Philosophy Now Forum

http://www.theguardian.com/books/live/2 ... chat-pearl

Simon Armitage webchat. Isn't it wonderful how we get to spend time, with poets nattering about all sorts...
On poetry, austerity, Beyoncé, Morrissey, Oxbridge elitism...
And how they tackle the uncomfortable questions.

Which poet/philosopher would you like to ask questions of - and what would they be?
Can you even name one?
Do you consider yourself to be one ?

I would like to ask Goethe some questions.
How would a webchat work for you?

So, there are 47 pages n the 'Poetry Here' thread, plus a few haikus scattered around the joint.
How difficult is it to 'come out' and call yourself a poetic philosopher or a philosophical poet ?

marjoram_blues wrote:
Which poet/philosopher would you like to ask questions of - and what would they be? Can you even name one? Do you consider yourself to be one ?

Yes I do, would you care to read some on the AEP or Ouzo?

bobevenson wrote:

marjoram_blues wrote:
Which poet/philosopher would you like to ask questions of - and what would they be? Can you even name one? Do you consider yourself to be one ?

Yes I do, would you care to read some on the AEP or Ouzo?

I would love to read your very best poem on the subject of...either/or.
But first, would you care to tell me about any other poet philosopher or philosophical poet you admire, or hate, who is either in or out of your present haunts?

marjoram_blues wrote:I would love to read your very best poem.

Political
Is it time for Americans
To cut through the haze
Of a dreary national government
Gloomier than the weather?
Can one State among our fifty
Rekindle the spirit that set us free?
Will we salute a bold new flag,
A great white star on a field of red?
Or will the yellow star of Vietnam
Confuse us on a cloudy day.

Spiritual
Ladies and gentlemen,
Welcome to the queen city of Babylon
And the seven hills of ancient Rome.
Welcome to that great city, that mighty city!
For in one hour is thy judgment come.
Welcome to the geographical center of evil
Of the Earth, nay the universe.
Welcome to everyone's home town
No matter where he's from.
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to Cincinnati!

bobevenson wrote:

marjoram_blues wrote:I would love to read your very best poem.

Political
Is it time for Americans
To cut through the haze
Of a dreary national government
Gloomier than the weather?
Can one State among our fifty
Rekindle the spirit that set us free?
Will we salute a bold new flag,
A great white star on a field of red?
Or will the yellow star of Vietnam
Confuse us on a cloudy day.

Spiritual
Ladies and gentlemen,
Welcome to the queen city of Babylon
And the seven hills of ancient Rome.
Welcome to that great city, that mighty city!
For in one hour is thy judgment come.
Welcome to the geographical center of evil
Of the Earth, nay the universe.
Welcome to everyone's home town
No matter where he's from.
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to Cincinnati!

Laissez les bon temps rouler !

marjoram_blues wrote:So, there are 47 pages n the 'Poetry Here' thread, plus a few haikus scattered around the joint.
How difficult is it to 'come out' and call yourself a poetic philosopher or a philosophical poet ?

Why call oneself something one isn't, starting with philosopher and ending with poet...or is it the other way around? Besides which, they are no longer in vogue and for good reason. Combine a pseudo philosopher with a would-be poet and you'll get a double whammy of incomprehensibility even in the shortest sentences.

As for poor Goethe, who was so afraid to die, he's hardly read even among the Germans. His reputation is mostly upheld by academia the museum keepers of culture as exemplified by all the "Goethe" institutes.

Also Herr Von Goethe being no match for Shakespeare, the question I would like to ask is "Willy, did you really write those plays since so many in the future question whether someone with your pleb background and education could have produced such a Magnum Opus in the Western Canon.

marjoram_blues wrote: Do you consider yourself to be one ?

Simon Armitage webchat. Albrecht Schlissweber, "Webmacht".

I just discovered this thread.

Dubious wrote:

marjoram_blues wrote:So, there are 47 pages n the 'Poetry Here' thread, plus a few haikus scattered around the joint.
How difficult is it to 'come out' and call yourself a poetic philosopher or a philosophical poet ?

Why call oneself something one isn't, starting with philosopher and ending with poet...or is it the other way around? Besides which, they are no longer in vogue and for good reason. Combine a pseudo philosopher with a would-be poet and you'll get a double whammy of incomprehensibility even in the shortest sentences.

As for poor Goethe, who was so afraid to die, he's hardly read even among the Germans. His reputation is mostly upheld by academia the museum keepers of culture as exemplified by all the "Goethe" institutes.

Also Herr Von Goethe being no match for Shakespeare, the question I would like to ask is "Willy, did you really write those plays since so many in the future question whether someone with your pleb background and education could have produced such a Magnum Opus in the Western Canon.

