/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.14158754]

Where do you even go after her stuff? Everything seems trite and tryhard in comparison. Only Shakespeare and religious texts compare. Help me /lit/bros

[Anonymous No.14158837]

>>14158754
Whitman is the only logical answer

[Anonymous No.14158849]

William Carlos Williams
Barbara Guest
Gertrude Stein
John Ashbery
Robert Duncan
Me

[Anonymous No.14158850]

>>14158837

But she’s better than Whitman..

[Anonymous No.14159715]

For me? It's Rosanna Warren.

[Anonymous No.14159731]

>>14158754
There’s a reason that’s all she read

[Anonymous No.14159762]

>>14158754
She's okay

[Anonymous No.14159768]

>>14159731

>there's a reason that's all she read

She read Higginson, Emerson, Browning, and Longfellow too.

[Anonymous No.14159850]

>>14158754
James McAuley

[Anonymous No.14159873]

Wallace Stevens is the true heir of Whitman & Dickinson. Every professor I've met who specializes in American poetry says that Stevens continues the tradition of authentic American poetry (while Eliot & Pound were off theorizing the best poetry in Europe).

Good starter book: The Palm at the End of the Mind
Good starter poem: "Landscape with Boat"

[Anonymous No.14159893]

>>14158837
>>14158850
>>14159873
Cringe american alert

[Anonymous No.14159901]

>>14159893
What does that mean?

[Anonymous No.14159910]

https://fr.m.wikisource.org/wiki/L’Après-Midi_d’un_faune/Édition_1876

[Anonymous No.14159957]

>>14158754
i actually waved my dick on her grave last may. we took a field trip in my class for a few days to amherst and visited her house and shit

[Anonymous No.14160054]

>>14159957
Why did this make me so sad

[Anonymous No.14160104]

>>14160054
Because no matter how great your oeuvre of poetry is, at some point some teenage shitposter will come and rub your dick on it. It's impossible to imagine how badly the shitposters of 150 years in the future will treat us.

[Anonymous No.14160383]

>>14158754
Honestly? Donald Revell

[Anonymous No.14160805]

>>14158754
Her sister

[Anonymous No.14160841]

>>14158754
I can understand poetry, it's by no means my favourite art as I think it correlates to a more feminine nature and that necessarily infers either by birth or the maturity of age. As far as I know I currently hold neither.

So I am wondering just as one must apply the conscious structures in reaction to the unconscious aesthetic to all art forms; the understanding of polyphony within music for example, or seeing how the paint interacts in such a way to present the literal dogma in a symbolic order, the sense-of-form with sculpture as third example. These I all know, but the meter of poetry I know nothing of consciously, and it is something I am in need of doubly so for poetry, as I said before and shall say again, is not an art I have a natural resonance with.

Anyone please halp? To be fair also I have not read too much poetry.

[Anonymous No.14160844]

>>14159893
Have sex, incel

[Anonymous No.14160864]

>>14160841
I’ve heard being able to speak English helps

[Anonymous No.14160953]

>>14160841
Poetry is not feminine.
Bad poetry is feminine.
Bad poetry is also masculine.

I don't know too much about poetry too but, in what I've seen and what's stuck with me the most, I've noticed the good stuff has a timeless, transcendent, unlabelled quality to it, a crystallization of the absolute truth.

Metaphor is of great importance in poetry too, it's like Jungian archetypes or Shakespearean characters, it's the perfect manifestations of concepts, how they are distinct from the human condition, yet still present in us in flashes amongst time. All good poetry makes great use of metaphor, someone here once wrote that it is the peak of creativity, establishing a connection between two things never previously explored, wholly original and newly stimulating. Understand this and you see poetry in everything but yourself, that tries miserably to embody some aspect of what it witnesses, but can atleast extrapolate and imagine what it could be.

[Anonymous No.14161108]

>>14160953
I'm talking in regards to the male reception of poetry and art as a whole, and with that particularly mine also. All functions are underlined by the masculine and feminine, and for the male all art has the feminine, for the female all art has the masculine; for the other is the soul of the other. Poetry however has seemed to me much more petite and eloquently constructed, or more so *eloquently dependent. Poetry is at the same time a no more feminine art (and this is of course in respect to men and myself as well) than any other, it is also basing itself upon more typically feminine qualities. As I said before, this is all going by what Jung would call an Extroverted Intuitive or Myers Briggs an Entp, not that I follow it too seriously they remain very effectually true and so are useful for diagnosis.

