[No reviews, no comedy, and no controversy this time. This is just straight-up folklore.] The legend of the Sugisawa Village is an interesting one, and I will here put down everything I can find of it and within the best of my abilities to distinguish fact (whatever that maybe) from speculation and sensationalism. The Sugisawa legend is very obscure, yet also well known. This contradiction seems to be a theme around this legend but it is easily explainable: it is known mostly in other forms, and under other names. It has been the basis of - like a lot of other Japanese ghost stories and folktales - a lot of fiction, and horror fiction in particular, and the video games Project Zero 2: The Crimson Butterfly by Tecmo (Fatal Frame 2 in the US and Zero 2 in Japan) and Siren, a 2003 game by Japan Studio, are both based on this legend. Considering this it is great a shame that the actual story of Sugisawa Village is hard to find, at least in English. Bits and pieces can be found but most of it is hear-say, and from untrustworthy sources. One of the most trustworthy sources available comes from a wiki site for Project Zero which states that Sugisawa village was supposedly in the Tohoku region, and was the site of a massacre. The story states that a villager in a ‘moment of madness’ killed the entire population of Sugisawa village before killing himself. The land the village stood on was later incorporated into a neighbouring village, and all trace of the village was erased from official maps and documents. This was not the end for Sugisawa Village however as it is said that people wandering near the site of the village would never be seen again, having been killed by evil spirits. It has even been said that people who wander close to the site of Sugisawa Village will hear in the distance - but very clearly - talking and laugher, as of a festival, before fits of screaming; after a while this screaming halts and returns to talking and laughter. Another legend states that the village is now part of a spiritual world from which people trapped in can never escape. However, people have also claimed to have stood in the remains of Sugisawa Village but these have continuously been found to be hoaxes. Many fans of the occult and abandoned buildings have visited the area looking for it. Most having heard about the legend from the television show "Miraculous Experiences! Unbelievable" and accounts of trips are often posted on popular websites, but these people either find nothing or post stories without any proof of their veracity. The site of the supposed village is also hard to pin down exactly. Zero wiki claims the village remains became a part of Aomori City along with the rest of the Kosugi district, and others claim that the village was more rural and still stands intact. This extreme contradiction makes it impossible to validate either story. The timeline of the events of the legend are also poorly recorded, or contradictory. The massacre has mainly been said to have taken place in two different timelines. The most common is sometime during the Meiji period (1868 – 1912) however, some place the events between 1914 and 1934, and some still suggest earlier. Whatever the truth, if there is any truth to this story at all, it is clear that the Legend of Sugisawa Village will remain and continue to gain attention. Any factual corrections or additions that could be suggested and made are encouraged.
[A heavy topic, and some controversial comments - just think of sunshine and smile.] Hanging & Capital punishment: it is pretty clear what makes this subject so divisive, but I’ve never really known where I myself stand on the subject. Most of the time I’m against it, but with some special cases I consider it an option. This must mean I am for restricted Capital Punishment, but I honestly am not sure I am. I have no 'moral' objection to somebody being killed in the name of society - but I don’t believe in any form of objective morality, I believe morals are subjective, and largely based on societal norms – and I certainly don’t think of it as ‘evil’, but I don’t really like the idea of Capital Punishment either. H.P. Lovecraft (in one of his few really quotable lines) once wrote ‘The man of truth is beyond good and evil’ and this is the stance I take myself. Good and evil are ultimately illusions, like a lot of things humanity holds on to, rather like morals. However, I was reading a book of George Orwell’s essays today in preparation for my next year at university and I read his essay, titled ‘A Hanging’ which reminded me of a topic that has recently been discussed on this site, and it got me thinking about Capital Punishment again. Orwell's essay is written in his blunt style, and it’s rather moving because of this. Some of the people reported in the essay seem to care little about the fact that they have killed a fellow human being, and they apparently treated it like rather a job. Which, I suppose it would have both been, and become if you were involved in hangings long enough. Orwell was clearly horrified by this attitude in the essay, and some really dramatic passages come up, especially this: Taken from 'A Hanging' on page 16 of George Orwell: Essays. The crime the man committed is never mentioned or commented on. It does not seem important to Orwell. But is it important? When Ted Bundy was put to death in 1989 I doubt more than a handful of people could have been upset, and an all-night observation was even kept around his prison by people actually waiting for him to die by electric chair. Was it wrong for those people to wish death on another human being because of the things he had done? Some would say yes. But was their loathing justifiable? Yes, again it was. Ultimately: our opinion on capital punishment comes largely from our background, as our background tends to make us think one way or another, and an opinion based on convention is largely subjective, which makes an ultimate, final answer almost impossible to come to. We can hardly dispute that some rather awful people have been put to death, some wrongly accused have died, and some have died who could have been rehabilitated. So is capital punishment right or wrong? I honestly don’t think it is either. In truth I still have not made a final decision, and for the time being I’m happy with that.
