I supposed to say to that? I wasn’t even sure if this was a “poem” or just a piece of prose with narrow margins. I guess it’s a poem.
I am not saying people are lying when they say they like a poem. Where did I say that? It’s great you like this poem. Recommend it for the Pushcart Prize.
I don’t need to prove to you that I am “honestly trying to figure out why people like this poem”…ha ha…I know why, Mike: because they are gullible and easily fooled by artifice. Sorry if that seems “sneaky” to you. If there’s anybody trying to “put a blanket over the sneaky Dumpster of your definition hustle” it’s Lorentzen.
It seems like everybody is discussing this piece without actually discussing it, which makes me want to say something abt the actual text…
I especially like:
~“I myself prefer polite mediocrity to rude talent, but there are plenty of nice restaurants in this city.”
~“No, it will rot your syntax.”
~“Style is the ultimate weapon, and if you can combine it with authenticity, you’ve got a great scam going.”
~“Welcome to my femininity, and let me tell you about the dental plan.”
~“It’s all right, but I wish it was as big as my ego, which will now take off his shirt.”
I like how it’s sort-of digressive yet not.
I like when the second half of the sentences do something startling (ie, ego… shirt).
I like reading it as though the sentences build upon one another, then as if they don’t, then as if they do again.
I don’t know anything abt Lorentzen. Are any of these ‘found’ sentences? Or else cut up or something?
It seems like everybody is discussing this piece without actually discussing it, which makes me want to say something abt the actual text…
I especially like:
~“I myself prefer polite mediocrity to rude talent, but there are plenty of nice restaurants in this city.”
~“No, it will rot your syntax.”
~“Style is the ultimate weapon, and if you can combine it with authenticity, you’ve got a great scam going.”
~“Welcome to my femininity, and let me tell you about the dental plan.”
~“It’s all right, but I wish it was as big as my ego, which will now take off his shirt.”
I like how it’s sort-of digressive yet not.
I like when the second half of the sentences do something startling (ie, ego… shirt).
I like reading it as though the sentences build upon one another, then as if they don’t, then as if they do again.
I don’t know anything abt Lorentzen. Are any of these ‘found’ sentences? Or else cut up or something?
i think of it more like when you disturb nature inside a human construction, like when you open the door to a gross old shed and the rats scatter, or touch a wall and the moths depart. then you get to see the wall as it has been affected in the absence of your attention.
i think of it more like when you disturb nature inside a human construction, like when you open the door to a gross old shed and the rats scatter, or touch a wall and the moths depart. then you get to see the wall as it has been affected in the absence of your attention.
The first sentence was one I found particarly appalling. Preferring polite mediocrity to rude talent is in perfect conformity to the current pc mindset. Unless, of course, the statement was made ironically or sarcastically, which is impossible to tell from such a wishy-washy piece of writing, meaning the author can change his mind depending on who’s asking.
The first sentence was one I found particarly appalling. Preferring polite mediocrity to rude talent is in perfect conformity to the current pc mindset. Unless, of course, the statement was made ironically or sarcastically, which is impossible to tell from such a wishy-washy piece of writing, meaning the author can change his mind depending on who’s asking.
I like that.
I like that.
I thought the pc mindset was a myth dreamed up by loud boring people.
Who said anything about ignoring meaning? Words radiate meaning no matter what you do with them.
I thought the pc mindset was a myth dreamed up by loud boring people.
Who said anything about ignoring meaning? Words radiate meaning no matter what you do with them.
Yeah, I know, it doesn’t mean it’s always a “good” result, but meaning is there even in bad poems.
Yeah, I know, it doesn’t mean it’s always a “good” result, but meaning is there even in bad poems.
The statement is made deliberately in a way that assigns the sentiment to the speaker (I myself), revealing something of him to us. Perhaps because I write fiction, not poetry, I think of this primarily in terms of characterization. “Current pc mindset” is irrelevant, it’s not abt anything cultural or political. And for me, the part about restaurants completely reframes what came before, so that what at first seemed like some grander sentiment about art or something is suddenly about something as mundane as where to go for dinner.
