Bukowski and Slam Poetry (1 Viewer)

... okay, so the fallout shelter is this way? Is there something to drink in there?
btw, the dogs around here are a friendly bunch.
Do you feel like introducing yourself?​
 
i have the feeling of being censored at my old mans funeral.
Honey, you'll need a thicker skin than that if you're going to throw your hat into the ring in the vicious and bloody world of full contact poetry.

This place exists in relative peace because there are a few simple rules in place. One of those rules is: you can't post your poetry wherever you'd like. They have to go into one thread designated for poems. Look around. You'll find it.

Your post that begins, "its like the world is hacked down," sounds like a poem to me. I didn't say it was a good or bad poem. I thought it should be moved to the poetry thread, but I was giving you the opportunity to defend it as a post.
 
tomorrow i am going to a slam poetry thing with a friend of mine.

i will let you know when i get back whether bukowski would have liked it or not. ;)
 
With this, possibly, in mind:

STONECLOUD: Have you ever tried like Charles Olson to construct theories about the way you write poetry? Line breaks, form, rhythm, etc.?

BUKOWSKI: I stay away from these Olsen essays and all that. I think I've broken through more or less to the common language. But we don't want to make it too common. I think the mistake that some of the black writers are making is - oh Christ, this'll probably be construed as anti-black, but it isn't - the mistake is that the language is too common, like "Hey baby, big train..."

STONECLOUD: You mean because their language belongs to everybody, and therefore to no one poet?

BUKOWSKI: It's kind of like flaunting the street language, instead of using it. I think they gotta calm down a little before they get to it. They've missed the mark there so far. What you end up with is a lot of cliches and platitudes posing as wisdom. If you use the common language, you've still got to stay away from the cliche and the platitude. I think that's where they make their mistake.

From the words section of this site.
 
meh.

it was alright. there were a couple of exceptional poems.

but i'm more of a minimalist.

that was a lot of words, you know?
 
This is not my poem

it is not even my short story

it might be my draft for a screenplay

but Charles Bronson is dead

Bukowski is taking lessons on drawing from Picasso

as he shows him how to bet on the horses

Slam, rap, whatever-it's words

it gets my blessing

but it's all short attention span now
 
i don't think this particular distaste of mine has to do so much with short attention span as it does with effective use of words.

which is not to say it was all bad.

like i said, there really were some exceptional poems.

i don't know what all that is going on about black writers above.

ninety nine percent of these people were white.
 
There is nothing wrong with slam.Nothing new there, just a new term.
Wether, it is a poetry night, a painting night, a combination of both or a music jam session, all the same. If you create something you want feedback.
It is a social thing for artists. It is worth what it is worth, it is entertaining.I see it like a comedy night. Some very witty stuff comes out of it, a lot of shit as well but it is mainly a social gathering, a challenge for artists, like rap, a flame thrower, a go at communicating with spectators, a thrill.
I think it is great. Is it art? sure. It is not the first time that things like that take place. In the seventies, it was part of bringing art to the streets for the common people and out of museums, out of libraries. Painting the sidewalks, a happening! Even in the sixties, poetry was being read out loud in cafés , bars, on street corners. What is is worth? who cares, it is about expression, whether you are doing it in a studio, a room, or on stage. Whatever gets you through the night is alright.You do not have to bleed yourself in public, it is all about being alive and sharing it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For what its worth (which may not be much since most people on this thread seem to have made up their minds) A) Slam poetry started with an intentional justice/agenda bent. Its highly idealistic. You can watch Marc Kelly Smith (the founder of the NPS) discuss that in in Ted talk. But B) It doesn't all have to be. I am a slam poet, and my favourite piece I've ever written is a self-portrait poem I wrote when I was 22. I am a straight white female, the poem did nothing but describe me to the audience, and it was incredibly well received. No agenda. No raging against society. Just an attempt to allow the audience to know me. The guys who host the night I regularly attend perform pieces on Shakespeare and hip-hop, or cooking a meal for the women they love. Its not all angry prophets shaking fists at the sky.
 
Its not all angry prophets shaking fists at the sky.
I don't think that was anyone's criticism of it.

The problem with "slam" (it's seriously still a thing?) poetry is it's a tight pigeonhole. It's a rigid style that few performers deviate from. So if you don't like that style - that beaten-to-death cadence, that rushed delivery - you don't like slam poetry. There's no option. There's no variety. Take it or leave it.

When you create a take-it-or-leave-it scenario, you can't be upset that a lot of people choose to leave it.
 
Its definitely still a thing lol. I go once a month.

There's a ton of variety. The people who say there isn't must not have experienced much.


I'm not upset that people "choose to leave it". I'd just like to hear a good reason why. And I haven't yet. I hear a lot of "its all the same thing over and over" - and while it may have homogenized some, there are still plenty of different styles. My original post was responding to the very first post in this thread but that person was saying that if you're not a POC or LGBTQ or angry at society as a whole that there is no room for you in slam. Which isn't true. That's why I made the comment i did which, this far down, is highly out of place. I commented in the wrong spot.
 
My original post was responding to the very first post in this thread but that person was saying that if you're not a POC or LGBTQ or angry at society as a whole that there is no room for you in slam. Which isn't true. That's why I made the comment i did which, this far down, is highly out of place. I commented in the wrong spot.

I think you summarized this very well and I commend you for it. The problem is that I disagree with you about it not being true. If slam exists today, I have to assume I would have to listen to endless Black Lives Matter poems. And I just don't want to be lectured that way -- especially because most of the poems would suck. If I could go to an event where I would hear an angry poem half as good as Howl, I might go back. That is an angry poem that truly worked -- and I am not a Ginsberg or Beat fan. The thing is, that poem is not a lecture. It's a statement.
 
A) Slam poetry started with an intentional justice/agenda bent. Its highly idealistic...] [... The guys who host the night I regularly attend perform pieces on Shakespeare and hip-hop, or cooking a meal for the women they love. Its not all angry prophets shaking fists at the sky.
If you can't be highly idealistic when you're 22, when can you be?:) I don't know that much about Slam Poetry and I'm way out of every loop. But last year I read about the work of Kate Tempest, an english playwright/poet and had a listen and a read.Her work is available in book form and Audio.The very thing I admire about her (apart from the great poetry) is her passion and fire. She has a new one this year called Let Them Eat Chaos.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-e...racklist-europe-is-lost-uk-tour-a7193376.html
This one, Progress is from the collection called Hold Your Own.

 
I think you summarized this very well and I commend you for it. The problem is that I disagree with you about it not being true. If slam exists today, I have to assume I would have to listen to endless Black Lives Matter poems. And I just don't want to be lectured that way -- especially because most of the poems would suck. If I could go to an event where I would hear an angry poem half as good as Howl, I might go back. That is an angry poem that truly worked -- and I am not a Ginsberg or Beat fan. The thing is, that poem is not a lecture. It's a statement.

You really oughta try going to one again. Are there a decent amount of political poems? Sure. But again, there are so many other things. I laugh at slams (out of enjoyment of the pieces being performed, not derision) more than anything else.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top