| Home | Stories | Poems | Articles | Photos | Links |
 Poetry: February 10, 2010 Issue [#3544] |
  Poetry This issue's editor: northernwrites More Newsletters By This Editor   1. About this Newsletter 2. A Word from our Sponsor 3. Letter from the Editor 4. Editor's Picks 5. A Word from Writing.Com 6. Ask & Answer 7. Removal instructions  Greetings from northernwrites, your editor for today's Poetry newsletter. Meter, rhyme, and form are not the only tools available for creating structure in poetry. Everyday things that you have been learning since you were a toddler and ideas cross-pollinated among the arts and sciences can enrich the creative experience and expand the possibilities for discovery. The best thing about them is that it doesn't matter whether you're writing free verse or traditional poetry. Today's newsletter will discuss a cross-pollination between an art exhibit and poetry.    Compared to Rembrandt Through February 28, the Getty Center in Los Angeles is exhibiting Drawings by Rembrandt and His Pupils: Telling the Difference. The exhibit displays 43 drawings side by side so the viewer can examine the differences. Some of the drawings are nearly identical, and most are unsigned. Art historians have spent more than three hundred years figuring out which ones were done by the master. Rembrandt's style has certain subtle tell-tale features. In the Los Angeles Times, Suzanne Muchnic describes these features as dynamic compositions, expressive body language, "suggestive line, selective detail, and precise rendering of light." What does that mean? Well, take the dynamic compositions, expressive body language, and selective detail -- In The Wall Street Journal, Candace Jackson notes that in Rembrandt's drawing of St. John the Baptist speaking to a crowd, "the listeners' eight faces each have a distinct expression (bored, fascinated, confused, skeptical)." Beside it, in a similar scene drawn by a pupil, "the listeners are roughly sketched, their faces similar." The master's work shows interaction between the speaker and the listeners. They're reacting to what he says. The listeners' faces have individual expressions and they're each different. The attention paid to the listeners' faces shows that they are considered signficant details in the composition that contribute to the story the drawing tells. The master's work tells the story: St. John the Baptist preached to a crowd including eight individuals, and as they listened, this person was bored, that one was fascinated, this one over here was confused, and that one over there was skeptical. Seeing the drawing itself would probably add more details to the story - details that can help pull the viewer into the drawing. For instance, which listener do you think St. John was looking at? Or: If you had been present, which listener would you have been most like? In a similar drawing by a pupil, all the story says is: A saint preached to a crowd. In his drawing, the crowd doesn't matter. They're generic. They're just placeholders, not individuals. If the picture shows that the people in the drawing aren't reacting to the speaker, how can the picture get a reaction from the viewer? The effects of Rembrandt's suggestive line and precise rendering of light are shown in another pair of drawings of old women. In the master's drawing, the fit of the old woman's clothes is scribbled in with fat lines that show the edges of the clothing and how it drapes around her. It gives the impression that the fabric is crisp and has some body. Her headdress is done in soft, blended shadings that suggest something like satin, with sharper focus around her face. The lit areas are mostly white, and the shadows are dark, including her shadow against the wall beside her. The angle of the lighting is consistent. The woman has a solid, 3D presence that looks like she could walk out of the drawing. Her face is the focal point of the composition. Time was spent drawing it in fine detail. It's difficult to look at anything else in the drawing for very long -- your attention is continually being pulled back to her face. The lines and shapes of things make the eye circle back. She's alert and watchful, looks directly forward with an air of disapproval, is sitting bolt upright with her hands (a mitten-shaped line?) perhaps on the arms of the chair (which isn't drawn). The drawing has tension and energy. She looks like she's mere seconds away from standing up and giving you a well-deserved piece of her mind. In the student's drawing, the old woman's clothing is cautiously sketched, with each edge and wrinkle shaded to show the shape, but it looks washed out, artificial, and static. In places her clothes seem to be merged into her skin rather than being a separate layer on top of it. Some time was spent on her face, which looks realistic. Her hand (the one that shows) is almost as detailed. The values are similar with few areas of contrast, and it's hard to tell where the light is coming from because the shading isn't consistent. The light isn't positioned to create useful shadows. The drawing has a little visual depth here and there, but most of it looks flat, and there's a slight sense of warping between different areas of the drawing, like the