The statement is made deliberately in a way that assigns the sentiment to the speaker (I myself), revealing something of him to us. Perhaps because I write fiction, not poetry, I think of this primarily in terms of characterization. “Current pc mindset” is irrelevant, it’s not abt anything cultural or political. And for me, the part about restaurants completely reframes what came before, so that what at first seemed like some grander sentiment about art or something is suddenly about something as mundane as where to go for dinner.
(which in my own interpretation makes a delicious mockery of grandiose assertions abt ‘mediocrity’ vs. ‘talent’)
(which in my own interpretation makes a delicious mockery of grandiose assertions abt ‘mediocrity’ vs. ‘talent’)
The Waste Land.
So, Mather, when did you stop writing poetry?
The Waste Land.
So, Mather, when did you stop writing poetry?
Yeah, Rachel, pc is a myth. Therefore, you are imaginary.
Yeah, Rachel, pc is a myth. Therefore, you are imaginary.
Hahaha, what does that mean.
Hahaha, what does that mean.
Why are there line breaks if most of the breaks don’t impart any additional meaning to the line? This question is not limited to the work above.
Why are there line breaks if most of the breaks don’t impart any additional meaning to the line? This question is not limited to the work above.
Whoah, I didn’t even notice they were line breaks when I read it b/c the lines are long enough it looks like an only slightly narrowly-set paragraph.
I don’t understand that, Jordan. I haven’t stopped. I’m barely getting started.
Whoah, I didn’t even notice they were line breaks when I read it b/c the lines are long enough it looks like an only slightly narrowly-set paragraph.
I don’t understand that, Jordan. I haven’t stopped. I’m barely getting started.
There are lots of reasons for line breaks. Meaning is not the only goal (and also, I’m not sure I agree that these particular line breaks don’t add meaning). There’s also affect. I care a lot about affect. For me, ending the first line on “shooting” builds in a little suspense, a tiny mind gap that makes “myself” more surprising. Line breaks can add emphasis to the words that lines end on. Line breaks also add extra thought groups. Like, normally, thought groups are sentences and clauses, but with line breaks you have the opportunity of more divisions, which causes more opportunities for thought. I think the shape of a poem also lends a certain sense of sound, and breath. There’s so much I don’t know about line breaks. I don’t think all line breaks are the right line breaks. But there are reasons for them.
That’s what I asked originally and never got an answer. Is this a poem or a piece of prose? Apparently nobody knows, which ads mystery to the piece, don’t you see?
There are lots of reasons for line breaks. Meaning is not the only goal (and also, I’m not sure I agree that these particular line breaks don’t add meaning). There’s also affect. I care a lot about affect. For me, ending the first line on “shooting” builds in a little suspense, a tiny mind gap that makes “myself” more surprising. Line breaks can add emphasis to the words that lines end on. Line breaks also add extra thought groups. Like, normally, thought groups are sentences and clauses, but with line breaks you have the opportunity of more divisions, which causes more opportunities for thought. I think the shape of a poem also lends a certain sense of sound, and breath. There’s so much I don’t know about line breaks. I don’t think all line breaks are the right line breaks. But there are reasons for them.
That’s what I asked originally and never got an answer. Is this a poem or a piece of prose? Apparently nobody knows, which ads mystery to the piece, don’t you see?
with great writing there is no difference between poetry and prose. hence, no answer.
with great writing there is no difference between poetry and prose. hence, no answer.
