Forum
Community Forum
Today's Posts
FAQ & Rules
Members List

Writing
Writing Forum
Recent Posts
Critique Guidelines

Groups
YWO Social Groups
Facebook
Myspace

Chat
 
YWA

Register

Store
Support YWO
YWO Merchandise
The Book Despository
Amazon.com (US)
Amazon.co.uk (UK)
Amazon.ca (Canada)

SBS Mag


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-02-2015, 06:27 PM View Post #31 (Link)
lalodragon (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
lalodragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: To the laboratory!
Posts: 1,982
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 193
Originally Posted by 2sh4r View Post
Do you need to see a lake in order to be able to describe it? Yes. This gets back to the initial point about imagery. Art has to be expressive. If somebody comes to me and tells me, "write a description of a lake for me". I would have to picture a lake, hold that image in my head, and describe that image so that the reader would then see that image. But the way Carson described it, it sounded like it had something to do with the author's personality as well.

It would be impossible, I think, to see inside the mind of a reader and then give them the lake that they wanted to see. I think it would be redundant too.
Sure, it has something to do with your personality, because the lake that you envision and the way you describe it will differ from my lake and my description.

(I don't think you have to be looking at a lake to describe it, but you have to have an understanding of the concept "lake.")

And I don't mean trying to give the reader the lake they want-- they can do that themselves. I mean trying to give them MY lake. To do that, I need to understand what the reader needs in order to see my lake. Of course I can envision my lake; they can envision their lake; but in order to get them to envision my lake, I need to describe it in a way that's understandable and evocative for them.
That's a convoluted paragraph, oh my.

Originally Posted by 2sh4r View Post
I also disagree with this in the sense that the idea of beauty is invented by the human, but this is more of a philosophical point. This is like "if there's a beautiful painting in a room where nobody can see it, is it still beautiful?"
Yeah, it is philosophical, which is why I kind of skimmed it. I would say that the painting is still beautiful. But the human who stands outside of the room doesn't perceive that beauty. When he does, he sees his perception of the beauty. Does that make sense? I mean that objective beauty is a thing but that there's no such objectivity inside the human mind. Beauty isn't brought into being by human observation. But the human perception of beauty is invented by the human.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 06:31 PM View Post #32 (Link)
2sh4r (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
2sh4r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 295
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 21
And I don't mean trying to give the reader the lake they want-- they can do that themselves. I mean trying to give them MY lake.
Yea I know, I was talking about reader-oriented writing when I said that.

To do that, I need to understand what the reader needs in order to see my lake. Of course I can envision my lake; they can envision their lake; but in order to get them to envision my lake
Right.

Yeah, it is philosophical, which is why I kind of skimmed it. I would say that the painting is still beautiful. But the human who stands outside of the room doesn't perceive that beauty. When he does, he sees his perception of the beauty. Does that make sense? I mean that objective beauty is a thing but that there's no such objectivity inside the human mind. Beauty doesn't come into being by the human. The human perception of beauty is invented by the human.
I mean I disagree, but that's another rabbit trail. I'm happy to discuss philosophy and the nature of reality if you want.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 06:37 PM View Post #33 (Link)
2sh4r (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
2sh4r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 295
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 21
So then, getting back to one of the questions we posed, the thing that makes one image better than another is that it portrays the thing in your mind well to the reader?

What if the reader doesn't care about the thing in your mind? What if the reader is un-empathetic, doesn't care about seeing the world in a new way, and is bored by your image?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 06:38 PM View Post #34 (Link)
lalodragon (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
lalodragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: To the laboratory!
Posts: 1,982
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 193
Originally Posted by 2sh4r View Post
What if the reader doesn't care about the thing in your mind? What if the reader is un-empathetic, doesn't care about seeing the world in a new way, and is bored by your image?
Then what the hell are they reading poetry for?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 06:40 PM View Post #35 (Link)
2sh4r (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
2sh4r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 295
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 21
Also, how does sound relate to that? I feel like sound is achieving something entirely different than imagery.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 06:42 PM View Post #36 (Link)
lalodragon (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
lalodragon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: To the laboratory!
Posts: 1,982
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 193
Originally Posted by 2sh4r View Post
Also, how does sound relate to that? I feel like sound is achieving something entirely different than imagery.
Elaborate? I think it does the same, though sound may convey something more abstract-- a mood. In Inviticus, the sound conveyed that important stalwart sense, the sure control of the speaker. This was what the author wanted us to perceive.