[I totally couldn’t come up with a better title.] Let us talk about immersion in writing for a little while. Immersion is where you go to your room to read, and when you stop to get something to eat you find yourself legally pronounced dead. Immersion is when you run home to continue reading a book, not necessarily because you ‘want to find out what happens next’, but because you have genuinely formed an emotional attachment to the characters and like them as people, or just find the story interesting. Because immersion can mark the difference between a forgettable book and an unforgettable book I think that it is really important, and sometimes really overlooked. When this has gone wrong reading a book is sort of like when a cat is crying around your legs for attention when you are trying to smoke. It’s cute, and you can tell he means well, but it’s just the wrong time for it and you are not in the mood. When it goes right you can literally feel what is going on. Let me give examples of what I mean. Two examples of the good was like when I was reading V. by Thomas Pynchon, and during the chapter set in Italy I could literally almost feel the Italian sun, or when I was reading The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald and during the first party at Gatsby’s house I could almost hear the revelry and almost felt a part of it. Two examples of the bad happened during Neverwhere by Neil Gaiman during a weird sort of throne room with a king-beggar and finally realised I just couldn’t accept what was happening, or during The Colour Out of Space by H.P. Lovecraft when a bumkinish local opens his mouth to let out a torrent of clichés and bad writing. Disagree with these examples if you want, and these might be unique to me alone, but everyone who has read enough will know what I’m talking about. With both of the good examples above I found myself lost in both books, picturing I was in a cafe in Italy, or watching a drunk swing on a chandler in West Egg, Long Island; I was just wishing the narrative to go on forever, without any of the daily annoyances like eating or sleep. With both of the bad examples the exact same thing happened: I looked up, saw my surroundings, went down stairs and made myself a coffee, and played a Nirvana song or two on guitar before finally going back to reading. This immersion into a narrative can happen in a number of ways I find, and I will list four ways here with examples: 1 – The joy of the writing itself. When reading Haruki Murakami’s After Dark I found myself able to at worst forgive, and at best accept the Lynch-esque dips into the surreal because the writing itself was so interesting, rich and alive. This is why we can accept and laugh at the borders that are pushed in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. The other end of this is Don Delillo’s Americana, which – while wasn’t poorly written, was so blandly written that I find myself sometimes uninterested. 2 – The details in the story. The best two novels I can point to with this are probably The Hobbit and Nineteen-Eighty Four. Both of these books gave sufficient details of their respective worlds that made them both seem more plausible that I could suspend my disbelieve enough to really enjoy them. The other end this is Lisey’s Story by Stephen King which uses the idea of an alternative world that one can get to by thinking about it. That’s not a joke either, I’m being serious. And this alterative world – named Boo’ya Moon in the novel – was copied almost completely from Lovecraft’s Dream World stories. 3 – The real world being distorted. Murakami’s After Dark also applies here, but a better example that I can think of is House of Leaves. This is when a realistic world is presented and detailed well, and then gets turned on its head. House of Leaves built up to its weirdness with normal things acting in increasingly subtle ways until we find Will Navidson exploring a mysterious, dark-covered alternate dimension, and yet I can accept House of Leaves more than, say, Neverwhere because a good contrast between the weird and the real world was established at the beginning. 4 – Being realistic. This applies to Hemmingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald and Joseph Conrad. These writers structured their respective worlds and stories in such a clear, sensible, logical way; and give so many relatable details in their stories that their worlds feel very real. Their stories are all heartfelt, all well considered, and natural; and their realism really draws me in to their stories. A clear example of the other side of this is Dan Brown’s The Da Vinci Code, which I find to be unrealistic and rather silly. Not to say that The Da Vinci Code wasn’t entertaining, it’s rather like a Michael Bay film. These are just a four examples of how a novel can draw you in. I’m sure I have not put down everything, but this should demonstrate what I am trying to say. What I am trying to say is this: with your writing remember to consider all of the usual things, like grammar, and style, and consistency; but also remember that you are trying to draw the reader into your world and allow them to enjoy it. Immersion, then, should be king.
