1. What responsibility do you, the writer, have to the character(s), subjects, objects, situations (etc.) you might inhabit? Do you impose your vocabulary upon them or try to speak in theirs? Which is more honest? Which is better writing?
2. What are you angry about? Who, specifically, are you angry at?
3. What do you consider to be avant-garde art in this century? What does it pit itself against?
Feel free to be as open-ended, speculative and investigative as you want--or need--to be in your responses
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
1)
I feel like (and I often fall short on this) the main responsibility is to make sure a poem is, to the best of one's ability, fullly fledged. To make sure that all characters, subjects, etc., aren't half contrived or ill concieved, but are instead fully explored and adequately conveyed.
2)
I'd say malignance, eco/homo"-cide," exploitation, neglect, and things like that make me angry.
I'm angry at malignant people - people who purposefully or unconsciously exploit or inflict undue harm.
3) Modern avante-garde is the art of all, provided by the fact that anybody seeking a mode of expression can find a stage or medium for that expression. Convention seems to be falling away and individual subjective expression seems to be coming to the fore.
(1) I guess I feel my responsibility to the characters, subjects, etc., is not to short change the representation of their situation. To try to paint a full picture of what is happening at that time. What I am speaking of I suppose is honesty or truth. These terms however are not black and white, but subjective. Things happen to us, we talk about them, and when we do, however objective we think we may be, we are always relying on individual interpretation of what is happening. Two people can be standing side by side, view a given situation simultaneously, and give two very different accounts of what occured (this happens often). So perhaps my responsibility as a writer is to try to consider all of the different interpretations of the situation I am writing about, but at the same time, not betray the staunch belief of the interpretation that is formed inside the mouth of the speaker of the poem. I guess what I mean is: I have a responsibility not to be short-sighted in the context of the poem, but ultimatley I need to be honest with how I, the writer, percieve
the implications of a situation on the characters in my poems so I do not set them up for iminent failure, but at the same time, I can not easily let them off the hook either.
As far as the vocab. thing, if one can speak in a vocabulary that is not their own, like it is their own, thats fine. But if they can't it will sound contrived, and hard to believe.
(2) I am angry about feeling apathetic at times toward the things I can not control. I am angry about being disrespected by this jerk-off who is late to work everyday. I get angry at myself when I think I am being honest, but I am just kidding myself.
(3) Avant-garde in this century to me is anyone who can stick anything in front of me that I can believe in my gut without question. It is something that transcends the intellectual. Something sincere where the honest work of arrival is written on a page without pretension.
1)
As a writer, it is my responsibility to stay true to my subject(s). Unlike what is often seen in Hollywood, I like to make my writing believable; I like to write about things that can, and actually do happen. I do not try to impose my own vocabulary on my characters/subjects. Instead, I try to write what is appropriate for the situation, and use vocabulary that I think a particular character/subject might say or represent. Personally, I think that this is an honest method of writing, and it is better writing because it is believable; it is better writing because I can create or imitate situations that are realistic, and to me, at least, that is important.
2)
I am angry about all of the stress that I have going on in my life right now. In particular, I am pissed at my lab supervisor because he's an ass, I'm pissed at myself for making dumb mistakes, and I'm pissed at whomever decided that pre-med students need to take the MCAT!
3) I think modern avant-garde is the art of free speech. People today, and mostly young adults at that, are constantly pushing their boundaries about what is "acceptable" to say in public; this is a constant battle against society, and what is deemed as "appropriate" language.
1. As a writer, if I choose to inhabit a certain character or subject it is a huge responsibility. It is pertanent to achieve complete understanding of that character or subject. In order to fully engage it seems I would have to speak, eat, breathe, and move like that I am trying to inhabit. From a writing standpoint I find this much easier in fiction writing then poetry. I'm not sure why, however I can grasp and fully develop what I feel would take too long and be too wordy, or cliche' in poetry. Which is more honest? Thats a hard one, I would lean towards depicting characters or subjects within my own perspective viewing the other from a third person. I defintetely think the "better" writing comes from fully engaging in that character. I just have a hard time calling that honest. I would wonder if it was honest from the author's standpoint or that of the subject, or character?
