Debate battle: Everlasting vs Jenni Marie

Following on from Britt and Mary Ann's pioneering battle, Everlasting and Jenni Marie have bravely stepped forward to wage a war of words over poetry!

You will each have a maximum of 3 POSTS. (5 was too much according to Britt and Mary Ann so hopefully 3 is a better number.) You must wait for the other person to reply before posting again. Observers, please refrain from posting or contributing until Everlasting and Jenni Marie have finished. Judging will be a combination of me and public voting.

The topic for discussion is this:

'The best poetry is written for the reader, not the writer.'

First in can either agree or disagree with this topic. Second in then has to obviously support the opposite argument.

Guidelines:
- You can and are encouraged to use research. Feel free to post links or samples to support your argument.
- In general, respond asap and at least within 24hrs. If you go beyond this penalties may be incurred.
- Have fun!

Wooot first in! Sorry Luce...no, not really ;)

"'The best poetry is written for the reader, not the writer."

I disagree with this. Poetry is not written for the reader, but for oneself. How is the reader expected to comprehend, relate, and understand if a poet writes for them first and foremost, taking away the poets genuine thoughts, emotions, experiences?

The poet does not know the specific reader, the readers history, or background so if the reader was to write specifically for the targeted reader how could they genuinely do so, being unknowing in the readers preferences?

No, the best poetry is written for the writer, the best poetry comes from the heart of the writer, regardless of what he/she will think the readers reaction will be.

After all, isn't the best poetry the poetry that comes from within oneself, the type that comes from the heart and is genuine and felt by the readers? Wouldn't you rather read -honest- thoughts and words, rather than what is -expected- to be felt by you, the reader? If that was the case, wouldn't that be dishonest and an insult to the poetry itself?

Isn't the best poetry the type of poetry that comes from the author without the author even having to try? Where the words just flow effortlessly and speak to the reader(s) as a whole?

The best poetry comes from within and to try and write specifically for the reader would limit ones feelings, emotions and words. What speaks for one reader can not speak for all.

The best poetry evolves from within the poet and doesn't need justification, or modifying. The best poetry is written and understood by being lived through, survived, experienced and felt.

Haha.. well, Jenni

I have to agree to disagree but you will see how.

I agree, there are certain types of poems that are written for oneself. This type of poetry, doesn't matter how many people can understand it, or how many people can relate to it because what matters is what - we - as the writer understand and feel from it.

It becomes a therapeutic write. It help us heal our inner aches, and at times, it pretty much help us cope with our own life. It really, it is wonderful. I call it a vent.

Though, a vent is not the most interesting type of poems to read. They can be disturbing, off putting or sometimes, troublesome because they are too invasive to the writer's life.

They are the easiest to write, yet at times, the hardest to read. Only a few selected people can write them in such a way that are enjoyable, that speaks, and connects with the reader - regardless - if the readers can relate to them. These are the type of poems that I feel you are referring to, please correct me if wrong.

However, there are those type of poems that are written specifically for the reader. They have several purposes for doing so. Some write them with the intention of giving entertainment, others to inform, while the rest to help people express what they couldn't.

As you may or may not know, there are people who wish to express themselves, but even when they try to, they can't. It's hard for them to even write a simple vent because they have not the slightest idea of how they feel.

So they go on to read poetry, to see if they can figure out how they feel or if other people have felt the same way as them.

And the writers who write for the readers.. may have that ability to express that feeling because they have experienced it before, some way or another. By this I don't mean, that they went through the exact same situations as other people, but that they know they general feeling. Thus, the way the writers write the poems, becomes written in a general way rather than in an invasive personal way, which for the reader can be easiest to relate and makes the poem more enjoyable.

So those writers who write for the readers are still writing from within. From what they feel. Now, the examples they use to convey that feeling, may not be too realistic, but then again everyone uses figurative language to easily express what they feel.

So yeah, I'm still agreeing to disagree on the part that the best poetry is written for the writer - in the sense - that the best of the best poetry is written for the reader because, after all, the writer him/herself is also his/her own reader.

<--Penalties this way haha

I have been sick after catching scarlet fever :(

Without further ado:

I do agree that what we consider a 'venting' poem isn't always the most interesting or captivating write, and that at times they can be incredibly difficult to read.

However, you mention that many people go in search of poems that are relatable to them, who's to say then; that these types of poems were not written specifically for the reader, but were instead written as something personal to the author and that it could simply be twisted into the reader's own relation?

