Kant (1724-1804) died 205 years ago. Fortunately for us science, philosophy, and communication have evolved.
For example, I am typing on a computer keyboard while being connected almost instantaneously through the www to a server where this site is hosted. I am able to write directly to that host and at the same time see the words on the screen in front of me.
Kant's Age of Enlightenment has come and gone.
Today we live in a quantum world where the act of observation changes what we are looking at, as per Heisenberg.
Superconductivity, nanotechnology, the Hadron Collider, listen, man, it was recently discovered that most of the universe is made of something we have never seen, dark matter.
Think abou it, everything changes, including poetry. In this modern society, we are bombarded by unceasing stimuli which allows only little time for contemplation before the next interruption drives us to the next activity.
Let's consider for a moment this phenomenal difference between the 17th century and the 21st century.
17th
- literature available to elite few
- people corresponded by letters carried by ship and horseback
- the middle east and asia did not exist
- the end of city states
- european colonialism
- slavery
- women were second class citizens
- the beginning of democratic republics in France and US
- most people never traveled more than 20 miles from where they were born
I'm sure you could add a few more details to this list.
21st
-most of the historic literature is either available instantly online, or soon will be
- email, mms texting, blogs, social networks, virtual storefronts (Amazon), search engines, fiberoptics, digital photography, desktop publishing
- recognition by humanity that we share this one world together
- national boundaries disappearing (EU, UN, NATO, NAU, ASEAN, etc...)
- emancipation, female suffrage, although slavery, violence against women, political, and religous persecution still exist
= International travel (two years ago I went to Kitty Hawk one day and flew back to Sacramento the next day - Kitty Hawk 290 ft, Sacramento - 3,000 miles)
Why should poetry be static? What makes it so special that nothing new be attempted and appreciated?
music - changed
dance - changed
theatre - changed
journalism - changed
language - changed (email, blog, lol, bff, modem, computer, whath the meaning of is is
presidential politics - no change still corrupt weasels selling change we can believe in
travel - changed (man on moon)
dna - unravelled
gender - changed (or should I have said 'sex - changed')
science - changed
You get the idea.
I hope I have made the point that poetry had damn well better have changed since the 17th century.
This does not prevent people from dressing up as soldiers and reenacting the civil war, enjoying Shakespeare at the theatre, horseback riding, eschewing modern conveniences like indoor plumbing, instead choosing to crap in an outhouse.
I write this with no grand authority at all. The facts speak for themselves. My personal opinion has been unneccessary until now.
I ask myself first of all what to rate this.
I take another look at the title, "Thoughts On Poetry." Well, that is exactly what you detailed, six thoughts.
Was it well thought out. Not particularly.
I have to appreciate the honest, clearly stated bias against free verse.
I also appreciate that this piece moved me to consider this subject for myself, a useful excercise.
Ultimately I recognise that everyone is only able to see what they see how they see it. Solipism suggests we can never really know what another sees, thinks, or feels.
I have to give this a five, not because I agree with anything you said, but because you took the time to consider and say what YOU believe.
I guess you could call this rating a five with an explanation.
I will finish a thought of my own.
Poetry is not a description of an event, it is the event.
peace - peach |
|