[Almost sounds like the name of a poem. Doesn’t it?] So after a sold two weeks of reading, and doing bugger all else, I have finished Ulysses by James Joyce. I am not even kidding with that opening sentence, I had so little to do so I read this book in two weeks; and when I finished the last chapter of the novel a weird thing happened: I was almost expecting more. Even though I could see the dates of when Joyce started the novel and when he finished it, and the name of the city where he finished it, I had to go back and read the last sentence twice again to make sure I wasn’t kidding myself. And when it dawned on me that I actually had finished the book I had this weird feeling that is really difficult to describe. I loved Ulysses. I will say that as much. It was strange and unique, and amazingly well written. Stephen Dedalus is still one of my favourite characters in all fiction, and the Bloom family were also so well written I felt I knew them both intimately by the end. But as I thought back over the entire book, remembering individual lines that stood out for me, and remembering what parts I liked and what parts I didn’t, and what parts I just plain didn’t get I also got the feeling like I should read the entire thing again. I want to do this one day, not any time soon considering it’s a massive book. However Ulysses is not the type of book I want to reread because I want to relive the joy of it but because I fell that there is so much I have missed in it. It feels like there are entire layers hidden in the novel that I didn’t pick up on, only catching hints in this first reading. I want to reread it because I want to understand it fully I guess. If at all. This novel, it is clear, had a strange effect on me. After finishing it I kept thinking back to when I finished Gravity’s Rainbow by Thomas Pynchon, and how fulfilling that ending was; How amazingly overt and funny it was and I was comparing that to the ending of Ulysses, which is weirdly funny but more bitter and dark. I think it’s because I loved the first and second parts to Ulysses, but part three I just didn’t care for, and I’m not sure why this is. For some reason most of the moments in the book that I remember happened in the first 1/3 of the novel, and I’m not sure what this means. Maybe this is another reason I want to reread this colossus? Currently I am still under this strange feeling, and I’m not sure if I can actually get to sleep tonight because of it. I keep thinking about Ulysses, Stephen Dedalus, Leopold Bloom; about the little moments in the novel that so drew me into Joyce’s world and vision of Dublin on that one day at the turn of the last century. I’m not sure I understand the book completely, and I’m not sure I ever will, but it is weird just how much this novel seeps into your unconscious. So instead of leaving this off with some weak ending, I will at least try and hide the fact that I can’t think of a way to close this by asking the question: what does Ulysses mean to you?
[I guess that after 10 posts to my 'blog' I should use this feature as a blog at least once.] In keeping with a really irritating habit - that has been going on pretty much all my life - of arriving so late to a party I can be more aptly described as a 'cultural archaeologist', I have recently discovered a liking for hip-hop. It happened yesterday as I was playing the game Scarface: The World is Yours (a bad game with a really strange ethics system. I am not allowed to bludgeon a civilian to death with a baseball bat because that would be murder - and this in theory is consistent with the character - but the game has no problem with me running that same civilian over with a truck) in which I was just driving around a condensed caricature of Miami, listening to the typical 80s Metal and Reggie, when I remembered that the game also has a large selection of hip-hop that I've never really gave much attention to. This thought has baffled me ever since, because usually I'm that type of 'no-guitars-no-good', closed minded idiot that could very well polarize and tribalize music. So I put some songs on, starting with D12, and I just had it in the background. As I started to actually listen to the music in between blasts of gunfire I began to really, really enjoy it. I know that this is a pretty pathetic way of introducing yourself to a new cultural medium, but with the selection in The World is Yours there is a healthy mix of hip-hop. Some songs are straight up - exactly what you expect, but some are self-parodying and rather funny, one song is a narration of a film, and others show a good blend with other genres of music. In a sentence 'there is a really good variety of different artists and songs'. I also find myself being able to get over my own cultural disadvantages. Being from Northumberland - which is an area of the UK not unlike Tolkien's Middle Earth - and being middle class, I've never had a sense what race relations is like in other parts of my own country, never mind other parts of the world, until I moved a little further south. Sunderland, before anyone complains. Whenever I heard the N- word it always sounded to me like something from another world, and was always a little uneasy when it was said in my presence, because where I am living now is rather tense and full of race discrimination. But listening to this music, it's almost like some kind of doorway into an aspect of life I was largely unaware of before. What does this say? I might wonder. Well, it's kind of told me that you can actually learn things about yourself from video games, and not just that you are a serial killer in training. This game at least taught me that I should try to understand things from cultures not of my own, try to give everything a chance, and it's really fun to explore new things. And that it's fun to smuggle drugs from the Caribbean.