drawing wasn't all done from the same angle, or the perspective is off. She's asleep, reclining against the chair, which is drawn as a smudged, flat shape that makes one wonder what's holding her up. The focal point is the area of highest contrast in the drawing -- the darkened shadow behind the upper edge of a piece of fabric draped across her chest. Her hand, which also has some darker shadows, upstages her face as well. Other dark wrinkles in the draped fabric function as lines pointing to her facial features, particularly the one pointing up her nose. These are like unfortunate things in the background of an amateur photo that appear to be growing out of the subject's head. These dark areas pull at the viewer's attention -- it's difficult to look at her face for more than a few seconds. All these difficulties indicate that the artist wasn't paying attention to the effects of what he was doing. Ambiguity in the periphery of the drawing makes one wonder if the title is a mistake -- perhaps instead, she is standing or kneeling against a broad stone railing to pray, and the "chair" is just her shadow against a wall and the shadowed back of her clothes. Considering the Differences The master artist sees a drawing as portraying specific individuals in a moment in time that is not static. He thinks of them in motion -- in the middle of moving or doing something. The movement comes from somewhere, and it goes to somewhere. The past and the future cast their shadows on the image of now. The details and nuances are where the motion, the past, and the future are captured. He's composing the picture before he starts drawing. The position of the light allows the old woman's face to be framed in dark shadows which he puts to good use in drawing the viewer's attention to her face. The way she is sitting, angled slightly forward, adds to the tension and energy. Once he starts drawing, he incorporates different textures and techniques for variety, not just for variety's sake, but in ways that make sense. He uses the lighting, the varied textures, and varied levels of detail to control the viewer's focus and how the viewer experiences the drawing. He sees the picture as a whole as well as in parts and in layers. He arranges things so everything works together toward the same goal -- so everything contributes. His drawing is cohesive but also complex -- it offers something of interest for the viewer to discover, something to hold the viewer's attention. Functionally, in this preliminary or practice sketch, he focuses on capturing the details that he can't re-create from what he knows -- the details that make his subjects unique individuals. How does a master artist keep track of so many things at once? Well . . . maybe he uses a checklist. How Could You Use This Principle?  In reading poetry, you could pause to consider whether a poem shows evidence of gestalt thinking, for example --  Did the poem hold your attention? Did it invite repeated readings by hinting at more to be discovered? Was your attention drawn to something meaningful? Did the poem show evidence of overall planning so that everything works together? Did the poem use the technical details (such as meter, rhyme, and other poetic devices) as layers that support the main idea?[With good poetry, there is usually more to the poem than a first reading will reveal. Whether you're reading traditional poetry or free verse, pausing to observe structural details and to think about what they imply can reveal more of the meaning.]  In writing poetry, you could plan to use it from the beginning; for example: You could outline what to put in each stanza or section before writing the first draft. You could use the outline to decide whether the poem is going to be balanced, whether it is missing something, whether something is redundant or just doesn't fit with the rest of the ideas, and where the focus is supposed to be. You could look for choices in form, meter, rhyme, etc. that blend with or support the message of the poem. You could develop a checklist of the poetic tools you know how to use and evaluation criteria to go with them. You could organize a master checklist to go with the process of writing poetry. [I discussed checklists two weeks ago in "Spiritual Newsletter (January 27, 2010)" .]  In rewriting poetry, once you have a first draft or freewrite version on the page, you could look for places where this idea could help make your poem stronger; for example: Does everything in the first draft of your poem work together? Is there something about it that doesn't? Can that be adjusted so that the poem will be cohesive? Is the first draft of your poem complex enough to hold the reader's attention? Are there poetic tools that weren't used in the poem, that could be? Are parts of the first draft of your poem generic or not unique enough to create an individual for the reader? What details could be used to individualize the poem? In reviewing poetry, you could use the same considerations in analyzing someone else's poetry that you would use for analyzing your own first drafts (see the sections on reading and rewriting, above). When you write the review, point out what you notice and make suggestions of any possibilities that you see.