2. I am angry about a situation I have been put in with my family. Specifically I am angry at myself. I am angry that I take on other peoples shit when I know that I cannot help or control what will happen to them. I am angry that I can't just 'let it go' I am angry that more than not society just wants to 'talk it out' all the time. The hell with that, if you want to be mad, angry, pissed off, good. Don't go out and hurt someone, however if two parties agree to disagree and still don't feel like that is the solution, then do what you gotta do to take care of yourself.
3. Avant-garde in this century, anything someone wants to take credit for. You can have a camera in a bedroom, you can preach on your 'soap box' at school, or use yourself as a form of avant-garde. The hard part I have is that a lot of it has been done before, truly original art is very difficult to come by. For that I would say that avant-garde pits itself against, methodical, formal art. This is not to say that avant-garde art cannot be formal and methodical, however more than not I would say I percieve it as 'in the moment art'.
1. I feel that my responsibilty as a writer is to make sure that I stay true and honest to my subjects and characters while also trying to understand the many different interpretations that can be formed by the reader. As for my vocabulary usage, I try to vary it with the different characters or subjects i am trying to portray, but i tend to find myself imposing my own vocabulary onto them. I feel that it is honest and better writing because I feel that i would be taking away from the characters or subjects if i didn't try to do so (if that makes any sense).
2. I am angry with all the stress in my life. I am angry with some of the situations I get myself into. I am also a little pissed at my little god damn cat that keeps my ass up all night long.
3. Modern avante-garde can really be anything a person wants it to be these days. I think that anywhere you look there will always be groups of people who view things differently; making things that you wouldn't view "acceptable" acceptable and appreciated.
1. My obligations to the characters and such is primarily non existant. I feel that the characters are represented as they are supposed to be no matter what, whether I add a few descriptions, perhaps some emotion, or nothing past the bare, shallow, every day perception.
2. Willful ignorance and condoned stupidity are rather unsettling come to think of it. Blatant disregard for simple rules set forth to keep an organization from plummetting should be followed. But hey, I'm only one person.
3. I agree with keaten, modern avante-garde is rather all encompassing of anything you could want it to be.
1. As I writer, I really don't feel obligated to represent any one thing/character/situation/object a certain way. I can take bits from everywhere and forge them together into something new that serves my purposes.
2. At the moment, I'm not really angry at anything... it's making this week's assignment really tough, actually.
3. I believe that avante-garde art is anything that breaks through the crust of cynicism on today's society to inspire true emotion/thought/concern.
1) As the writer I find it is hard to inhabit particular characters in my writing. Objects and situations are a little easier tho. When writing about certain situations, for example, I try and put myself in that point in time and try and remember everything I possibly can about that time. Such as the language being used, the images I saw, and the noises I heard. I think this is a very honest form of writing. I also think that it is ok to add in your own personal interpretation of a situation or character, it may not be exactly on the spot, but it can make for better writing at times.
2) I am very angry about all the discrimination that is going on in our world today. I can't believe that its 2007 and people still have to fight for equal rights. Its bullshit that women are still looked down on for certain jobs because they aren't strong enough or may have a child in the future, therefore taking time off of work. People that assume things without knowing exactly what happened also make me extremely angry. It just causes more problems because most people have a huge desire to gossip about shit that in no way effects them, but in the end will have negative effects on somebody else.
3) Modern avant-garde is anything that someone has extreme passion for and it in turn inspires others
1.i would this is a simple answer. you are not you characters. the characters are themselves with lives of their own. as a writer you must become each those characters and speak the way they do. You must forget yourself. That is what is honest, and what is good.
2.Bad things. The people that have made the bad things the way they are and myself.
3.visual arts and the revolution of use in computer technology in art seems to be innovative in some respects. of course to the antithesis of this and reject the new way is in a way a movement of itself.
the drug revolution is huge, esp. with regards to marijuana. we pit against the ignorance of those who be come politicians.
(1) I feel that you should acurately represent a character as best you can and try to make them authentic. This can involve your voice or a simulated one. I wouldn't say either could be deemed better, or "more honest."
(2) What makes me angry? Ignorance, and bloody hypocracy, both of which I partake in, and that makes me even more grumpy.
(3) I thought that avante-garde just meant "ahead of it's time". In that respect it could be anything. Lately though, specifically in music, avante-garde feels like something to do when your all out of good ideas.
Post a Comment