You reminded me of the launch of an Italian edition of MacCaig's Selected Poems. By then Norman was too ill to read himself, and Valerie Gillies stood in for him – graciously, if quietly. Norman sat near the back, and then complained loudly throughout that he couldn't hear himself at all. This was the only time I've ever seen anyone heckle their own poetry reading. Then there was the time Norman was sharing a platform with Sorley MacLean. He became increasingly irritated over the length of time Sorley spent leafing through his books to find his next poem.‘Sorley – I believe you’re supposed to read them aloud.’
See my comment below… And thanks for giving name to the poet in question. I always assumed the poet in the audience was MacCaig, but wasn’t sure of the other.
Loved this - particularly as John Glenda’s was the guest poet yesterday evening at the online monthly open mic of Fire River Poets based in Taunton! His reading was so enjoyable and so were the bits in between! A fantastic evening!
Great fun - thank you! I suspect the difference between actors and poets when reading in public or on air is that actors will likely have had someone like me directing them and poets on the whole are left to their own devices…
I am finding I have to choose my poems according to my emotional state as well as their read-aloud-ness. Some are so raw that I run the risk of breaking down and crying which can be too authentic for many people.
I read something recently about 'poet's voice' and laughed out loud at some of the all too spot-on observations about the bizarre line one crosses when reading poetry aloud. The writer of said article quoted a friend who described poet-voice as 'Anglican wha-wha', but I'm not sure it's specific to any culture or place, frankly. You write the thing, which sounds one way, and then you open your mouth and it sounds like something else. What the hell happens in translation? As I'm writing this I'm thinking of poor Lena Lamont in Singin' In the Rain-- dubbed over, 'smoothed and saved' by Kathy Selden. I'll take the Lena Lamont truth of a poem any day over the Kathy Selden dubbed version. But a little smoothing of the path ain't always a bad thing. A poem worth its salt can weather many voices.
Thank you, John. Looking forward to class on Saturday!
A fascinating subject! One of the aspects of hearing a poem read aloud is that you are being led towards a single interpretation of that poem, which might or might not be a good one, irrespective of whether it is the poet reading their own poem. One of the attractions of good poetry for me is that there can be multiple interpretations and this is only possible if you read it yourself and reread words, lines, stanzas etc in different ways. When this is done silently you can even imagine different voices, accents, genders and so on. After all, the words on a page are simply "breath turned to ink. Vibrations in air frozen onto the page". This is a quotation from David George Haskell’s fascinating book, "Sounds Wild and Broken", where, among much else, he explains that reading silently engages the "listening" part of the brain.
I tackle this subject—somewhat cheekily—in my poem, “Deaths of the Poets.” I opened a set with it last Wednesday evening in the Berkshires, sandwiched between four fiction writers.
I don't necessarily write with the intent that that a poem of mine will find its way from page to stage, however the process of editing involves reading aloud again and again, looking for a certain music until the ear feels settled, satisfied. I think poetry's pleasure is often found in the voice. When it is read aloud, the whole poem comes alive, becomes a force, a feeling. And the shorter poems, I think deserve more pause, more rest in the reading. My body absorbs its rhythms, hears its heart. That said, you are absolutely right, that reading aloud is a skill. As a former speech and drama facilitator, I have seen how a bit of work with the body can free the voice, transform the reader to become an instrument that plays the song sincerely. Recently I read an essay by Rebecca Solnit, 'Truce with The Trees' where she presents the idea that the violin is a global gathering of trees, that it sings from a forest of trees who have transformed into this unique instrument that is handcrafted, but also that its sounds are wind-tuned, weather-worn, tight-grained, even ringed song of the climate leaving its resonant mark on each tree that has come to become a part of the instrument. Now that, very vital ingredient, climate is changing, a violin won't sound the same. It might feel like I am digressing, but there's a point I want to make here. Each of us, individually is such a tree, our body that instrument, fine-tuned by our experiences; our voice, unique. Reading aloud is a gathering of forces in the body, the inspiration that is breath feeds the voice, the expiration of breath, feeds the rhythm, carries the pace, the power. Where we inhale, where we exhale, how we inhale and how we exhale does make a difference.
As someone deliberately writing (mostly) short poems in a foreign/ second language, I feel nothing but awe for any poet who can stand up in front of an audience — however large or small the number of people— to read/ recite (!) their poetry out loud. As mentioned in the post I always thought of performance poetry as a different ‘beast’— does the poet take into consideration performing when writing the poem? That would make a huge difference to me. I enjoy writing for the privacy of the readers’ inner voice, it is very intimate to have someone’s words in our mind/ head/ body, and I honestly prefer it that way. I wonder if performing has also a lot to do with promotion — the commercial and social aspects of which are very important, too. But are they vital for our careers? I do not want to feel less of a poet only because I am not a great at performing my poetry. I could sing, though.(?)
