Page v Performance
I’ve been downloading performance poetry videos recently, listening to their art as well as reading a transcript of the poem itself.
Performance poetry resembles poetry. But I submit that it’s a different thing and deserves to be treated as such. Comparing the two is like comparing a classic to a systems novel - Ulysses v On the Plurality of Worlds. It doesn't make sense to have the same judgement criteria for them, which is the reason why there are two very different English words – page and poetry- with two very different connotations. Calling performance poetry "poetry" is a misnomer: studying Performance is more a nomological concept than a literary one; the latter applies to studying Page.
Of course reading a poem aloud doesn't cancel it out as poetry. Of course the texts that get performed by performance poets can be poetry. But they don't HAVE to be.
Performance should not be forced into poetic criteria and poetic criteria should not be stretched to accommodate it. I've seen several slam poets visit discussion forums and try to pass off crap poems that work well at slams. That is not to say they shouldn’t – I’m just saying critical appraisal of their Performance should not be predicated on the same criteria used to judge Page.
Page poets must do with language what performance poets can do with their body. They are essentially different arts, and should be recognised as such.
Another illustration. Page, I submit, is a more esoteric art than Performance. And Performance poetry is more esoteric than rap battles, plays, concerts, ballets. But Performance poetry lies closer to the rap battles/plays/concerts/ballet area, just as Geography is more a Science than an Art. Categorising Performance within the ambit of poetry, and forcing a counterpart upon Page is a plain mistake. And even if Page wants company, judgment criteria should be divided and not remain the same – that is the primary argument of this post.
I wish someone would be willing to go to a slam with me. and then i can explain my thoughts with more lucidity.
Performance poetry resembles poetry. But I submit that it’s a different thing and deserves to be treated as such. Comparing the two is like comparing a classic to a systems novel - Ulysses v On the Plurality of Worlds. It doesn't make sense to have the same judgement criteria for them, which is the reason why there are two very different English words – page and poetry- with two very different connotations. Calling performance poetry "poetry" is a misnomer: studying Performance is more a nomological concept than a literary one; the latter applies to studying Page.
Of course reading a poem aloud doesn't cancel it out as poetry. Of course the texts that get performed by performance poets can be poetry. But they don't HAVE to be.
Performance should not be forced into poetic criteria and poetic criteria should not be stretched to accommodate it. I've seen several slam poets visit discussion forums and try to pass off crap poems that work well at slams. That is not to say they shouldn’t – I’m just saying critical appraisal of their Performance should not be predicated on the same criteria used to judge Page.
Page poets must do with language what performance poets can do with their body. They are essentially different arts, and should be recognised as such.
Another illustration. Page, I submit, is a more esoteric art than Performance. And Performance poetry is more esoteric than rap battles, plays, concerts, ballets. But Performance poetry lies closer to the rap battles/plays/concerts/ballet area, just as Geography is more a Science than an Art. Categorising Performance within the ambit of poetry, and forcing a counterpart upon Page is a plain mistake. And even if Page wants company, judgment criteria should be divided and not remain the same – that is the primary argument of this post.
I wish someone would be willing to go to a slam with me. and then i can explain my thoughts with more lucidity.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home