Slammin’ Slams

Always reliable for providing  brain bubblegum and mostly a fair tool for research, if one spends a reasonable amount of effort researching the research…the internet.

There is always something to be learned from another’s writing. Sometimes it just takes a bit of winnowing of the chaff to get to the grain…

Late night, letting my mouse take me on a journey through the morass of “poetry” refuse jamming up the ether. A somewhat catchy blog title: Should Poetry Slams be Put to Sleep?  (11-22-2006 by StrUHT) snags my attention. Then the, not unexpected, disappointment sets in as the article spirals down mimicking the mundane effort of the title and the author quickly tangents into a monologue of his qualifications and awards and all-around hip-hip-hooray good Hanna pass the gravy—complete with exclamation marks! Ever (really) addressing the title issue? No. Not hardly.

The only relevant component of the “article”, the closing paragraph which in essence observed: The credibility  (“credibility” mentioned or addressed nowhere previously in the article) Credibility of a “poet”/performer needs to be initiated by each “poets’” clarity of themself and their ability. Huh? That’s bringing us full circle again; allowing the inmates to run the asylum.

   The “poet,” apparently, being the only one able to judge whether or not they are “performing” just to be on stage, or are trying to impart “…something truly worthy of consideration within the soul. …”

   Ok. A fair statement. It is indeed up to the “poet” to determine their own premise in reciting (performing) before an audience—still not addressing the sludge that is produced and the authors of said sludge, ego-driven to never address improvement, never get beyond grandma-ma applauding her shriveled hands to shreds supporting these unfinished attempts.  

Wouldn’t one then come to the conclusion: this is why there is such an overwhelming prevalence of crap writing out there. It is too easy to be recognized by those who wouldn’t know a “poem” from a donut-hole. Of course (exclamation point!) your grandmother is going to clap for your effort—leaning to her companion (dragged kicking and screaming to bolster ol’ granny) and whispering, I wish Elrod wouldn’t use the “f” word so often…

Right on Elrod. Just keep f…..n’ it up and you’ll become a noted bard. Right…

A few (edited) misc. notes picked up along this latest journey; seeming to actually make some sense.

·        Performance “poets” have some desire to be appreciated by others. Agreed.

·        Most audiences would prefer to understand that which is being spoke at ’em. One would think, Bub. Why then, do we insist on writing in convoluted circles with references that only we—as in our self and self alone—are privy to?

·        Audiences are reasonably willing to suss out the meaning of a “poem.” Why, then, do we make it so difficult? Write for the audience …no one really gives a furry rat’s behind what your feelings are as the story-teller; the individual, bottom-most line: the audience is only interested in what entertains or is directly relevant to them. Just suck it up and pander to that end-game. Then, watch your “audience points” rise. Plenty of time later to have engraved, your finest, personally introspective hour, on your granite tombstone.

·        Many (hmmmm? Most?) “poets” write (and then perform) of experiences or situations which only they can related to—apparently, caring not the loss of their audience. Ephemeral blue haze personal emotions fall easily into this trap.

   If one is a writer of limited specialty, ie. automotive or truck or train, or gerbil raising—what is the net audience for these subjects? Most likely nil or less,. Should one not write of these tangentials? heck no—write about them, the world needs to live and have available to them interests beyond their own, stifling little microcosm. This is where an audience might actually be interested in your strange little world. The trick is then: limited interest subjects need to be addressed in such a way, that an explanation—either direct or strongly associated and implied—is carefully included in the work. Otherwise, the little ol’ lady in the back row will be consternated no end by the term, V-8. Wondering why in the hell you’re revving up your eight vegetables and spices breakfast drink with a four-on-the-floor…?!

Logic and consideration mi amigos e amigas…

Max tdc