A POETS MORAL RESPONSIBILITIES – WHAT ARE THEY? - James Daron

I think that we have responsibilities as human beings, not as poets. Poetry is an art form, and art forms are not bound by morality, in my opinion. There are numerous moral uses of poetry and art in general, and if so inclined, an artist should utilize their talent to help others. However, this is not a responsibility placed particularly on any artist, including poets.

I do not think it fair to state that a poet can be merely a philosopher. Nor do I believe that philosophy is limited to discussions concerning moral obligations (and is certainly not limited to either side). However I do feel that there are a wide range of people we may call poets. There are poets whose sole use of poetry is to release inner feeling. There are others who feel that poetry can illuminate the world about us, and thus feel an obligation (not necessarily moral) to share their understanding with the world. There is another category of poets; those who use poetry as a means to an end,; the end being the spreading of their own personal agenda, whether it be social or political. Any one particular poet may dabble in any of these three categories. I do not feel, however, that a poet has an obligation to belong soley or partially to the third type of poet on my list.

And I apologize for the delay, I was eating dinner, and I am now studying for an Art History exam.

I dont think there are any responsibilities or moral ethics of poets as such, but I believe in certain aspects there most certainly should be.

I am not at all denying the freedom of peoples choices of topics nor words. I think it is the enormity of the english language that can make poetry such a beautiful thing (though arabic poetry is the most exquisite i have ever had the pleasure of reading).

What I do think is that moderators of poetry websites like this, and publishers of poetry compliations should be the ones burdened with the ethical morals and responsiblities.

For example the prewarning on this site before entering the Explicit Poetry Section is an example of what I am talking about. I love the Explicit pieces personally, but I wouldn't want my 11yr old getting on here and reading some of them either, not they aren't wonderfully written pieces of literature but in no way are they suitable for the eyes nor the mind of a child...

So in conclusion may I just say poets keep writing freely, Moderators really need to get their stuff together and start doing something about this problem and James my friend...what a brilliantly thought provoking topic

With Luv Eirisa

we dont have a responsibility except for maybe satisifying our readers which is not always easy

James Daron Starr;

I have taken a look at the many comments from you and others. and I have come to the conclusion that what you have tried and fought for people to see about moral and ethical responsibilities as a poet i disagree with. I will respect your veiws on that subject but, I will not agree with it.

Poets have not one responsibility except those they set for one's self. poetry is something that should and will never have limit set on it as well as limits set on the poet. The only responsibility I can think of as a poet is to speak his/her words....Some people may feel otherwise but this is my oppinion and it will not change, as your will not either. To set a limit with morals and responsibilities on poetry defeats the whole purose of writing poetry for me anyways. The sky is the limit and bringing morals and responsibilities is taking away from the uniqueness that these "fellow poets" possess. You surely seem to be a man or moral and responsibility which is something you hold within you but, for many not only me it is not. The only responsibilties i set for myself while writing is my words coming from the heart. I do not care if someone hates or adores my work, i am appreciative dearly but that is not what stives me to write.....Anyways....these are my thoughts. you can choose to accept them or ignore them but...this is my freedom of speech without morals and responsibilities of any kind. If anything i had a responsibility to comment on this post because i had something to say about it...lol

Hows that for responsibilty:)

take care always
Scooby

I think there is a fundamental distinction to be drawn here between philosophy and art. Poetry can be either; it can be both. Philosophically, the purpose of your poetry can follow whatever philosophical dogma you subscribe to, whether that be religious (poems to praise God), stoic (poems, but they don't matter really) or nihilist (why am i writing this?).

Art is different. So are the arguments about the purpose of art. Michael Tippett (famous English composer) argued that art's role is to reflect life as perceived by the artist. I think this is good idea. Poetry can be very useful as a reflection, or 'projection', if you will, of life.

Freedom of speech is paramount and incontestible. The US constitution guarantees it (i believe), as does the EU legislation on human rights. As Jean-Jacques Rousseau said, "Never exceed your rights, and they will soon become unlimited." Treasure your right to write. Don't let anyone (including me) tell you how to right. 'Follow your instincts and you will always be free'.

just to correct you it is MISS SCOOBY NOT MR SCOOBY thank you..