Could your distinction of poetry also be classified as too simple, perhaps? As poetry is deeper than what we can sometimes comprehend and is something that has always been, and will always be, first of all, connected with the writer's emotions.

Maybe because the writer wants to express his feelings of joy and excitement, of sadness and melancholy, it is undeniable that in every poem words are nothing but the translation of what the writer's feeling inside.

His own feelings will turn into words as he puts his own emotions line after line, whatever his purpose is, be it expressing himself or speaking up for other people.

The poet will always first of all express his personal feelings, because poetry is by definition something personal. It's something that goes beyond our comprehension and rational thoughts; in poetry the ever-flowing cascade of feelings that shines by its own splendour is always and can only be attained from the personal feelings and experiences of the writer. And that's the reason why poetry has always been, and will always be, the expression of the writer's feelings, and written for the writer themselves.

Even in the case the writer is trying to speak up for other people, it's his own emotions doing it. It might be for the need of other people, but mostly, that's because he's feeling something, he's feeling the need to express his emotions regarding it.

Even when it seems like he's expressing other people's emotions, he's in truth expressing his own emotions, from his own personal feelings, and THAT is the reason why he began to write the poem in the first place, because he had feelings for that particular something for which he intended to write.

In other words, poetry is feelings, because without feelings there is no poetry. It is self expression, because it comes from your own personal emotions and experiences, which the poet just lets flow like a river of words on the paper as he expresses himself and his own personal need to whisper to the world what his feelings are. All poems will of course be written as a result of that need mentioned above, in fact, that particular need is what characterizes every single poem which leads to the natural conclusion that every poem, regardless of quality is written as a way of self expression (and hence for the writer.)

And this of course leads us back to my statement, "the best poetry is written for the writer,"

Scarlet fever? I hope you are doing better.

---
On another topic:

You have really interesting points and also an interesting question:

" who's to say then; that these types of poems were not written specifically for the reader, but were instead written as something personal to the author and that it could simply be twisted into the reader's own relation?"

In this case, you'll have to consider the intention. What was the poet's intention for writing the poem? Was the poem meant to be written for the reader? or was it just to satisfy himself? If the poem was written for himself then - for the purpose of making an statement - I will assume that no one but himself will read the poem. In this case, the only reader would be the writer. Thus the writer becomes his own reader.

In other words, when a poem is written just for the poet, the writer becomes his own reader. Thus, he is writing to satisfy one reader; himself. Hence, the best poetry is written for the reader, not the writer.

To make it even clearer and also because I agree with the majority of what you mentioned above specially on your last stanza:( edit: I meant Paragraph :)) )

"the best poetry is written for the reader because a reader reads, hence, the best poetry is not written for the writer because a writer writes. When the writer starts reading then the writer technically is no longer a writer, but a reader.

So "the best poetry is written for the READER [ to read], not the writer."

Do you see where I am going?

People write for someone to read. It doesn't matter if what one is writing is personal or not. Poets, write for the reader. And the reader can either be the own poet or anyone else.

So yeah, "the best poetry is written for the reader, not the writer."

I'm okay now thank you, after much needed constant rest :) -hence my lateness again.

:

As stated, I think the first and most important, often unconscious intention of any writer is expressing herself. Even in the cases where the writer becomes the reader, the original, first reason that had prompted her to write was the inner need of self-expression that she was feeling inside of herself.

"In other words, when a poem is written just for the poet, the writer becomes his own reader. Thus, he is writing to satisfy one reader; himself. Hence, the best poetry is written for the reader, not the writer."

I disagree here, because whilst the writer will afterwards read her own poem, she doesn't want to satisfy the part of herself that will read the poem, she's writing it with the intention to satisfy the part of herself that is writing the poem, since the writing is self-expression. The poet might obviously enjoy reading her own poem, but what had moved her originally was the intention to write it, and the only way to please that intention is actually writing the poem in the first instance.

""the best poetry is written for the reader because a reader reads, hence, the best poetry is not written for the writer because a writer writes. When the writer starts reading then the writer technically is no longer a writer, but a reader."

Why would poetry be written for the reader because the reader reads? The writer is the only person that can express herself, be it something of a personal nature or circumstance or something she feels strongly about in general and that's the reason why poetry is written for the writer. Who else will express themselves through poetry if not the writer?

"People write for someone to read. It doesn't matter if what one is writing is personal or not. Poets, write for the reader. And the reader can either be the own poet or anyone else."