>someone here once wrote that it is the peak of creativity, establishing a connection between two things never previously explored, wholly original and newly stimulating.
Reminds me of the Mishima quote, something about having to pertain all dualistic impulses within the unconscious to truly feel alive, very typical if you're familiar with Jung's writings on the artist. And as a result the individual ego of the artist suffers a lack of development which is one of the reasons why you hear of the "artists character", they must bare a heavier burden than most. Being one of the greatest artistic geniuses to ever of existed would also probably contribute to the feeling of a lack of necessity in regards to any change to the ego as well so there's that. However to revert back to what you were saying, it isn't necessarily something "that it has never come in contact with before" but rather the dualistic impulse itself and whether or not they have come in contact before, in the same way or not it doesn't really change.

Still I dislike using the term Jungian in these ideas as I find although he himself has many original and unique ideas which is one of the reasons he has such value as a member of Western Canon, his "Analytical Psychology" is simply the way of understanding an extremely rational person has for these things, for Heidegger it's the process and maturation of beings through time, for Jung the integration of unconscious content. For Schelling a somewhat eternal "unconscious" base of existence, for Jung the collectively inherited unconscious structures for which an ant is controlled in complete by, but a men conscious in this process and so with choice. The unconscious origination of opposition shame and character for Jung, is no different from the innately revealing frame of essential opposition within the human experience.

[Anonymous No.14161115]

>>14160953
>Understand this and you see poetry in everything but yourself, that tries miserably to embody some aspect of what it witnesses, but can atleast extrapolate and imagine what it could be.
Also thank you for this part, it was very helpful, but I ask do you understand the actual reasons why poetry is written as it is and to at least some extent has the aesthetic effect it does by the placement of words for more than their direct meaning.

[Anonymous No.14161192]

>>14161108
Yeah, I see you, it's more of a surfacing of a deeper truth that was waiting to be resolved, an untangling of two concepts appearing to be more disjointed than they really are. All about delving into the subconscious and returning a little more fulfilled.

And I'm in the same boat as you regarding aesthetic. For me, form is much harder to process than function, especially form in it's totality of verse and stanza. I think that's a study in pattern establishment, that only comes with extensive reading and familiarisation, but there must be something intrinsic for those patterns to exist. Patterns, structure and repetition exist to be remembered more easily and be passed on, symmetry and order in art is pleasing for there are familiarities our brain can categorise, to help carry the new upon the old.

What helps I feel in analysing and appreciating form to an extent, even without being extensively well-read, is again an intrinsic truth being inherently present in the work, something palpable and apparent when you first read it, even if you don't fully understand it.

The best stuff is always that which leaves a consistent impression, before getting layered and even deeper appreciated. For me, I think if you read the whole of the piece, then a stanza, then a line, then a word, parsing it into it's smallest forms, and see it still ringing equally in it's sincerity, it is truly a work of art. Indivisible in it's greatness, like when you equally appreciate a minute detail, and the big picture, while stepping back. Simply put, every word, in the totality of the piece, isn't wasted and is exactly where it should be.

[Anonymous No.14161237]

>>14158754
Try reading poetry in other languages and I assure you that you will discover quite a number of poets who are superior to her.

Quan chai la fuelha
dels aussors entressims
el freg s'erguelha
don seca 'l vais e'l vims,
del dous refrims
vei sordezir la bruelha:
mais ieu sui prims
d'Amor qui que s'en tuelha.

Tot quan es gela,
mas ieu no puesc frezir
qu'amors novela
mi fa'l cor reverdir;
non dei fremir
qu'Amors mi cuebr'em cela
em fai tenir
ma valor em capdela

Bona es vida
pus Joia la mante
quei tals n'escrida
qui ges non vai tam be;
no sai de re
coreillar m'escarida
que per ma fe
de mielhs ai ma partida.

De drudaria
no'm sai de re blasmar,
qu'autrui paria
trastorn en reirazar;
geb as sa par
no sai doblar m'amia
q'una non par
que segonda no'l sia

No vuelh s'asemble
mos cors ab autr'amor
si qu'eu ja'l m'emble
ni volva'l cap alhor:
no ai paor
que ja selh de Pontremble
n'aia gensor
de lieis ni que la semble.

Tant es per genta
selha que'm te joios
las gensors trenta
vens de belhas faisos:
ben es razos
doncas que mos chans senta
quar es tan pros
e de ric pretz manenta.

Vai t'en chanzos,
denan lei ti presenta,
que s'ill no fos
no'i meir'Arnautz s'ententa.