I don't think I would ever call myself a poetic philosopher or a philosophical poet, even if I happened to be one.
I might apply the descriptive label to someone else though. A bit like Wikipedia likes to list eg Shakespeare as a 'poet, playwright and actor'. Goethe as 'poet, novelist, playwright, natural philosopher, diplomat, civil servant'.

As to being in vogue, who cares about that? Catherine ( Kate ) the Duchess of Cambridge.

And yes, your references to a pseudo philosopher and would-be poet, incomprehensible short sentences brings up the usual 'What is...? type questions. What is a poem ? All good questions...but perhaps more for the aesthetics thread. This thread started out from my fascination with the way modern technology can give better access and more visibility to poets. As in 'philosophy for all', why not 'poetry for all' ? Not just a few of the widely known historical figures and academic critics. Perhaps bringing old ideas, core values to life, and reflecting the modern world...

Most people would cringe at being called out as a poetic philosopher...and never want or hope to be famous, or wish a wiki entry. Nevertheless, there is some great writing out there, and even in this very forum.

As for Goethe - I can only imagine his rolling eyes if I asked him if he considered himself one. Just look at the wiki page...re his work and influence.
The Goethe Institutes, I think have their focus more on the German culture and language than Goethe himself.

Goethe is more than a match for the Shaky one Perhaps that would be a question for Goethe's webchat...
'Wolfy, how would you compare yourself to Willy?' >> 'Let me count the ways...'

bobevenson wrote:

marjoram_blues wrote:I would love to read your very best poem.

Political
Is it time for Americans
To cut through the haze
Of a dreary national government
Gloomier than the weather?
Can one State among our fifty
Rekindle the spirit that set us free?
Will we salute a bold new flag,
A great white star on a field of red?
Or will the yellow star of Vietnam
Confuse us on a cloudy day.

Spiritual
Ladies and gentlemen,
Welcome to the queen city of Babylon
And the seven hills of ancient Rome.
Welcome to that great city, that mighty city!
For in one hour is thy judgment come.
Welcome to the geographical center of evil
Of the Earth, nay the universe.
Welcome to everyone's home town
No matter where he's from.
Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to Cincinnati!

Very beautiful. I like the "yellow star of Viet Nam" image.

marjoram_blues wrote:So, there are 47 pages n the 'Poetry Here' thread, plus a few haikus scattered around the joint.
How difficult is it to 'come out' and call yourself a poetic philosopher or a philosophical poet ?

Sadly, the two disciplines, at least in their western stream, are antagonistic. Philosophy is logic, description, definition, organization, drawing up exact and exacting relationships between parts, and then putting ideas into boxes and make them fit, then transfer them into same size-and-shape iron boxes. This is called iron-clad logic.

Poetry, on the other hand, and in my esteem good poetry, comes from that part of the soul that communicates or absorbs music and dreams. It is unorganized, unscheduled, and therefore free.

Can you do both? You sure as hell can. Can you marry the two? Yes, but the two will be strange bedfellows. They say opposites attract. To me philosophy is male, poetry is female, much like Chinese watercolours of horses or of cherry blossoms are female, and Albrecht Durer's "Rhinoceros" is male. Cats are female, dogs are male. Female is movement, lightness of being; male is stagnant, stabilized by weight and by will. Birds and butterflies are female, castles and forts with bastions are male. You get the point. Meat and potatoes are male, preserves and sushi are female. Scarborough fair and parsley, sage, rosemary, and thyme are female, The Fifth is male.

One singular exception exists: Beethoven's Leonora Overture. It is a truly symbolic description by concrete images that it evokes, of androgyny; it is a wonderful piece, because at the time other musicians depicted marriage, revolutions, idyllic scenes with their "porgram" music, Beethoven took on a conceptual image and made a masterpiece out of it, before androgyny was even conceptualized by social anthropologists or by anyone else.

marjoram_blues wrote:I don't think I would ever call myself a poetic philosopher or a philosophical poet, even if I happened to be one.

It was only a generic observation not meant to be applied to any one person though there are those who qualify.

marjoram_blues wrote:And yes, your references to a pseudo philosopher and would-be poet, incomprehensible short sentences brings up the usual 'What is...? type questions. What is a poem ? All good questions...but perhaps more for the aesthetics thread.

An “aesthetics thread” isn't going to help one bit if we don't know by now what a poem is or meant to be. Most of the time - especially modern times - poems are nothing more than verbal bunk often indulged in by those who can barely write decent prose. That's what “poetry for all” has done to poetry.

marjoram_blues wrote: The Goethe Institutes, I think have their focus more on the German culture and language than Goethe himself.

This is true.

marjoram_blues wrote:Nevertheless, there is some great writing out there, and even in this very forum.

