Poetry Reading

[Peely]

There are advantages and disadvantages to both methods of presenting poetry. I have seen people who can read poetry poetry very well (English poet Les Barker springs to mind here - his shows at the National Folk Festival in Canberra were excellent).

If you are going to present a poem by reading it, it pays to have a good knowledge of the poem first - knowing what pace, inflections, pitch, tone and characterisation for example are appropriate and in what places can make something that is being read much more memorable. Reading the poem without trying to take those things into consideration is likely to be met with a very poor response. The person who has only taken the trouble to memorise the words without thinking about the importance of those things is likely to be met with that same response.

Performing from memory has the disadvantage that you are limited to the poems that you have in memory at the time. If something special is required somewhere (if you have a poem written for a friend's birthday for example), you may have to weigh up whether or not it is worth learning a poem in the first place if it is only going to be given limited time otherwise. If it is only going to be in limited usage after that time, it probably isn't worth learning in the first place, you are better off reading it.

If you are reading a poem instead of memorising it, you may not be able to use as much body language and there will be times when you lose eye contact with your audience. Also, if you are reading from a lectern, much of your body may be blocked from the view of the audience which could also block body language as well if you are trying to use it. Trying to keep some eye contact with the audience while you are reading could also lead to you losing your place on the page and a pause out of place while you are trying to find where you are up to. If you are reading you have an almost limitless amount of material to choose from.

It is a myth that poets are excluded from reading in competition, even at open level there are provisions in the rules for reading. You are likely to lose out in some of the areas outlined above and on memorisation if you do choose to read.

For the most part, you shouldn't be able to tell whether or not a poem (or for that matter a song) on an audio recording is being done from memory. A live performance is different - presenting from memory, especially for the top performers, is a much more professional look. You don't see the top singers performing their songs by reading them off a page and it doesn't hurt to aspire to be at that level if you wish to be one of the best performance poets. The better rehearsed you are on your material - the less likely you are to have a problem. Similarly, the more stage time you have, the better you are likely to recover if something does go wrong. Practice makes perfect as they say.

Incidentally, I can tell that Jack Thompson is reading the poems - from what I have heard of his recordings, he has done a very poor job of knowing the poems first in terms of the key things already mentioned and as a result presents with very little expression. If more attention was paid to those things it would be hard to tell from the recording.

[william williams]

Hi John Bill here. AND PLEASE TAKE NOTE I AM NOT COMPLAINING IN ANY WAY.

Thank you for your remarks in trying to bring to light problems of the two different types of performances Visual or Audio, as you know I have competed against you and you have won (not by much I gather) several times, you with your visual style and me in my audio style and there the difference lies.

People can see your motions, gestures, body language and your eye contact with the audience.

But the reading performer has not these advantages, motions hidden behind a lectern, gestures the same, body language the same, eye contact with the audience, and is hard when you are reading for your eyes are busy following the words.

Voice control is interesting as the reader may have more control with their voice where as a visual performer has personal visual physical effects to help sell the story.

There are several comps in the circuit that state reading will incur a 5 or 10 point deduction, so why waste my money on them, and they wonder why they are not attracting competitors.

It is hard when these problems are there and there will be a number of you will say,

If you cannot stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

And to them I say let the audience hear the story no matter which way it is performed.


BILL THE OLD BATTLER

[David Campbell]

Thanks, John (and Bill again)...lots of useful observations there. I agree wholeheartedly regarding Les Barker. It's clever writing, brilliantly presented. Usually I read my own poems, so there's no problem about having a good knowledge of them first. It also gives me lots (100+) to choose from and the ability to make last-minute changes to accommodate special circumstances, a particular venue, or requests for a poem that somebody's seen or heard somewhere. But, as you say, there can be disadvantages regarding body language and eye contact...swings and roundabouts.

Yes, memorising is important for the professionals who earn a living performing poetry, but there are only a handful of people doing that. For the rest of us, it's a case of deciding what works best. Those who want to learn them...fine, go for it! There are quite a few people who've put in the time and effort to learn some of my poems for performance competitions and I admire them tremendously. It's probably the greatest compliment I can receive. But it really gets under my skin when comments are made that indicate a sort of "holier than thou" attitude directed at reading. Here we are, worrying about falling numbers and struggling competitions, and yet still disparaging one aspect of the spoken word that might actually encourage more people to take part. Where's the sense in that?