Oh, now it’s “great writing”….ha ha…my guess it was written as prose with the line breaks dictated by the margins. But Blake’s right, it makes no difference…
Oh, now it’s “great writing”….ha ha…my guess it was written as prose with the line breaks dictated by the margins. But Blake’s right, it makes no difference…
How about:
if you’re talented then being talented is easy, while being polite is hard because you have to either not know or deny or forget the fact that you’re talented (hard) or decide that being talented is ever irrelevant (harder). And if you’re untalented then being talented is impossible, so all you can do is be polite, which is still hard. So basically he is praising effort above that which is cool and all but outside human agency or IN OTHER WORDS he praises that which benefits from praise and doesn’t praise that which doesn’t benefit from praise, as Jimmy Chen reminded us earlier, and what’s wrong with doing that.
How about:
if you’re talented then being talented is easy, while being polite is hard because you have to either not know or deny or forget the fact that you’re talented (hard) or decide that being talented is ever irrelevant (harder). And if you’re untalented then being talented is impossible, so all you can do is be polite, which is still hard. So basically he is praising effort above that which is cool and all but outside human agency or IN OTHER WORDS he praises that which benefits from praise and doesn’t praise that which doesn’t benefit from praise, as Jimmy Chen reminded us earlier, and what’s wrong with doing that.
Hi Amy. I get what you’re saying, and you care about line breaks so we’re on the same team. And I don’t mean to say that none of the above imparts meaning (the lines ending in “shooting” “Welcome” “simple” and “man” are my favorites). But much seems accidental or awkward. “The crucial hour begins at three in / the morning.” “What’s / funny is when”. This reads like a strong piece of prose and I wonder what it means for poetry when perfectly good prose is put into lines. I wonder this sometimes about James Tate too. Maybe I’m grumpy and the battle I’m fighting is stupid. But if we’re calling it poetry I want a microscope on every syllable and a rationale behind every break.
Hi Amy. I get what you’re saying, and you care about line breaks so we’re on the same team. And I don’t mean to say that none of the above imparts meaning (the lines ending in “shooting” “Welcome” “simple” and “man” are my favorites). But much seems accidental or awkward. “The crucial hour begins at three in / the morning.” “What’s / funny is when”. This reads like a strong piece of prose and I wonder what it means for poetry when perfectly good prose is put into lines. I wonder this sometimes about James Tate too. Maybe I’m grumpy and the battle I’m fighting is stupid. But if we’re calling it poetry I want a microscope on every syllable and a rationale behind every break.
Maybe it’s not intentional! It does look broken like an email can get broken. I wonder.
Maybe it’s not intentional! It does look broken like an email can get broken. I wonder.
Hey Amelia, atlanta misses you. You’re fighting a good battle. I agree that this has some awkward breaks. But it’s hard! Like, if I’m dealing with a piece, and there are some great opportunities for breaks, then it seems to make the most sense to line break the whole thing, I guess just for the look of it. Sometimes something isn’t quite working for me, and I make some hard returns and it comes together, but I don’t know why. I definitely don’t think everything has to have a manifest rationale–some choices just feel right, and I think that’s okay for poetry or prose.
Hey Amelia, atlanta misses you. You’re fighting a good battle. I agree that this has some awkward breaks. But it’s hard! Like, if I’m dealing with a piece, and there are some great opportunities for breaks, then it seems to make the most sense to line break the whole thing, I guess just for the look of it. Sometimes something isn’t quite working for me, and I make some hard returns and it comes together, but I don’t know why. I definitely don’t think everything has to have a manifest rationale–some choices just feel right, and I think that’s okay for poetry or prose.
I just clicked on Lorenzen’s name above, saw the TONY article, and suddenly the relationship between this and Jimmy’s post makes way more sense.
duh. dumbfuck.
I just clicked on Lorenzen’s name above, saw the TONY article, and suddenly the relationship between this and Jimmy’s post makes way more sense.
duh. dumbfuck.
a thing saying nothing at all is fun sometimes but not when it’s presented as a response to another that did say something.
