Question: Do i see form & language as something that is expressive? or lacking expression?
Does a writer impose/infuse meaning and content in language? Or does language carry it's own meaning and content?
Definition "Language:" method of communication either spoken or written, consisting in the use of words in a structured and conventional way, mode of communication specific to a people or location, manner or style of language or speech.
Answering a question with a question.
How can one not see form and language as expressive? Flatly speaking, those things (form & language) are fundamental parts of being. Every one of us uses language either written or spoken as a mode of expression. Expression of needs, wants, desires, etc. These being used on certain degrees of necessity, creativity, understanding, indulgence, what have you. By using language you are releasing that which is in your mind, which ='s expression. Now form, this is more tricky but i also view this as expressive. Form requires deeper thought. Visual thought on shapes textures, movements, arrangement, pattern, contour, gesture, of words, ideas or objects. This is form. Therefore the mind must generate solutions to express form to others and ones self.
My answer is yes, they are expressive.
Now to the second half of the question.
A writer does both. They will impose and infuse meaning and content in language. As does language carry its' own meaning and content. Tricky question. Emphasis on "trick."
For a reader to be carried by a string of words ie. a poem, the reader must impose a succesful infusion of thoughts onto a page. The act of writing and having another read the material is imposing thoughts and ideas onto the reader. And quite honestly i feel like writers want to make people understand where they are coming from, what they are saying. So naturally it's imposing. But to do this every writer tries to infuse meaning to let the reader be "carried away" by the words.
Language naturally carries its own meaning and content. Historically language has specific meanings, particular to individuals at a time, place, or location. Now language carries it's own meaning and content by definition. The word language itself has many definitions. This is where form comes into play. The writer must understand the language well enough to use it in proper form according to the time, place, and location. Here the writer imposes the infusion of language onto a page through form, inevitably revealing creative expression.
The End.
Good work AG!
ReplyDeleteThe questions I was asking were meant open up your thinking so we could get at a better understanding of concrete poetry. It's pretty clear to me, now, having read so much of your work, that yes, you clearly both language and form as expressive "tools", One way to think about concrete poetry is that it is essentially NON-expressivist.
I think you'll see in the printout that I gave you that concrete poetry places far more emphasis on the visual characteristics of language, the graphic and iconic characteristics, rather than the semantic, or meaning characteristics. Concrete poets tend to like to play with the surface feature of language, With an expressive poem, it really doesn't matter what font or media we publish in. With a concrete poem, since the graphic elements are key, media and font choices are absolutely critical. Expressivist poetry is meant to be written and heard. It has an aural apprehendible form as well as a visual apprehendible form. Concrete poetry, by definition, lacks an aural apprehendible form.