Today's poems are about ambition.
Submit an item for consideration in this newsletter! http://www.Writing.Com/main/newsletters.php?action=nli_form  Have an opinion on what you've read here today? Then send the Editor feedback! Find an item that you think would be perfect for showcasing here? Submit it for consideration in the newsletter! http://www.Writing.Com/main/newsletters.php?action=nli_form Don't forget to support our sponsor! InstantPublisher.Com: Self publishing made easy and affordable. All file types accepted with many options. Starting at $100 for 25 copies in 7-10 days! Visit us today!  These comments were submitted in response to my previous editorial in "Poetry Newsletter (January 13, 2010)" on Sesame Street and Shakespeare, on the principle of figuring out the meaning of poetry written for an audience. I appreciate all those who took the time to write in:elvy Comment: Excellent topic for the newsletter! Your literature professor sounds like mine. :) I've had a strange fascination with the classics from an early age, and much of my writing reflects this- it's full of allusions of all kinds, and I sometimes think it's a shame that only a handful of people now will recognise those if I don't point them out... I hope, though, that readers might find themselves motivated to go learn about these topics even if I don't tell them where to start looking. Unfortunately, though, to some people a rose by any other name... NW: Thanks! I think such motivation can be influenced by the poet who provides an enjoyable experience in the poem, whether the "extras" are understood or not. The desire for "more" of the same can sometimes persuade people to make the effort. But if they don't, then that can be okay, too -- Many poets like to hide away such happy additions: they do not insist that every reader respond to them; it is enough that such touches delight the writer and are ready to delight the reader who is able to respond to them. -- John Ciardi, How Does A Poem Mean, p.766 mesonali Comment: Northernwrites, thanks for this Newsletter. It's a keeper. I'll use some of these aspects in my teaching. Thank you again!  Sonali NW: Thanks! I'm pleased the newsletter was useful for you. acme Comment: This was one of the most refreshing newsletters that I've read in a long time. Thank you. NW: Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it. troubadour Comment: A very simple-to-understand Newsletter today, one that I appreciated greatly because I caught almost everything at the first read. Normally your Newsletters must be studied preciously and I've been, alas, lazy since mid-december. I like your newsletters because they force the reader to become active in the learning process. That's what good teaching is all about. Forcing the student to discover the answers himself. The modern reader does tend to think Shakespeare was an elitist, although nothing was farther from the truth. I fully agree about too many books being published per year. How on earth can one read them all, much less figure out which ones might be the most interesting? And you are absolutely right about internet. It's greatest lack is not being truly able to discuss things. But the time another I pen an idea, my train of thought becomes completely stationary while waiting for a response, and sometimes we must wait for a day or so to be able to continue the "discussion." Whereas in a vocal conversation the train of thought is constantly spurred by new ideas presented by one's interlocutor. Thank you for your great participation in the WDC Newsletters. alfred NW: You're welcome, and thanks for the response to the editorial. I appreciate it. I've always thought finding my own answers was more fun and meaningful. And I was taught that it's nice to share.  martha0764 Comment: how do we get our poems to be posted in your newsletter. NW: To submit a poem for consideration, use the small box above the larger textbox for feedback comments at the bottom of the newsletters. Put the item number in the small box, add a comment in the larger textbox if you wish, and click the button underneath the textbox to submit. Items can also be submitted from the submission form linked in the left hand navigation menu under Site Tools/Newsletters/Submit an Item For Consideration. To help make your poem findable when the editors use site search to find poems, use the poetry subtype for statics and the appropriate genres and keywords for your items, and content rate them correctly. aprildesiree Submitted Item: "Invalid Item" Comment: Thought I'd submit my poem to see if it's Highlight worthy. scarlet.ink Submitted Item: "You Are" [E]Until our paths cross again, keep writing! northernwrites  To stop receiving this newsletter, go into your account and remove the check from the box beside the specific topic. Be sure to click "Complete Edit" or it will not save your changes. |
© Copyright 1999 - 2007 Dawn Arkin. All rights reserved.