Interesting statement! Whose writing on this forum, or any other, is so exceptional as to escape the extinction list. I've never encountered a single nugget of great writing but there are enough posts to conclude that there is good writing with the occasional bit of notable writing.

marjoram_blues wrote:Goethe is more than a match for the Shaky one Perhaps that would be a question for Goethe's webchat...
'Wolfy, how would you compare yourself to Willy?' >> 'Let me count the ways...'

As one's personal opinion, I wouldn't dispute it but that is not the global consensus and hardly any in Germany would agree that Goethe is more than a match. But it must be said that Goethe had a profound regard for Shakespeare.

hajrafradi wrote: Philosophy is logic, description, definition, organization, drawing up exact and exacting relationships between parts, and then putting ideas into boxes and make them fit, then transfer them into same size-and-shape iron boxes. This is called iron-clad logic.

There is no such thing as “iron-clad logic” in philosophy especially upon the approach of the 18th century and the Enlightenment. You're literally equating philosophy with math and Scholasticism, not a likely combination. Based on your conclusion, the likes of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche would not qualify as philosophers...a conclusion many academics prefer to accept. It makes life more simple!

hajrafradi wrote:They say opposites attract. To me philosophy is male, poetry is female, much like Chinese watercolours of horses or of cherry blossoms are female, and Albrecht Durer's "Rhinoceros" is male. Cats are female, dogs are male. Female is movement, lightness of being; male is stagnant, stabilized by weight and by will. Birds and butterflies are female, castles and forts with bastions are male. You get the point. Meat and potatoes are male, preserves and sushi are female. Scarborough fair and parsley, sage, rosemary, and thyme are female, The Fifth is male.

These dichotomies are much too simplistic to offer any kind of insight as to what constitutes male and female in poetry, philosophy or anything else. But that's a separate subject.

hajrafradi wrote: One singular exception exists: Beethoven's Leonora Overture. It is a truly symbolic description by concrete images that it evokes, of androgyny; it is a wonderful piece, because at the time other musicians depicted marriage, revolutions, idyllic scenes with their "porgram" music, Beethoven took on a conceptual image and made a masterpiece out of it, before androgyny was even conceptualized by social anthropologists or by anyone else.

I won't argue with anyone's “sensibilities” but I'm quite certain Beethoven didn't think of it in those terms. To him it was a musical summary of the dramatic action especially so in Lenore #3 with its majestic coda of heroism and complete authority against tyranny...qualities which are not androgynous but indigenous to males and females. Everything in the human art of thinking, creating and dreaming is replete with both the anima and animus functions of creativity. Some have more of one than the other but none are exempt of either...including the 5th. It's not separation but integration which creates completeness and the "wholeness" art is meant to represent.

To my mind the Anima content of the masculine psyche within the realm of music and drama as ONE cannot be better denoted than Wotan's farewell to Brunnhilde...one of the most sublime moments of revelation in all of music.

Dubious wrote: There is no such thing as “iron-clad logic” in philosophy especially upon the approach of the 18th century and the Enlightenment. You're literally equating philosophy with math and Scholasticism, not a likely combination. Based on your conclusion, the likes of Kierkegaard and Nietzsche would not qualify as philosophers...a conclusion many academics prefer to accept. It makes life more simple!

Why would my conclusion disqualify Kierkegaard and Nietzsche as philosophers? They did not use logic? I find that rather hard to believe.

If I am equating philosophy with Scholasticism, it's a coincidence, because I don't know what Scholasticism means.

You ought to have understood what it was that I meant "iron-clad logic" in the colloquial sense. The context was a dead give-away. But hey, I misspoke; I did not know "iron-clad logic" was a definitive movement. I am ignorant of that.

Dubious wrote:These dichotomies {with regard to male-female characteristcs} are much too simplistic to offer any kind of insight as to what constitutes male and female in poetry, philosophy or anything else. But that's a separate subject.

And there I went, worried sick that the dichotomies were way too complex for people to fully appreciate. Heck, even I can't fathom them fully, and I was asserting them. It turns out they were simplistic. Hm. One man's trash is another man's treasure. One man's complexity is too simplex for another man. I can live with that.

Dubious wrote:I won't argue with anyone's “sensibilities” but I'm quite certain Beethoven didn't think of it in those terms.

Hola. It was my interpretation. Extrapolation back in history, and attributing greatness to a mind that touched on something he did not know he was touching on. Asserting a criticism that Beethoven was not in awe of himself for musically describing the formation of androgyny IS a bit of an obviously over-obvious criticism. I am not sure if I am being insulted for my intelligence, or you are for yours. Let's call it a draw.

hajrafradi wrote:I am not sure if I am being insulted for my intelligence, or you are for yours. Let's call it a draw.

There was no intention of insulting anyone's intelligence and made no such inference. It was merely a counter view that doesn't agree with yours and that's the whole story. To avoid any perception of insult, I'll forgo replying to your posts in the future.