[Anonymous No.14161291]

>>14161237
This is shite m8

[Anonymous No.14161322]

>>14161192
>Patterns, structure and repetition exist to be remembered more easily and be passed on, symmetry and order in art is pleasing for there are familiarities our brain can categorise, to help carry the new upon the old.
I dunno, I think this statement neglects the actual qualities of the aesthetic itself. The brain likes these repeated patterns because it liked the idea in the first place.

>What helps I feel in analysing and appreciating form to an extent, even without being extensively well-read, is again an intrinsic truth being inherently present in the work, something palpable and apparent when you first read it, even if you don't fully understand it.
A direct relation to human nature perhaps, but of course elevated in its intent. I never had the same feeling I did with poetry as I did with many other artforms but I have experienced it and so I just put it down to a lack of reading it on my part.

>The best stuff is always that which leaves a consistent impression, before getting layered and even deeper appreciated.
Yes, the unconscious aesthetic which appeals to both collectively inherited character (archetypes), as well as the actual cognition of it which also can be unconscious or conscious.

>like when you equally appreciate a minute detail, and the big picture, while stepping back. Simply put, every word, in the totality of the piece, isn't wasted and is exactly where it should be.
Very true but you are doing that minimising focus by the knowing of its larger importance and placement. Still I agree.

[Anonymous No.14162053]

>>14161108
>And as a result the individual ego of the artist suffers a lack of development which is one of the reasons why you hear of the "artists character", they must bare a heavier burden than most. Being one of the greatest artistic geniuses to ever of existed would also probably contribute to the feeling of a lack of necessity in regards to any change to the ego as well so there's that.

Where can I read more about this?

Also, contributing to the thread with some rare Emily:

These 2 are prayers for unrecognizedartists:

Poem 779

The Service without Hope —
Is tenderest, I think —
Because 'tis unsustained
By stint — Rewarded Work —

Has impetus of Gain —
And impetus of Goal —
There is no Diligence like that
That knows not an Until —

Poem 783

The Birds begun at Four o'clock —
Their period for Dawn —
A Music numerous as space —
But neighboring as Noon —

I could not count their Force —
Their Voices did expend
As Brook by Brook bestows itself
To multiply the Pond.

Their Witnesses were not —
Except occasional man —
In homely industry arrayed —
To overtake the Morn —

Nor was it for applause —
That I could ascertain —
But independent Ecstasy
Of Deity and Men —

By Six, the Flood had done —
No Tumult there had been
Of Dressing, or Departure —
And yet the Band was gone —

The Sun engrossed the East —
The Day controlled the World —
The Miracle that introduced
Forgotten, as fulfilled.

This one is a kind of Kafkaeske scene

Poem 1242

To flee from memory
Had we the Wings
Many would fly
Inured to slower things
Birds with surprise
Would scan the cowering Van
Of men escaping
From the mind of man

[Anonymous No.14162140]

>>14162053
Wow. The first one moved me, the second one completely shook me, the third one made me half smile. Thanks for this stuff

[Anonymous No.14162941]

>>14158754

What happened to make Emily Dickinson one of the favorite poets on /lit/? There was hardly a thread about her about a year ago, and now we have one every week.

I'm not saying it's a problem. I love her.

[Anonymous No.14163424]

>>14162941

I noticed the same thing

[Anonymous No.14164178]

>>14162053

Thanks for those poems

[Anonymous No.14165182]

>>14162941

One Anon made a comment about her possibly having an IQ of 160 and then made a series of posts of critical commentary on her poems. It was probably the same guy who said she was the greatest lyric poet of all time. All this grandiloquent talk impressed younger Anons into reading her work and flooding /lit/ with their newfound love.

[Anonymous No.14165636]

Anyone got a good intro to dickenson. I've taken a quick look at her stuff and none of it has caught me.

Just looking for a one paragraph recommendation on why I should read her.

Thanks in advance.

[Anonymous No.14165803]

>>14165636

There’s a copy pasta on warosu. Some 7-8 posts explaining some of her poems. I think if you look for the poem “The Spider holds a Silver Ball” you will find it.

[Anonymous No.14165826]

>>14165803

Found the thread. The copy-pasta is on the commentaries:

>>/lit/thread/S14037700#p14043634

I recommend you read at least the introduction of Helen Vendler book on her works. The introduction is called “Dickinson the poet”

[Anonymous No.14165851]

>>14165636
#260, #459 and #764 might make for a good introduction. #764 is my personal favorite. Read those three attentively and if they do not pique your interest then I don't know what to tell you anon

[Anonymous No.14166017]

>>14165826
>>14165851
Thanks. Will take a look.

[Anonymous No.14166018]

>>14158849
This