TextSpace

Looking over the posts which I have made over the semester, I realized that in one of my posts, I really never responded at all and merely posted Wanda Coleman’s poem. Due to this, and in order not to do less work than my fellow classmates, I have decided to write an extra post.

I found it very interesting to read the progression of, not only poetry, but poetic theory as it evolved through the twentieth century. I found the terms that we discussed every week very helpful and was surprised at times by how complex they tended to be. Even though I have studied poetics for quite some time, I discovered quickly that although I may recognize a word and think I understand it, it is very difficult to formulate a fitting definition of such a term. I was also surprised that some terms existed with such a multitude of meanings. Irony, for instance.

I am conflicted in that I wish we would have read over more poetry, but, I would not have wanted to read any less theory. The workload may have been too much if more poetry were added, but the subject is so rich with the need for so much to go over it was necessary to be thin in some areas. Of all that was encountered, however, I would believe poems to be what most of the class had the greatest history of reading, therefore it is only fitting that this be the area to be left somewhat slim. By no means, however, do I feel that this area was lacking, which may sound opposed to what was just said, but if we would have had more time, I would have enjoyed more poetry.

The theory was probably what I enjoyed most. Some of the theorists were familiar, though I had not read that specific article. I liked Heidegger and Olson, probably two of my favorite. I wish we could have worked with a little theory dealing with aurality versus text, but realize that it really didn’t exist within the text. As we both know it takes at least a semester to cover that anyway.