I don't beleive in following a form of writing is that wrong? because i refuse to do so. Mabey so but who has the right to sit there and tell me the way i veiw my principles and morals so to speak are wrong. When it comes to writing, i feel if you are able to put your writing on to paper then it is a poem....disagree all you like but there is more then one person to who think as i do.

take care always
MISS. Scooby

apology accepted.......LOL..
hmmm first time i was mistaken for a dude....
**shivers** lmao
take care
MS.scooby

...about forms of writing...

I have to agree with Ms Scooby. No-one should follow a form of writing. To do so would be to imply a subjugation to that form, which would be wrong. Instead, the form should follow the poet and serve his/her needs according to what the poet is writing about. Forms can be good, but are there to be used, not to be obeyed. In the words of an art historian, whose name I forget: 'Once we know the rules, we can break them.'

oh oh oh ....What he said.....lol I like the way he put it.....teehee and thanks matt...for adressing the MS...ahaha

James;

Okie You have managed to take a comment and twist it towards your advantage. You know exactly what i meant and by you making a comment such as that, not only degrades my intelligence but does the same to yours. We both know what is meant by that.....So instead of trying and insiting on getting a rise from someone. Leave it alone because it states the obviouse BUT if you KEEP insiting that i go on...then by all means honey i am willing to explain and break it down.

BROKEN DOWN;

Poetry is anything written on paper that contain emotions that does NOT have to have a particular form or writing. To disgree with an opinion is fine, but challenging one results in a heated discussion.
So if your grocie list contains emotion then yah i would consider it poetry, you continue to disagree with me, but i dont think you quite understand the concept of an OPPINION...you have yours and I have mine as do millions of others so i hope i broke it down for you.
take care
scooby

P.S. dont forget the milk and bread on the grocery list :) ahaha

MY GROCERY LIST
today i need to go to the store,
i need many things,
but refuse to pay a lot more,

I need bread and some milk,
sugar and spice,
hmmm...mabey i shall get something twice,
mabey i'll walk mabey i'll run,
but writing poetry about groceries...
is some kick ass fun!
---yah this sucks but it was a 10 seond written example
I think you get the hint....however, i did use a rhyming scheme lets get something straight before your jump to a conclusion....
I beleive poetry does not HAVE to have a particualr form....is it wrong if it doesnt since when is anyone the judge to tell another how to write???

Okay. i didnt really read the other 32? was it responces. or however many it was.

But i think responcibilities in something such as an art doesnt apply. in writting, there are MANY grey spots. more then noticeable. and as a poet, or an artists, i dont think any stamp on any artform can be placed. Its just what uniqueness the person has inside of them to write down.
I may have not read the other posts, but this is my responce to the first & second posts. Anywhoot.
i'll get back to my own responcibilities as a person. :p

-courtney-

Too funny it did indeed leave us quiet LoL :o)

Isn't there another restriction on the freedom of speech (I apologize for the tangent)? I am pretty sure you can't say things that directly endanger those around you (like yelling fire in a crowded place when there is no fire).

There are absolutely NO moral or ethical responsibilities to a poet. It is for the readers to decide if they like the genre of poetry, the words that are used, and what the poems themsevles stand for. Freedom of speech is out there for a reason and even if some poems only serve as a bad example of things to do, state, or say, they still are there to prove and convey something that was felt by the author, right or wrong, the poet is putting their thoughts out there to be judged, yet always appreciated.
Kaitlin Kristina

**Peeks around corner**
Is it safe to come in here???? lmao

I agree with you

Daron, this is a fundamental question not just for poets but for any aspiring writer for that matter. In my opinion any write void of ethical and moral values lacks in it the basic ingredients that are worthwhile to the human life.

The basic one i will say is TRUTH, this has to do with expressions as it were. The reader must find the writter trustworthy.

I believe other than that, may come Philosophy in which the writer intends to impart. Must be fundamental and such that wont harm, but build.

Why don’t you let us young and/or naive simpletons know what the hell you mean by "moral" and "responsibility" so that we can further explain our positions then?

