Poetry Reading

[Vic Jefferies]

Entertainment/performance and "poetry" are not always the same thing.
Heather

Precisely Heather! You are (as usual) completely and exquisitely correct!
This is, I believe the nub of so many of the problems we discuss on this forum. We tend to lump the three together and of course we come up with a disjointed solution.
Poetry may or may not be written to be performed or even read aloud. It may not even be intended to entertain, but meant to be appreciated for what it is: a poem, an expression, an idea, a collection of words to be read and enjoyed alone and in silence.
I have no doubt that some poetry can be read aloud in a most entertaining and thought provoking way and have witnessed this done on a number of occasions, but how much better is it when a skilled reciter presents the same work? It is very much like saying, "I will read you a story," rather than, "I will TELL you a story."
While poetry is the subject central to the argument I think all things being equal reading to an audience is completely different to presenting a recitation. A reciter can convince an audience he is part of the story; it is his story and he was there when it happened. A reader usually looks (to me at least) like someone who simply has not endeavoured to learn the poem and may even convey the idea that he doesn't think his audience is worth the effort or the time required to learn the poem...Perhaps like an actor in a play reading his lines on stage rather than performing!
I am not opposed to people reading poetry and as I have already admitted that is how I started. I think it is essential that people who wish to read poetry at poetry events be encouraged. I am one of the conveners of the Gosford Bush Poets and we welcome people who read their own or favourite poetry. Many have been coming to our monthly events for years and still continue to read, however a number have very successfully made the transition to reciting and often remark how satisfying they find their new skill. (Have to admit we welcome free verse too!)
I note that there has been a couple of mentions of Les Barker the famous British poet reading his poetry on stage. I have seen Les perform a couple of times and I came away thinking that his "reading" was actually part of his act and the book a mere prop. Les has been going around for a very long time doing the same poems night after night for years and I doubt he would need to read.
Similarly there is a very famous Australian bush poet (no names) who made forgetting his lines a very funny part of his act.

[Stephen Whiteside]

You may well be right about Les Barker, Vic, but I wonder what it is about the 'apparent' reading that makes the performance an improvement on simple reciting. I seem to remember that when he has finished a poem, he drops the book to the ground, so that they build up in a little pile at his feet.

The notion that reading implies a certain disrespect for your audience is a fair cop, but it strikes me that most of us are primarily either writers or performers. There's not many that reach the elite level at both. If somebody who sees themselves primarily as a writer, as I do, is to perform at all, then it has to be at least partly as a reader. It's better for a poem to be read to an audience than for it not to be heard at all, which would be the case for much of my stuff - most of it these days, in fact. I think that's also why it's generally regarded as acceptable to read your own stuff at a Breakfast, but regarded as a bit dodgy to read somebody else's work. That's how I feel, anyway, and I've heard others express the same sentiment.

[Heather]

Oooh, I do like a man who thinks I am correct - and I've never been called completely and exquisitely correct before....

[David Campbell]

I can’t buy the idea that a poet who is reading is disrespecting his or her audience because they appear to be someone who “simply has not endeavoured to learn the poem”. If you go online you can see videos of Les Murray and Chris Wallace Crabbe, arguably Australia’s two best-known contemporary poets, reading to an audience. Internationally, you can find videos of the American Poet Laureate, Donald Hall, reading some of his poems, and videos of the British Poet Laureate, Andrew Motion, reading some of his.

Why would top poets like these read if they thought that doing so would send a message to the public that they couldn’t be bothered learning the poems? Following this logic it would make sense for poets of this calibre to engage professional actors to present their work if they didn’t want to risk alienating their audience.

I also had a look at the latest episode of ‘Red Lobster’ (No. 275), which is a Channel 31 program in Melbourne, filmed at various locations around the city. It’s about poets presenting their work, mainly free verse. There were seven poets in this episode, of varying ages, and all of them read.

The common link here is that they’re all writers, so the performing side probably comes second…the point Stephen is making. In fact, given the quality of some of the readings, it seems likely that it’s very subsidiary to the writing. Arguing that a writer shows disrespect by not learning his or her poems ignores a whole lot of factors, including a possible lack of confidence or interest in that aspect. Some writers, in fact, loathe appearing in public and avoid it altogether if possible.

Nor can I accept the suggestion that a skilled reciter can necessarily do a better job than a reader of convincing an audience that he or she is “part of the story”. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. I’ve seen many performances of ‘The Man From Snowy River’, but none better than one at Tamworth this year…as a reading. If you approach a presentation with an inbuilt belief that a reading won’t be as effective or interesting or engaging as a recitation, then the chances are that’s what you’ll see.

There can be a similar problem with free verse, where, instead of approaching it with an open mind and giving it a fair go, the automatic reaction is that if it doesn’t rhyme it’s rubbish. Again, if that’s the inbuilt assumption, that’s probably what you’ll find. Any judge who took on an open competition thinking “if they can’t be bothered with metre and rhyme it’s not ‘proper’ poetry” (a view I’ve seen expressed) would be incompetent.

One way of dealing with the reading/reciting issue is to appreciate a presentation in terms of what the poet, each with his or her unique background, is bringing to the craft…without slotting it into some sort of pre-judged pigeonhole. How do you decide what’s more valuable…the writer’s insight or the actor’s skill? If it were possible, would you choose to go and see Henry Lawson or C. J. Dennis reading one of their poems or a professional performer reciting it?

Cheers
David

[Bob Pacey]

I think ya's all think to much !

All that time wasted and you could have been writing poetry


Off the do a 40 th birthday party and tomorrow a fundraiser for the Helicopter rescue, keep extra busy and you do not get time to think.


Bob

[Heather]

I started reading at poets' breakfasts (with a mandatory lecturn to hide the shaky legs) in order to share my own poems. I eventually learned to recite one poem so that I could look at the audience as I recited. It went ok but I discovered that I have no desire to "perform" or have to think of all the other things you need to do when reciting to an audience. I enjoy reading and reading well; then I am in total control of the words and how I express them. Consequently, my reciting career was limited to two public recitals of one poem. I no longer get up to perform or read now. I prefer to read to myself or quietly read my own poems to someone else and do a good job of it.

I can enjoy a poem that is presented as entertainment by the likes of Greg North, Neil or Bill Kearns (& you too Bob) and I can also enjoy listening to a beautiful poem that would not translate into entertainment for the masses but is best listened to with the eyes closed and the senses all tuned in.

And once again I am exquisitely correct!

[Neville Briggs]

I think ya's all think to much !

All that time wasted and you could have been writing poetry Bob

No, No, No ! Bob, a thousand times No. Thinking is where poetry is made.

[warooa]

I agree with all that David has said . . . especially about pre-judging those who read and don't recite, and especially those poets who shut off completely at the sniff of some free verse. But there is something almost magical about a memorised performance of a poem. Nikki Gemmell wrote recently in the Weekend Australian about a barbeque she was at - typical Aussie BBQ, late arvo, drinks and setting sun with a lull in conversation - spontaneously it just came from someone "There was movement at the station........." and at the end it just blew them all away. It was unexpected and electric, and undoubtedly it's impact would not have been the same had someone pulled out a sheaf of papers and started reading.

Marty

[Heather]

Agreed Marty. A poem and a way to do it for every occasion

[Glenny Palmer]

I don't fink Martyboy has ever seen David Campbell present a poem. His reading was an entirely professional yet personal experience that I will not readily forget. It was just...sublime. (I'd never seen that before or had believed it was possible.)