A Soliloquy in Poetics | Point II: Self and Perception

they see me even when I am not there,

ubiquitously defined; 

out of thin air I am made vivid,

as I am manifested by the fruits I bare,

call it perception personified…

Because poetry is born of self, the self must be defined; the self is at the core of every poem and discourse, making the self-awareness of high import. Poetry represents the self, in that every poem represents its source as the fig is to its tree. While a poem may stand on its own absent name, its audience will no less ideate its author no matter how vague the imagery. Who is the author—who is the self, is the question; can this be defined by extrapolating solely the expressed art? Can a tree of an apple half-eaten be seen or described by some of its parts—yes, and the more that is found of its parts may shape a more vivid representation of its source—a truth; perhaps not the exact tree and orchard, but its typification can be made. Therefore, one can begin to examine the self by virtue of examining the poetics expressed; however, it is also possible to shape perhaps an imitative-impression of others by the contents of their discourse.

In the same that extrapolation is applied to ideate the expressionist, it is possible to witness and individuate the change or growth in an artist by perusing the contents of their expressions, for a writer always shares some portion of self with the audience. Even in fantasy, the author offers an invitation to examine who and what they are in some fashion, more so in nonfiction is the invite ever-so apparent. Over time, the imagery or the perception becomes more defining—a figment is constructed to be defined—regardless of whether it is fiction or nonfiction. Until some form of transformation in content takes place, the contrived representation remains vivid and potentially a truism. Being a poet means to be transformational, and the impetus to that change is time and experiences; making the expression of poetics the description of time and experiences—life.

The self is matriculated by the world that surrounds it, which shapes the perception and the repast of derived emotions contributes greatly as well; this individuates the expressionist, and if the expressionist is unique, so should be the poetics. Poems are personal, they are an intimate view into the literate’s thought processes and often reveal a lot about who they are in character (in every respect), and more than not generate a perception—ironically, poetics is written from perception to only be reversed perceived by the concepts intended to illustrate and form new perceptual experiences. So a poet evinces by that which influenced, giving definition to self, and in turn influences others.

If the poets is sharing something of themselves with you, what fruit has been offered to feed perception?

to be continued…

A Soliloquy in Poetics | Point I: Defining

As I always do in the quietest moments of the day; I ponder many things, as my soul is always at thirst for new horizons…this I share to an empty room.

I find it crucial, even more so in the present, that while there does exist a general treatise for poetics, that it must be defined at the individual level because the birth of a poem begins as a soliloquy before it is a colloquy—meaning it begins as a personal expression.  There must be a genuine examination for why one chooses poetics as a form of expression, and must define what poetics is; not the entire genre, for that is not practical nor is it sensible, to attempt to define all poetry nor the exercising of it. However, by self-defining poetry and purpose one may be able to create new theorems and forms of creativity.

It is not to say that the established treatise for poetry is not adequate enough, but only to say that they are stifling in the potentiality and growth of new forms.   We have walked in the shadows of previous definers, those who have created the standards; however, who defined the standards for them? None I suppose, since there is always nothing before the beginning, they defined it for themselves, because it was theirs to do, and we have adopted their definitions in fear of what it means to define it for ourselves. So I wonder when this generation is going to define itself and its expressions of art.  This is not to suggest that the abandonment of previous standards, to the contrary it should be preserved and examined carefully for the possibilities of creating new, or enhancing standards so as to not be stifled by the past in such a rigid assimilation.  The old standards offer a basis for discipline and formation, but if we are to succeed them then we must—by natural order—evolve into new forms for we are in new times.

to be continued…