Obviously freedom of speech is something that is both American and something that people hide behind, however it is something that needs to be put up for discussion when you are talking about the moral and ethical responsibilities that someone owes to their readers when they are a writer. The bottom line is that there is no "code" that writers must follow and any work that is put out to the public is the writer’s opinion and perception of a concept, reality, or fact.

Each poet writes up to their own standard of ethics and moral responsibility and it is important to factor into the equation that most good writers of history, as well as most notable genius’ for that matter, have been people who would not live up to many peoples codes of ethics today. It is important to consider that genius does not discriminate based upon ethics or principle, and that goes for writing that could be considered distasteful, crude, or ethically offensive. Much of the point of writing is to bring out something in the reader that they may not be able to access themselves, whether that be a thought, emotion, or paradigm, and often these topics are both dark, taboo, and morally “wrong” to many people, it does not mean that they cannot be appreciated as fantastic works of the human mind and what its ability is to reach into something dark and potentially offensive and bring out the side of it that is beautiful or genius.

It is the people in this world who are able to rise above social standard and forget about questions such as “what are my moral and ethical responsibilities as a poet?” and choose to write what other people dare not to for their readers to enjoy, because the readers are either afraid to do so themselves or would simply be unable to within the limits of their own mind, that are both the "greats" of history (and future history), and those who dare to be progressive.

This question is both great to debate and very simple to conclude; basically it is up to each writer/poet to make up their own moral code of ethics and responsibility and it is up to the readers to judge if they agree or not.

Religious dogma and social taboos are what keep us from being able to appreciate works of genius, for fear of eternal damnation or just because of stigmatic paradigms, as each person is individual and must decide for themselves the limits of their own writing (and the limits of their own mental capacity) and do what lets them sleep well at night.

Obviously standards are only relevent to what the writer is trying to convey. You are "allowed" and not restricted to use whatever means necessary to prove your point to your reader. It has been said before in this discussion, and I will say it again because it is really at the core of what I believe to be the answer, that it depends on "why" you write, individually. If you write to point out moral and ethical standard, then this would be a great topic of interest and "freedom of speech," as well as "poetic license" are not valid enough reasons to cut it. I write to push people beyond their comfort zones, so my stance on this topic is obvious, and not right for everyone.

Other than that poetic license, and freedom of speech (to be terribly American) are what keeps this debate in a tiny little box that we cannot look beyond.

By the way being a Gemini does not mean that you see all sides, it does however mean that you are intellectually codified and self-righteous. This discussion is not for you to dictate what is right, wrong, or valid. Everyone's point is valid and not to be overlooked. The size of words that are used is superfluous and irrelevant, and everything can be simplified to being very black and white, as well as simple:

We all have our own opinion and that is what makes us different writers. If James' opinion was the only one that mattered we would only be reading his stuff and no one would bother to ever put pen to paper ever again, but the beauty is that it is not.

James you are obviously a very smart man with much to offer, pushing us to our intellectual limits is great, just dont take yourself too seriously. You are one of the great intellectuals on this site and that is very admirable, I am not trying to be a bitch and slander you.

The only ethical and moral responsibility we have as poets, writers, artists, etc. is not to abuse copyright laws of intellectual property. This means only claim your own work and site others'.

Kaitlin Kristina

I dont think there are any respnisbilites other than staying true to yourself and your wrtings take criticism and jsut write for the passion of writing

A retort from Mr. James????

Hmmmm... thanks for letting me know :)

Let's broaden this a little to ask does anyone have any responsibilities?

If you like the amoral, Hemingway, Bukowski Byronic etc image of artists, then sure, be that. No one is stopping you. People will admire your candor. They will be shocked by your vulgarity. They will fear your eccentricity. Even those who hate you will allow you to continue to write, because, well, sometimes people need a reason to be angry. If you don't mind slinging mud, or stirring chaos wherever you go, sure, continue thinking that you don't owe the world anything. Say you're only "documenting the truth." If you can live like that, more power to you. You have some ego. Nothing phases you.

However, if you're humane, you will be respectful enough of others to know where to draw the line.

Be a little bold, but respectful. yeah, that's it.

I Don't Get What Your Trying To Say....Poems Are About Freedom Of Speech And The Way You Feel xoxo-Nikki-xoxo