It’s like when magazines, for seeming lack of imagination, send out calls for work in response to M.C. Escher’s “Waterfall” or whatever the hell, and the issue comes out and the poems read
“Springtime is superflous in the natuaral order of blatant maternity”
and not
“Fuck M.C. Escher’s Waterfall”
and you sit there and you think what?
a thing saying nothing at all is fun sometimes but not when it’s presented as a response to another that did say something.
It’s like when magazines, for seeming lack of imagination, send out calls for work in response to M.C. Escher’s “Waterfall” or whatever the hell, and the issue comes out and the poems read
“Springtime is superflous in the natuaral order of blatant maternity”
and not
“Fuck M.C. Escher’s Waterfall”
and you sit there and you think what?
looking back at the email, Christian’s note to me above it was also broken in the same way. so they may well have been incidental. they may not. in the mail he called it ‘kind of a half-ass disjunctive prose poem’
looking back at the email, Christian’s note to me above it was also broken in the same way. so they may well have been incidental. they may not. in the mail he called it ‘kind of a half-ass disjunctive prose poem’
Well at least he knows
(Amy, why not break some lines and keep others in paragraphs in the same piece? Let’s sit on a porch sometime.)
Well at least he knows
(Amy, why not break some lines and keep others in paragraphs in the same piece? Let’s sit on a porch sometime.)
I think those breaks you mentioned are defensible.
“three in/ the morning”: this break allows the line to begin and end with “n,” a nasal stop, so that a sonic narrative is created, appropriate to a discussion of creating narratives. Also, it allows “the morning” to begin the next line, or what visually looks like the inside of the line, which reinforces the thought as well as creating an echo– which reinforces the idea of being inside something– and forces you to process the events which follow as being inextricable from the idea of their occurring in the morning.
“what’s/ funny is when”: this is a funny break. It turns “funny” from a description into a state, which makes sense because you the reader are reading a description of a report– which by its description we must assume has also been read, by someone– that explains that people are reading. So we are reading about someone reading about how people read, humor is the self-implicating recognition of the absurd, this isn’t a scenario describing one thing that is funny out of many things, this is a scenario which describes every funny thing, the thing of funniness itself. Funny.
some of my favorite things are to do the full graphs with line breaks all of a sudden out of nowhere, just like boom. i likes dat
I think those breaks you mentioned are defensible.
“three in/ the morning”: this break allows the line to begin and end with “n,” a nasal stop, so that a sonic narrative is created, appropriate to a discussion of creating narratives. Also, it allows “the morning” to begin the next line, or what visually looks like the inside of the line, which reinforces the thought as well as creating an echo– which reinforces the idea of being inside something– and forces you to process the events which follow as being inextricable from the idea of their occurring in the morning.
“what’s/ funny is when”: this is a funny break. It turns “funny” from a description into a state, which makes sense because you the reader are reading a description of a report– which by its description we must assume has also been read, by someone– that explains that people are reading. So we are reading about someone reading about how people read, humor is the self-implicating recognition of the absurd, this isn’t a scenario describing one thing that is funny out of many things, this is a scenario which describes every funny thing, the thing of funniness itself. Funny.
some of my favorite things are to do the full graphs with line breaks all of a sudden out of nowhere, just like boom. i likes dat
also, does anyone know why n+1 is so fascinated with that shit?
also, does anyone know why n+1 is so fascinated with that shit?
yeah, i like to do that. i like to do an all-prose poem with just one line break. other times i like lines of somewhat even length even if some breaks are weaker than others. i love porches and sitting and summer friends.
yeah, i like to do that. i like to do an all-prose poem with just one line break. other times i like lines of somewhat even length even if some breaks are weaker than others. i love porches and sitting and summer friends.
Thank you rachel, I appreciate the defense
Thank you rachel, I appreciate the defense
I completely agree with your choices – isn’t that odd?
Also the last line about The worst winter and snowflakes being identical.
I completely agree with your choices – isn’t that odd?
Also the last line about The worst winter and snowflakes being identical.