People write for someone to read? Not necessarily, since people write to express themselves and the writer is the only one that can express herself. The writer might read the poem afterwards, and even be pleased by it, but that was not the primary reason. Sometimes you may even come across a writer that writes his or her own poetry and then never looks at it again.

In order to understand whether it is mostly for the writer or for the reader, we need to understand what's the main purpose of poetry, and that will always be about self-expression; as poetry is a way to express yourself. And the only part of you that can express yourself is the one that actually writes the poem.

Hence, poetry is written for the writer, the first part of us that is going to be pleased as we are writing a poem; that is the result of our desire to express our emotions through writing.

" Why would poetry be written for the reader because the reader reads? The writer is the only person that can express herself, be it something of a personal nature or circumstance or something she feels strongly about in general and that's the reason why poetry is written for the writer. Who else will express themselves through poetry if not the writer?"

All right, read this sentence carefully:

" the best poetry is written for the READER, not the writer."

The term "the best poetry" is subjective. Meaning that the definition of "best poetry" will be different from person to person. Some may think of vents as "the best poetry." Others will think of form poetry as "the best poetry."

However, in my opinion, that sentence is not asking: what is the best poetry? is it the one that was written to please the reader, or the one that was written to please the writer?

Rather, I interpret it as an statement that clearly says that "the best poetry [ whether vent, form poetry, etc] is written for the reader, [to read it] not [for] the writer.

That's why I said:

"the best poetry is written for the reader [ in general ] because a reader reads, hence, the best poetry is not written for the writer because a writer writes. When the writer starts reading [what he wrote] then the writer technically is no longer a writer, but a reader."

In other words:

hmmm... I'm not disagreeing with you on the part about the writer writing to expressed himself. I agree poetry is about self-expression. Rather, I am disagreeing on the part about poetry being written for the writer because the "job" (per se) of a writer, it's to write it. So the writer writes it... then what? Will Poetry not be read?

Then why write it in the first place, if not to read it?

Now here is something important - based on personal experience - whenever I write a poem, I read my thoughts, and as I am reading them I am writing them down.
So even if I don't read what I wrote after I finished writing it, I still read what I wrote while I was writing it. So yes, I wrote for the writer in me to express myself, but also for the reader in me to satisfy myself and figure out how I felt per se.

But there are like mentioned before, different purposes and intentions for writing. But I believe they all summon up to something and that is, that Poetry is a revelation. And that writers are the first readers of their minds. That's what I love about poetry.

oh, before I forget. I found this link that I find pretty interesting:

http://www.visualnews.com/2013/05/28/how-does-the-act-of-writing-affect-your-brain/

I'm just highlighting what caught my attention:

" Why does writing things down help us remember?

When you are writing something down with a pen and paper, you are stimulating a collection of cells in the base of your brain known as the reticular activating system (RAS). The RAS is the filter for all the information your brain needs to process and it gives more attention to what you are currently focusing on.

The physical act of writing brings the information to the forefront and triggers your brain to pay close attention."

^^ The way I understood it, it's that while we are writing, our brain gathers the info and stores it in us. So the writer while writing reads( focus) on what he is writing and thus retains what he wrote. So the writer either writes for the reader in himself, or for himself and for someone else.

So yeah, the best poetry is written for the reader,
because poetry is pointless to the poet unless he is a reader.

I guess, it could be some sort of paradox.

-----

I need fresh air. Thanks Colm and Jenni for the debate. I have a whole lot of thinking to do.

Wow! Thanks Everlasting and Jenni Marie for the effort put into this. Made for great reading and was very comprehensive! I hope you enjoyed it.

Anyone who was following this debate, you can send me your pm as to who you think should win. Also observers feel free to chip in with your own opinions.

Who do you write your poetry for?

Thanks Colm and Luce for this, was definitely harder than I thought it would be!

Apologies for the lateness, just my luck to become sick!

Thank you Colm for making me think and thank you Luce for having me put everything into question that I believed, was truly thought provoking!

I see Luce (Everlasting) has deleted her account..maybe she got fed up waiting for a decision on this one. Has this thread been forgotten or what?

I will post the results when i have time to get on my computer this afternoon

Sorry for the delay. Sorry to see Luce fill leave the site, hopefully it is temporary.

Anyway, I got three votes in from the public on this and thanks to those that voted! 2 votes went for Jenni Marie and one for Everlasting, with my vote also going to Everlasting. 2 votes apiece show how close it was! Our official 'winner' then is Everlasting due to some penalties Jenni Marie incurred by being late in to post! But overall both made really good points which made for interesting reading and I hope they got some enjoyment/satisfaction from it too.