REALLY STIMULATES MY NEURONS

What the fuck is this schlock.

I'm not saying poetry HAS to rhyme. But fuck this shit seems to lack any discernible cadence.

How do you even go about criticizing post modern poetry in any objective way?

>How do you even go about criticizing post modern poetry in any objective way?
You dont need to. It criticizes itself

What?

it looks like a collection of aphorisms in the body of a poem

absolutely no coherence

Its self evidently shit. Critisizing it would be like critisizing diarrhea. Theres no need to.

Her primary medium is twitter

Did women ruin poetry?

shes still considered the voice of her generation in 'Merica or she was already forgotten?

i don't think so
modern women maybe
(but modern men aren't so far behind)

I've never been a big fan of poetry, although Milton, Shakespeare, Blake, Coleridge, and a few others are pretty great.

I don't think I've read any modern poetry I liked except for T.S Elliot. Prufrock and The Wasteland are masterpieces.

I think Post modern lit is perfectly valid, but when it comes to poetry they just abandon all style in seem to right pretentious shit without any structure or point than "expressiveness".

Stop denying her experiental reality. Do you realize what youre doing is a form of rape?

You sound like someone terribly under read to be making such wide sweeping claims

I'm inviting you to correct me. That's why I said seem. I don't read a lot of poetry, I have a few "classics" that I enjoy and that's it.

So if you could recommend good post-modern poetry I'd like to read some. I generally like some experimental literature. But if the OP's post is supposed to be "good" Idk what to think.

No good poem was ever written in free verse
Not one

If you write in free verse, please kindly stop pressing 'enter' so much and call it what it is - bad prose

ezra pound

Isn't Ginsberg good?

NOT
ONE

IT MEANS ZERO

Since the term pomo is mostly meaningless and a catch-all, i'm going to name the single after-modernism poet you need to have read: James Merrill

It's time to stop posting

>Whitman
>Rimbaud
>William Carlos Williams
wew
Most free verse poets are shit but you're basing your opinion on fucking Mira Gonzalez you tard. Ideally, the shape and form of a free poem compliments and enriches the "content" (in quotes because there is really no distinction in good poetry)

>literally less awareness of poetry than someone who looked at the Wikipedia page for 10 minutes
wew
Have you read any Shelley, Whitman, Rimbaud, Keats, Crane, Pound, or Williams?

Jesus christ who gives a fuck? Why do you care so much about something I readily admit?

I've read Shelly, Whitman, Keats, Pound, Frost, Emerson, Browning, Wordsworth, Tennyson, etc.

I mention the ones I liked the most. Blake especially.

>how can i objectively criticize poetry without rhyme and meter??
>how do I discern quality if not on the basis of the presence of a formal order that was last essential to my art a century ago??
>how do I mask my lack of taste and judgment without appealing to outdated formal signifiers of poetic acculturation??
>"""objective criticism"""

It was a question. Can you answer it? I'm not trying to be smarmy.

This is why I enjoy Veeky Forums because (usually) its not a nest for inflammatory, ironic, shit posting.

I don't have taste for poetry. When I read good prose and poetry I feel it in some way. But I lack the ability to articulate exactly what makes it impart that feeling. Sure, word choice can do that, but sometimes there's something beneath that.

THIS FUCKING HURTS ME

>DUDE ART IS SUBJECTIVE LMAO
>DUDE MY CHILDHOOD SCRIBBLINGS ARE JUST AS VALUEABLE AS SISTINE CHAPEL ITS ALL ABOUT EMOTION LMAO
>DUDE FORMAL RULES OF ART ARE GAY LMAO FUCK THIS ACADEMIA SHIT BLAZE IT XDDDD

art is subjective. that doesn't mean standards don't exist. you need to chill out with your false equivalencies.

modernity ruined poetry

good poem user

>art is subjective
>yet somehow theres a basis for standards
You are incredibly fucking retarded. If someone said that Weekend At Bernies is a better movie than Godfather, they would be objectively wrong.

>art is subjective. that doesn't mean standards don't exist.
You must be insane with cognitive dissonance

Fuck you, weekend at bernie's is transcendent.

>they would be objectively wrong.

I would love for you to elucidate this "objective" formula you're using to judge films so I can then apply it to what I watch and can find out if it's good or bad.

Just becauase something is objective doesnt mean you measure it through a precise forumla. I would love for you to explain how standards can be a thing if art is purely subjective

Also I want to add that art isnt "purely objective". But the idea theres no objectivity what so ever in art is beyond stupid

What was is there to tell
the difference between freeform poetry
and broken up prose?

>What was is there to tell

can you stop? jesus, my original point was that the critique of a poem on the basis of whether or not it adheres to formal constraints is stupid and one-dimensional. somehow you've arrived at calling people retards and assuming that everyone you're talking to thinks the judgment of art is entirely contained in the subjective viewer and therefore no judgment achieves more validity than another.
>if art is purely subjective
You're literally the only one ITT who's used the word "purely" so don't turn this into a strawman clusterfuck. Check yourself already.

protip: reading comprehension.

I find it extremely irritating that most but not all lines start with "I". What gives? Either this person is fucking egotistic or this is their first attempt at poetry

If you want your work to have propaganda atleast be subtle about it.

This one is nice, actually, no need to shit on it for the bandwagon alone, fuckers.

What do you think about e. e. cummings?

>dude no capital letters lmao

I enjoyed harry potter as a kid, too

What do you like about it? I'm curious cos I'm ambivalent about it