Jacob’s Ladder is underrated. I know that some people might have heard of it, and I can already hear the ‘but it’s inspired so much’es but bear with me. After my last two reviews about films made in and about Germany, and one joke review about Battle Royale, I wanted to do a review about something different – something that does not involve my love of the bottom quarter of the screen – and so I shall review an American horror film from the early 90s, a film that is rather close to my heart. The story itself is interesting, well thought out and well developed, even if it does borrow heavily from the Ambrose Beirce short story An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge. The overall message of the film is nothing we have not seen before: the entire message could be boiled down to ‘A man’s worst enemy is himself’ something Tom Clancy cannot help but masturbate over the blurbs of all his books. The film also uses the military as a kind of backdrop too – again, strangely not unlike Tom Clancy - but don't think Tom Clancy has anything to do with this film! – as it uses the MK Ultra project as a backdrop to the events of the film. This must not make the film director, Adrian Lyne, very popular with his own government. As said before Jacob’s Ladder has inspired a lot of modern horror, and it started the ‘Rubber Reality’ films like Donne Darko. The Silent Hill video game series also takes a lot from this movie, ranging from actual inspiration to actual plagiarism veiled as 'homage'. The film opens with a brief friendly scene in which soldiers in an unnamed Vietnam village sit around talking like they just left high school before a stark and brutal fire fight between members of that largest of NRA fan clubs that is the US army and a then unknown, unseen enemy. Jacob Singer is.... the protagonist, and is also stabbed and left to die in the bush by an assailant. Then he wakes up. He’s on a train in New York years later and proceeds to live a normal life. But things quickly turn against him, and he comes to find – not just believe – that he is being stalked by things not-quite-human. The whole effect is that after a blistering opening and some truly graphic scene with legs blown halfway to hell, and soldiers having convulsions and throwing up, the next part of the film is very tame and subtle. The film suffers from this because the opening is very strong and memorable, leading you to believe when you watch it for the first time that you are watching a war film, and then for the film to settle and it become a very subtle, psychological film the change in mood is almost jarring. The aim here was to presumably make us feel safe in this urban environment, but because there is no sense of any real danger to the protagonist we begin to feel less like something is wrong and more like nothing is happening. This is not to say that this part of the film is bad. Far from it, its well shot, well acted, well scripted and has a number of subtle symbols that are extremely rewording to find. It’s just that the clash of tone between the opening and this part is so great it feels like two different films which is both a point in its favour and a real problem. The film starts to build quickly in the second half of the film as Jacob’s life spirals out of control. Symbols and horrific imagery are aplenty here, and the effect is truly horrifying. It is here when the film comes into its own, and we begin to sympathise with Jacob a lot more now that reality and nightmarish fantasy start to mix together; resulting in one of the most intense and deeply disturbing scenes in cinema. This part of the film just builds and builds and builds until the ending: which is perhaps one of the most beautiful and meaningful endings to a film that I have ever seen. However, with a film like Jacob’s Ladder the ending could either leave you spellbound or thoroughly confused. What you feel at the end relates entirely to how much attention you paid to the dialogue, which leads me to a very lazy, and poor complaint about the narration in the film. Throughout the film Jacob is shown as very intelligent, a man who earned a degree in philosophy sometime long before the films events. However, he has to be told a quote from Eckhart. The reason is obvious: to tell the viewer something important about the plot, but the style of delivery is poor. This is not good storytelling: surely if Jacob Singer has a degree in philosophy then he should already know of Eckhart and his ideas? That said though, the film extremely well made, and a personal favourite. The ending is astounding in its beauty, and it is the sort of film that stays with you long after you are finished watching as you reflect on it, and work the films finer points out, which is something I really appreciate. I must admit that this review was hard to write from an unbiased position because I am such a fan of Jacob's Ladder.