Alternatively, if you're trying to convey something that creates sound, or liking sound to another sense. When we talking about "crashing waves," the use of "crashing" involves its sound mimicking the waves.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 06:53 PM View Post #37 (Link)
2sh4r (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
2sh4r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 295
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 21
I think it does the same, though sound may convey something more abstract-- a mood
Hmm... yes, maybe. The rhyme and rhythm in Stopping by Woods on a Snowy Evening gives a sense of quiet and childlike meditation.

So for imagery, you're conjuring something to mind and holding it there as you attempt to manifest it with words. For rhythm and rhyme, you're expressing something more primitive maybe, just an raw instinct or a mood. Then sound must come more spontaneously when you're writing a poem (right?). I mean you could engineer sounds into a poem, but that would require an intense knowledge of the different sounds and the sorts of effects they create...

That would be interesting to study. Has there been a poetic movement around that already?
  Reply With Quote
Old 10-02-2015, 08:51 PM View Post #38 (Link)
2sh4r (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
2sh4r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 295
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 21
I think another principle worth discussion is the joy of construction, not only in the author but also in the reader.

I think we, as humans, enjoy putting things together to make new things (like Lego blocks). Therefore, in order to make your image as effective as possible, you have to explain as little as possible while still portraying the important parts of the image. Once the reader has the important bits, we hope that he/she can construct the rest of the image (and its accompanying ideas/emotions) on his/her own. And if the reader is able to construct the image that you saw, then it is (hopefully) enjoyable to the reader.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2016, 04:50 AM View Post #39 (Link)
2sh4r (Offline)
Global Moderator
 
2sh4r's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 295
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 21
Then sound must come more spontaneously when you're writing a poem (right?).
Hmm... interesting point of view.

I don't know if that's necessarily the logical conclusion to draw. For example, I could just as easily say that, since sound is more abstract, there is a greater need to try and make it specific and concrete, which you can be done with formal rhyme schemes. I guess it all depends on what you believe and what the prevailing views of the time are.

I don't know what I believe in right now; I'm open to all things.

The way I understand it, your stance is: instinctual emotions are best expressed via spontaneity rather than formality. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Could you defend your stance? Or elaborate on your reasoning?

You don't have to if you don't want to. This stuff is complex. People do their doctoral theses on this.
  
						Last edited by 2sh4r; 03-14-2016 at 04:52 AM.
					
					Reply With Quote
Old 03-14-2016, 05:17 PM View Post #40 (Link)
Infinity_Man (Offline)
Freelance Writer
 
Infinity_Man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1,407
Points: 30
Times Thanked: 241
2sh42, ronrogers is a spam bot, it looks like. All his posts are just copies of other people's posts from the same thread. You won't get much of a discussion out of him, especially since it's one of your posts he's copied that you're challenging him on.
__________________
Infinity_Man's Mega Guide

Pro-tip: because my first instinct is to procrastinate anything I see as an obligation or responsibility, asking me for a critique is a good way to make sure I never give you a critique.
  Reply With Quote
Reply
Thread Tools

 


All times are GMT. The time now is 07:23 PM.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 - Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All writing Copyright © its author(s). All other material Copyright © 2007-2012 Young Writers Online unless otherwise specified.
Managed by Andrew Kukwa (Andy) and Shaun Duke (Shaun) from The World in the Satin Bag. Design by HTWoRKS.