People who front up at poets' breakfasts (for example) shouldn't feel they have to apologise for reading..."Sorry, but I'm still learning this one"; "I've only just written this"; "I haven't done this poem for quite a while"...and so on. That only happens because there's a stigma attached to reading in bush poetry circles, and I'd like to see it eliminated. At free verse gigs reading is widely accepted and very common. Nobody has to make excuses. That's the way it should be.

I'm surprised to hear that Thompson's Paterson CDs aren't up to scratch. I'd assumed from the publicity and a review I read (a "rhythmic and passionate" presentation of The Man From Snowy River..."maybe reminiscent of Banjo's original reading") that he knew what he was on about. It's a pity if he's doing the craft a disservice.

Cheers
David

[Terry]

I'm certainly no judge of performed or recorded poetry but agree with John to some extent, I was disappointed with the Thompson recordings I've heard but just put it down to a matter of personal taste.

Just dug out his Paterson recording and will have another listen.


Terry

[Neville Briggs]

Does anyone know if Paterson , Lawson, Morant, Gordon or C.J.Dennis ever read or recited their stuff. Dorothea Mackellar was recorded reading hers. Les Murray reads his stuff.
If they did, I wonder how it was done, that would be interesting.

[Vic Jefferies]

This is an old argument and one usually put forward by those who don't recite.
Reading a poem is not the same as reciting a poem. I agree both can be done well or very poorly.
However, if it is done properly (well) a recitation is usually a performance, a reading no matter how well done, remains a reading! They are two distinct presentations.
I have always been in favour of people being permitted to read at poetry events as I am sure this is a very good way to encourage newcomers, however I have always encouraged those who read to learn to recite. I began by reading my work in public, but after seeing my first bush poet perform I understood that if I wanted to progress I had to learn to recite.
I should imagine watching actors walk around a stage reading their parts would be less than exciting, I know that I do
not usually get very excited by watching someone read.
I find the process of learning a poem helps me to better understand the work and allows me to add my interpretation.

[Neville Briggs]

"Poetry " performance is so often about the performer. Poetry reading is about the poem. I see bush poetry ads asking people to come and hear this champion poetry performer and that outstanding poetry performer, I don't remember seeing an ad that invited people to come and hear C.J. Dennis poetry or Paterson poetry etc.

[Heather]

Marty if you want hot wax in your ears then sadly you probably never heard Robert Markwell recite Dennis. He was amazing. Some of Dennis' poetry is an acquired taste but it is very, very clever.

Last year I was lucky enough to see and hear Geoffrey Graham (amongst others) give a little performance of "The Play" at the Newstead festival - it captivated the audience and was extremely entertaining. Listening to a record of "Doreen" is one of my earliest childhood memories. Now, that is poetry that should be performed.

Heather

PS When I child I had an ear infection and the home remedy was to pour warm castor oil into the ear - unfortunately, my mother made it hot oil and I promise you , it was extremely painful.

[Neville Briggs]

Goodonya Marty, you've proved my point, even though I was not talking about competitions. The Man from Snowy River Comp was a competition in which a number of performers all did the same poem. This was to pick the best performer, it was all about the ability of the performers.

[alongtimegone]

Vic is absolutely spot on. a recitation is usually a performance, a reading no matter how well done, remains a reading! From my mid teens until mid forties I worked professionally as a band singer. In the early days I memorized every song in my repertoire. As I aged I became more and more dependent on visual aid. I was never able to be as convincing with a lyric when having to glance occasionally at my little cheat sheet as I was performing without it. However I need my cheat sheet more than ever now, as in my senior years, I find that I am unable to commit my poems and most other things to memory. And it's not just memory that's fading. I walk for exercise instead of jogging. I need assistance to lift things I would once have lifted alone. I get up to pee at least three times each night. It's more than just my memory that is surrendering to old father time. I know that I'm talking well outside of David's initial comment on reading versus memorizing but I want to make the point that for some of us, having to commit to memory means quite simply that we will never front a performance stage.
Cheers,
Jack ... I mean Pete ... uhh wait til I check ...got it ... wazza