[In order to make these reviews a little more interesting I’ve decided to review the 2000 film Battle Royale in the style of 18th century poets and use Heroic Couplets.] 'WHAT dire Offence from am'rous Causes springs, What mighty Contests rise from trivial Things,' Alexander Pope - The Rape of the Lock BATTLE ROYALE is a film that’s real bad But somewhere inside it makes me so glad. What is it about this film that’s shitty? MUSE! Aid me in explaining this myst’ry! The story is silly, and poorly done; Seems the director wanted to have fun With an island, some school kids, and some guns, And have one boy who all the girls love tons! SHUYA can’t see that NORIKO Love’s him, But they stay together because... it’s him; The result: a romance that makes milk curdle... To hell with just MUSE! I need VIRGIL! The acting is bad, just beyond compare, A lot of the characters are just ... there; Getting themselves killed so the film can end. So if you like that stuff – do not pretend – There is enough killing to make it fun But if you like a good story, just run: There is nothing for you here, it’s just all Killing, with one scene with a basketball Game, and a ball in reverse gravity. Just you try explaining that one to me. But, despite all this; it does what it does – And I’d not mind it if there weren’t a buzz. (Stuff you! I know these rhymes are really bad) But after watching it you are quite glad And not just because the film’s over, either, If I said I hate this film ... I’m a liar. It has this weird charm that I can’t describe: It’s feels somehow mature, and I ascribe To this. It’s easy to feel that social Commentary is it’s – well - it’s so called Aim (if you excuse the pun) the people Of this future JAPAN do not mind the game, And some of its winners even find fame! So what any message might be, I don’t know - It can’t be very original though; And I still don’t understand the ending! What message, BATTLE ROYALE, are you sending? [My god that was painful]
Goodbye Lenin! – A review If Downfall shows a sophistication in German cinema, then the film Goodbye Lenin! proves that Germany has a fantastic film industry that is largely and criminally ignored. Goodbye Lenin! (2003) is a very good film, and it is shows another side of Germany that is often overlooked in that the film is also genuinely funny. Goodbye Lenin! tells the story of Germany’s reconciliation, and the morphing between Capitalist west and Communist East, and the personal difficulties that many East Germans had in accepting and coming to terms with their new, freer if less structured life. All of this is seen through the eyes of Alex Kerner the protagonist, a young East German who longs for a freer life. This reunion is where most of the emotional impact in this film comes from; the comedy comes in the story of Alex trying to stop his staunchly Socialist mother (who suffered a heart attack during the reunion, and is told that if she suffers another large shock she might die) from finding out that the Cold War is over. He does this in a number of ingenious ways while he also tries to live his life, and embrace the new culture developing around him. What is great about this film is that it pokes fun at the distrust between East and West born out of the Cold War instead of relying overtly on simple jokes, and the comedic elements of the film serve to also develop the characters. Because of this character development we are more attached to Alex as a person rather than just a character and we feel his frustration when the illusion he tries so hard to build becomes impossible to maintain. We also get a real sense of his sadness when he finds his father, who defected to the west when he was young. Overall the film is a very funny and original piece that is greatly overlooked and underrated. There are a few anachronisms; but this is literally a small picking-point rather than a major problem with the film. The only real problem with the film is that the ending and some of the scenes are largely forgettable. However, if you can look past some forgettable moments and a few anachronisms then Goodbye Lenin! is a film very much worth checking out; it is emotional, unique, well written and above all very well made.
Downfall – a movie review Berlin, 1945. The Russian Red Army are closing in on the tired, war-weary city, while the Fuhrer Adolf Hitler raves in an underground bunker and slips into madness and depression. This is the setting of the 2004 German film Downfall (or Der Untergang) and the film tries very hard to have a realistic and vaguely sympathetic depiction of the end of the Second World War in Europe, the Battle for Berlin, and Adolf Hitler’s state of mind. A cynical person might think something would be strange about a German film portraying this period of history in such a way, but this film is actually very natural with this subject. This film is, I think, a great sign, as it shows a maturity in German cinema – and in cinema in general – which is very refreshing. Also, the fact that this film is spoken in German adds a more realistic feel to the film, unlike other films about this conflict which involve Russians or Germans conversing in English and with either British or American accents. The Germans, who are obviously the focus of this film, are often fully developed characters with flows, a sense of humour, and a moral ambiguity which makes many of the characters very memorable. However, this does not apply to every character in the film, but considering the sheer number of characters in this film it would be very difficult to give equal light to every story thread. The film is very long though, over three hours, and yet not every story thread is fully explored, or fully rapped with the main plot. The film tries to do too much and very often suffers for it, but the viewer never loses track of the overall story. I will not here give a summary of the plot, the story is so well known it seems pointless and it would be much better to simply watch the film anyway. The before mentioned moral ambiguity of the film is perhaps where the film draws a lot of its power. It gives a sense of humanity to the characters, even to Adolf Hitler, who is played excellently by Bruno Ganz. The overall effect of this is to make you appreciate the sophistication of the film, which is very welcome when compared to other films about the period. Downfall is also a very well made film. Some moments are almost Lynchian in their nightmarish atmosphere and intensity, whereas other scenes (especially of street fighting) are amazingly intense. But saying this there is a lot in the film that betrays its origin. A lot of the explosions, especially near the beginning, are clearly CGI which takes away much of their intended impact. The film, then, is very much worth watching. However, the length of the film could turn many away from it, and some might find it difficult following every story thread. However, if you do sit through the film you might find a unique, satisfying and very sophisticated take on the end of the Second World War in Europe.
Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, by Penguin In 1949 George Orwell (real name Eric Arthur Blair) gave us this novel as a vision of the future. Today it is still widely read, whose story continues to stay with the reader long after the last page is turned, and whose prophecy remains as terrifying as ever. I first read 1984 when I was 15, 6 years on and it still scares me; and yet, this novel is so well written and executed, that whenever I return to it I cannot help but read on - regardless of how much time has past. Though Orwell admitted that he based his novel on the earlier WE by Yevgeny Zamyatin, it was really just a source of inspiration, rather than a form of plagiarism. In truth the two novels are very different, and Orwell is not the only writer to have taken inspiration, and maybe a few liberties, from another. Other reviewers who claim that 1984 is a poor 'imitation' are missing the many clear differences between the two novels. Throughout 1984 there is an overwhelming sense of paranoia (considering this, it seems fitting that the introduction was written by Thomas Pynchon, to which I will come back) and there is a sense in the novel that the entire world was set up as a sinister game between the characters Winston Smith and O'brien. This paranoia is also, and sense of always being watched is no accident given the constant surveillance over the protagonist. The novel is also deeply mysterious. Few, if any of the questions you start with are answered, and though clues are given, they are often fabrications, or outright lies, which make the novel fascinating. It also seems to give the novel much of its force, and impact after the novel has been finished. Even the essay at the very end of the novel Apex on Newspeak is a mystery in itself. The writing is tight, and effective; and usually in other Penguin Modern Classics such as The Great Gatsby there are clear spelling mistakes that can disrupt the flow of reading, however this is not found in this edition, and the sense of paranoia is able to hold because of this. As stated earlier, buyers of the Penguin Modern Classics are not only given the novel, and the essay on Newspeak at the end, but also a very good essay by Thomas Pynchon (V., The Crying of Lot 49, Gravity's Rainbow and so on) and this, given the paranoia of the book is both fitting, and slightly ironic in a pleasant way, as the form of paranoia in 1984 is much different to the forms of paranoia found in Pynchon's work, which often seems more comical. The Penguin Modern Classics edition is highly recommended for other, more mundane reasons also. The text is pleasant and distinct, large enough to be read by anyone, and the pages are pleasant to hold. Everything is clearly spaced out, and I do not remember a single grammatical error in the whole book, and for the price of the book, the Penguin Modern Classic edition is, really, impossible to fault.
H.P. Lovecraft is best remembered as a prose writer, and a writer or ‘weird fiction’; but Lovecraft also wrote poetry, and wrote about poetry very capably. This is not to say that Lovecraft was a great poet, far from it. Much of his earlier work are imitations of 18th century verse, especially Pope, and much of his later work are attempts to get away from imitating 18th century verse, mostly by imitating Poe. However, this does not mean that Lovecraft was a bad poet, just a largely unoriginal one; but since Lovecraft’s poetry was light hearted, and mostly for fun [1] we can forgive this. But despite this, Lovecraft’s poetry still has its own merits. For example: This is taken from the 1924 poem Providence, a poem about his home city. In these lines we find a consistent metre, being in Iambic pentameter, and consistent line lengths of eight syllables, then six syllables and then back to eight. Another notable thing about these lines is that their imagery are present and clear, while these lines also charge a very strong emotion, or feeling of reflection. Another excellent poem by Lovecraft is The Garden which also shows off all of these positive aspects of his poetry. However, this poem is also hurt by archaic throw-backs Such as the words ‘o’er’ and ‘flow’rs’ in the finishing couplet: These archaic touches are found in Providence too; however given the tone and subject of that poem they are allowable. This use of archaic grammar is typical for Lovecraft’s other work, and he is both derided and admired for this. However, despite this The Garden is a worthy poem, and the imagery, flow and emotion is easily felt by the reader. This charging of imagery and feeling is not found in all of his poems however, and it is absent from his 1919 poem Sunset. Another side of Lovecraft’s poetry that can be seen as regrettable is his sometimes blatant racism, which also colours his prose. Which these poems, and reading them with our modern perspectives, it can difficult to take Lovecraft’s poems seriously. See for an example On the Creation of Niggers. This is not to say that these are the only faults of Lovecraft’s poetry, his racism, prison-like antiquarianism, and sometimes lack of genuine emotion. And this is not to say that Lovecraft is worth an examination because it is. Forgiving the flaws then there are some of Lovecraft’s poems that are worthy of attention, as I hopefully have briefly shown. There are other positives to his poesy too: poems such as Waste Paper and To Charlie of the Comics are rather funny, which is not something which can be said about his prose; and his poems are also more easily read this his