You reminded me of the launch of an Italian edition of MacCaig's Selected Poems. By then Norman was too ill to read himself, and Valerie Gillies stood in for him – graciously, if quietly. Norman sat near the back, and then complained loudly throughout that he couldn't hear himself at all. This was the only time I've ever seen anyone heckle their own poetry reading. Then there was the time Norman was sharing a platform with Sorley MacLean. He became increasingly irritated over the length of time Sorley spent leafing through his books to find his next poem.‘Sorley – I believe you’re supposed to read them aloud.’
See my comment below… And thanks for giving name to the poet in question. I always assumed the poet in the audience was MacCaig, but wasn’t sure of the other.
Loved this - particularly as John Glenda’s was the guest poet yesterday evening at the online monthly open mic of Fire River Poets based in Taunton! His reading was so enjoyable and so were the bits in between! A fantastic evening!
Great fun - thank you! I suspect the difference between actors and poets when reading in public or on air is that actors will likely have had someone like me directing them and poets on the whole are left to their own devices…
I am finding I have to choose my poems according to my emotional state as well as their read-aloud-ness. Some are so raw that I run the risk of breaking down and crying which can be too authentic for many people.
I read something recently about 'poet's voice' and laughed out loud at some of the all too spot-on observations about the bizarre line one crosses when reading poetry aloud. The writer of said article quoted a friend who described poet-voice as 'Anglican wha-wha', but I'm not sure it's specific to any culture or place, frankly. You write the thing, which sounds one way, and then you open your mouth and it sounds like something else. What the hell happens in translation? As I'm writing this I'm thinking of poor Lena Lamont in Singin' In the Rain-- dubbed over, 'smoothed and saved' by Kathy Selden. I'll take the Lena Lamont truth of a poem any day over the Kathy Selden dubbed version. But a little smoothing of the path ain't always a bad thing. A poem worth its salt can weather many voices.
Thank you, John. Looking forward to class on Saturday!
A fascinating subject! One of the aspects of hearing a poem read aloud is that you are being led towards a single interpretation of that poem, which might or might not be a good one, irrespective of whether it is the poet reading their own poem. One of the attractions of good poetry for me is that there can be multiple interpretations and this is only possible if you read it yourself and reread words, lines, stanzas etc in different ways. When this is done silently you can even imagine different voices, accents, genders and so on. After all, the words on a page are simply "breath turned to ink. Vibrations in air frozen onto the page". This is a quotation from David George Haskell’s fascinating book, "Sounds Wild and Broken", where, among much else, he explains that reading silently engages the "listening" part of the brain.
I tackle this subject—somewhat cheekily—in my poem, “Deaths of the Poets.” I opened a set with it last Wednesday evening in the Berkshires, sandwiched between four fiction writers.
You may appreciate the last bit best: https://scottedwardanderson.blog/2017/04/30/national-poetry-month-2017-bonus-poem-my-poem-deaths-of-the-poets/
In view of the subject of this post it would be great if you did a voiceover!
Very interesting as always.
I don't necessarily write with the intent that that a poem of mine will find its way from page to stage, however the process of editing involves reading aloud again and again, looking for a certain music until the ear feels settled, satisfied. I think poetry's pleasure is often found in the voice. When it is read aloud, the whole poem comes alive, becomes a force, a feeling. And the shorter poems, I think deserve more pause, more rest in the reading. My body absorbs its rhythms, hears its heart. That said, you are absolutely right, that reading aloud is a skill. As a former speech and drama facilitator, I have seen how a bit of work with the body can free the voice, transform the reader to become an instrument that plays the song sincerely. Recently I read an essay by Rebecca Solnit, 'Truce with The Trees' where she presents the idea that the violin is a global gathering of trees, that it sings from a forest of trees who have transformed into this unique instrument that is handcrafted, but also that its sounds are wind-tuned, weather-worn, tight-grained, even ringed song of the climate leaving its resonant mark on each tree that has come to become a part of the instrument. Now that, very vital ingredient, climate is changing, a violin won't sound the same. It might feel like I am digressing, but there's a point I want to make here. Each of us, individually is such a tree, our body that instrument, fine-tuned by our experiences; our voice, unique. Reading aloud is a gathering of forces in the body, the inspiration that is breath feeds the voice, the expiration of breath, feeds the rhythm, carries the pace, the power. Where we inhale, where we exhale, how we inhale and how we exhale does make a difference.
As someone deliberately writing (mostly) short poems in a foreign/ second language, I feel nothing but awe for any poet who can stand up in front of an audience — however large or small the number of people— to read/ recite (!) their poetry out loud. As mentioned in the post I always thought of performance poetry as a different ‘beast’— does the poet take into consideration performing when writing the poem? That would make a huge difference to me. I enjoy writing for the privacy of the readers’ inner voice, it is very intimate to have someone’s words in our mind/ head/ body, and I honestly prefer it that way. I wonder if performing has also a lot to do with promotion — the commercial and social aspects of which are very important, too. But are they vital for our careers? I do not want to feel less of a poet only because I am not a great at performing my poetry. I could sing, though.(?)