25 February 2011

POETRY PORTFOLIO GUIDELINES

For Monday's class session (28 February), your Poetry Portfolios will be due. All portfolio material must be contained within a pocketed-folder; please, do not use a binder, etc. In the right-side pocket, put your final poems and their previous drafts; in the left-side pocket, put your reviewer's workshop comments. Furthermore, each poem and its revisions must be stapled separately as a group. As such, each stapled, mini-packet will begin with your final draft, followed by each subsequent revision (i.e. final draft, third draft, second draft, and original draft) and any comments you or I have made with regard to the writing process. Finally, for your workshop comments, please have each day's comments stapled separately, beginning with the workshop cover-sheet that has the reviewer and reviewee's names, followed by the hand-written comments, and the poem (if the reviewer wrote comments directly onto the hard-copy). No late assignments will be accepted, so please make sure you attend class and have your completed portfolio with you.

READING: Building Fiction, pages 1-11 and Best American Fiction (2008), pages 22-35.

15 February 2011

02.15.11: WORKSHOP GUIDELINES

Please bring two copies of the poem you will be work-shopping to class: one for you and one for your partner. Also, bring a copy of the workshop question to class and be prepared to write down answers to each question. Your responses to your peer's poem will be a graded component of this course, so make sure you provide thorough and rigorous answers to all prompts.

GUIDELINES AND QUESTIONS FOR POETRY WORKSHOPS

____________________________reviewer

____________________________ reviewed

1) The first step in the workshop process is for each one of your to read your poems out-loud. During this reading, don’t annotate; simply listen to your fellow student read their work. After one of you has read, the other will read their piece.

2) Read the poems out-loud again. For this reading, though, listen to where your fellow student pauses, stops, trips up over particular words and annotate your copy of the text. Likewise, if they speed up their pacing or speak through punctuation, line breaks, or stanza breaks, mark those instances as well.

3) Once each of your have perform two readings, create line breaks, stanza breaks, and punctuation that adheres to the manner in which they vocalized their poem. After you’ve done this, create three more versions of the poem using different line breaks and stanza breaks; try to vary your suggestions, using enjambments and end-stops different for each. Additionally, write down the overriding conceptual framework for each poem. To this extent, think about the exercise we undertook in class wherein we broke the pre-written prose block into different lines and stanzas. Make sure you, as a workshop partner, acknowledge why you made alterations in your four versions. Obviously, the first version will be based upon your peers breath and vocalization, so you will not have to write a conceptual justification for that version.

4) Locate the three highest-level abstractions in the poem. Use last class as an example; words such as “resolve” and “regret” are at the highest point of the abstraction ladder, so be on the lookout for these type of words. Once you identify three of these words, write down three different suggestions for how each word (which will make nine suggestions, total) and why they would be appropriate or more concrete. Oftentimes, this may mean that you will have to re-write a phrase or an entire line or two, as opposed to just swapping out a single word.

5) Locate three words within your fellow writer’s poem that are non-descript verbs and offer three suggestions (again, this will add up to nine different suggestions) as to how these particular words can be made richer and more linguistically dense. For example, in John Rybicki’s poem “Three Lanterns,” he doesn’t just write: “She puts her thumbs and fingers together”; instead, he writes: “She squares her thumbs and fingers together.” To this extent, do not just write down the first words that you can think of. Take some time and think about a plethora of words, especially ones that offer a lush, sonic resonance. Use dictionaries or thesauruses (online or in print) if you have them handy; if not, look trough Best American Poetry (2008) to see if any words in there could help you. Do the same thing with three nouns. If, for instance, your partner uses the word “trees,” suggest, instead, something that is more compelling, such as “a stand of honeylocusts.” Finally and in addition to the previous suggestions, offer three compelling phrases or word combinations, such as Chad Sweeney’s “oblique syntax of bones” or Lisa Russ Spaar’s “your vesper curfew gown.”

6) Finally, does your fellow work-shopper employ any metaphors or similes? If so, your first task is to determine whether or not those they use are a) clichéd (i.e. have you heard this before or does the comparison seem so obvious that it isn’t interesting), b) does the comparison make sense, and if not, does the poem attempt to explain the comparison, and c) does the poem mix metaphors (i.e. do different comparisons throughout the poem lack a central unity or vary so widely that different comparisons seem disjointed). Regardless of your answers, suggest an alternative for each metaphor. If the poet does not use metaphors or similes within their poem, re-write three instances within the piece where a metaphor or simile may be helpful. Again, as with previous re-writes, this most likely will mean that you have to re-compose whole, phrases, lines, or stanzas.

7) Discuss your suggestions, recommendations, and changes with your partner. Brainstorm with one another as to how these suggestions may work, or not work, within the piece.


13 February 2011

02.13.11: UPDATE

REMINDER: There will be no class on Monday due to Saturday's reading. On Wednesday, come prepared to workshop one of your poems in class. I will provide handouts that will prompt you for specific responses to the poem you cover. Workshop responses count toward your overall grade, so make sure you're in class and respond appropriately.

READING: Best American Poetry (2008), pages 126-135.

WRITING: In addition to revising your 5 poems for workshop, you also will need to write a 1-page, single-spaced response to a particular image, phrase, or poem (or 2 poems if you're engaging in a relevant comparative analysis) from Saturday's reading. Responses will be due Friday and will be worth 5 points.

09 February 2011

Abstraction Ladder

READING: Best American Poetry (2008), pages 113-125.

The image below visually and linguistically outlines S.I. Hayakawa's Ladder of Abstraction and demonstrates what we mean when we speak of abstract and concrete language; I hope, to some extent, this will further clarify the issue for all of us. To see a larger version, please click the image:

07 February 2011

02.07.11: UPDATE

READING: Best American Poetry (2008), pages 98-110.

WRITING: Continue on with our in-class assignment by completing the following steps: 1) create syntactically coherent connections between today's student line swaps, 2) extricate abstractions from your poems and replace them with concrete language, 3) insert three neologisms into the fabric of your poem, and 4) enjamb all but the final line of your poem.

REMINDER: As you can tell from comparing our progress in-class to that of the tentative syllabus, we are a bit behind. Workshops will, most likely, begin next week. This necessarily means that we will cut a week from on non-fiction section. This should not be too much a worry because many of the concepts we will address in the non-fiction portion of this class will be components of our fiction section as well.