prose, as there is less verboseness. It is sad, then, that no serious study of his poems has been published outside of Science Fiction websites; and an even greater shame that his poems are not so easily available. There are now Kindle documents out with his poems on, and complete collections of his poetical works in large books, but the books are extremely expensive and Kindle documents are of course exclusive. Hopefully soon there will be a small, mass produced book of his poems, along with his essays on poetry such as The Allowable Rhyme, The Despised Pastoral and Metrical Regularity for book lovers to enjoy. It seems certain such a book would interest Lovecraft fans, as his poetical work is very seldom mentioned and not well known. But with Lovecraft’s ever increasing popularity a book such as this seems not very far off. 1 - This is because I do not try at all to be a poet in any serious sense. My verse is simply antiquarianism and nothing more.'" [Letter to Miss Tolridge - 8 Mar 1929]
An Issue in Publication To many amateur writers publication is their main goal; so much so that a rejection slip can be extremely discouraging. Especially for people who do not have a so-called ‘thick skin’, it is easy to think, when looking at a rejection slip (particularly a generic one) that the only reason that their piece has been rejected – whatever it may be – is because of a lack of talent, or a lack of quality in their work. However, this is not always the case. Here is a potential issue with submissions that amateur writers should be aware of. An editor, as I observed when working with The Northumberland Gazette, can reject a piece for a variety of reasons. One unusual reason was a simple case of space. Something can be good, can be well written and relevant, but if it cannot fit alongside the other material then it simply cannot go in; and amateur writers should understand that their piece will almost certainly not be the main focus of a magazine or newspaper page. The advice: do not be afraid to be minimal with your writing. Not only does it concentrate your work, and make you consider each word, but restricting yourself to 500 words or less in a piece is good practice in clarity. It might also give you a better chance of being published in the future.
What was Alexander Pope’s Understanding of the role of Literary Criticism. Alexander Pope’s theory on Literary Criticism, and his understanding of it, is mostly displayed in his poetry, and his style of poetry. However, one poem of his stands out as particularly important due to the fact that it is a poem analysing poetry, which is his Essay on Criticism, which first appeared anonymously in 1711. In this essay I will use Essay on Criticism to show Pope’s opinions on the subject. In the poem, Alexander Pope (1688 - 1744) details many claims on the subject of poetry, and the composition of poetry, as well as on Literary Criticism using his depiction of critics found in the aforementioned poem as a representation of Literary Criticism at his time. Here I will work through each comment in his poem and discus them with relation to his opinions on the subject so far as we can ascertain. It is a Didactic poem[1], which aims to teach about the rules of poetry, composing and critiquing, and is Pope’s most ambitious poem at that time. It was an effort to both establish and refine his opinion on Poetry, and to respond to the ongoing debate to whether poetry should be ‘Natural’ or ‘Artificial’ i.e. based on the rules inherited from the classical period. As soon as we start the poem we find Alexander Pope’s voice, and within the first two lines he both enters the poem and makes a statement on Literary Criticism: with this heroic couplet: This couplet introduces the poem with an interesting statement; it opens the first of the three parts which discuses the standard poetic rules of taste by which critics should evaluate a piece of work and give sound judgement on. After this Pope expands into: Here Pope puts forward the idea that bad criticism is worse, and more harmful than bad writing. This opening stanza also shows why Pope continues to be popular today, as this statement is still relevant today. He then gives some advice for both professional and aspiring critics with this stanza: In essence this stanza advises that you should not try to critic beyond the limits of your knowledge and skill. Criticism is not the only subject discussed in the poem. Throughout Essay on Criticism Pope talks of poetry being natural: And with this theme he constantly refers back to the ancient, epic writers of Homer, Virgil and Horace, and referred to Aristotle and Plato in this poem as establishing the rules of composing poetry and the ultimate standard of taste. This he states in the last lines of the poem, from line 643 onward. With these closing lines we can see Pope’s appreciation for the classics, which might be considered as a bias; but this was a way of marrying the two sides of the aforementioned argument of whether poetry should be ‘Natural’ or ‘Artificial’. What this states is that the rules we inherited from the classics are Natural. This is an effort to console the advocates of both opinions into mutual agreement. The poem in this respect seems to be deliberately ambiguous. Pope both admits that rules are a necessity, while also stating that poetry is founded on mysterious, natural forces which a poet of good taste and ‘genius’ can appear to transcend these rules. The critic then must be an equal if he is to appreciate the poet’s ‘genius’. The couplet found in this section “True Ease in Writing comes from Art, not Chance/As those move easiest who have learn'd to dance” also states (and rightly so) that Poetry is an art form, and that all good poetry comes from talent, practise and learning the rules of poetry – not just from contemporaries, but from the older poets too, or the classics. This is complemented by the next few lines, which run thus: These lines also state that, like dance, bad writing is recognisable to the ear; good writing is pleasant to read, and sounds good to the ear whereas bad writing is equally recognisable. With this I must go back to the opening lines of the poem to demonstrate Pope’s understanding of the role of Criticism quoted before: “Tis hard to say, if greater want of Skill/Appear in Writing or in Judging ill.” Which demonstrates that Pope considers bad writing to be a fault - though mostly due to a lack of respect and care given to the craft in learning the poems and the rules of poetry set down by the classic writers - this is not as harmful to literature as bad criticism is. This is expressed in these lines, shortly afterward: In this Pope attacks both critical clichés, and bad critics who depend entirely on the majority opinion without stating anything original. However, this critique of bad critics can also very easily be applied to bad poets too, and thus Pope is warning against unoriginality (clichés, dead metaphors, Plagiarism) which was later a large thought of Romantic thinking, who were greatly inspired by Pope. In this stanza Pope also states that it is not the poet that should be critiqued, but a poem he has written. At this time people would critique, often disparagingly, the personality of the poet, rather than discussing a certain poem (as in the lines 452 – 559). This is referenced in another of Pope’s poems, in the Rape of the Lock there is the line “At every word a reputation dies.” In Canto III, line 16, when talking about a fashionable meeting spot. Pope also states in the poem that the critic should seek the poets intentions with a poem, instead of simply stating that they do not understand it; this is discussed in the lines 253 – 266, which are: Again this is the fault of a critic who fails to learn the rules around what they are critiquing, because with these rules known, even if the meaning proves evasive, the critic can recognise when a poet is knowledgeable and skilled in his craft because of the way his poem is written. Pope in the essay also critiques critics who concentrate on only one part of the poem, not looking at the bigger picture. For example, he talks about critics who judge by the imagery and metaphor alone (lines 269 - 288), critics who judge a poem on its use of language (lines 305 - 336), and critics who judge by versification (lines 337 - 343). Other than criticising critical approaches, and bad critics, Pope describes what he considers to be the ideal critic[3]. He does this between lines 560 and 643. The ideal critic, in Pope’s opinion, should have Integrity: Modesty: Sense of what is appropriate and inoffensive: And courage enough to express their own opinions: [3] Pope then begins to discuss the attributes of critics that he finds most distasteful (lines 584 - 630), which is essentially a recap of what has already been said. Pope then ends the poem with a list of classical poets and critics, and their influences. Much of the poem is a discussion of critics, as a reflection on literary criticism as a genre, describing both the worst and the best qualities of the common...
Does Twentieth Century Poetry Constitute an Incontestable Break with the Poetry that Preceded it? The answer to this question is rather complex. While it is true that modern poetry is a great change from the poetry of a few centuries ago; is it really an ‘incontestable break’ with the work that preceded it? There is strong reason to think it is not. Of course, there is a difference between modern poetry and the poetry of, say, the 19th century; but though they may be different, this does not mean that they are not similar in a number of ways. There are a number of different approaches and styles in modern poetry, some have evolved directly from these earlier forms; while others are different from past poetry in a more fundamental basis, but still carry many of the same, or similar ideas. Modern poetry comes from - and was mostly inspired by - the Modernists, of which the most famous poets were working during the inter-war years (1918 – 1938) with writers and poets such as T.S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, and Ernest Hemmingway however, Modernism can still be considered to be present in modern poetry, however, I will return to this later. The Modernists were writers who took an interest in more modern forms of art, such as television and radio and film, and took influence from them. It is this expanse in cultural influences that – and with no accident – seen new ideas and concepts introduced to poetry; such as free verse, and new ideas were bought into the changing art of poetry, in a reflection of the changing world. The influence of Modernism on newer poets is plain to see: their subjects and themes of isolation and disillusionment are shared by poets such as Philip Larkin and Dylan Thomas. Where is the influence of the earlier poets? Philip Larkin’s poem This Be The Verse (1971) is an example of very traditional form in modern poetry. It is set into quatrains of strict metric length, with a fixed rhyme scheme. This example shows that even in modern poetry the pre-modernist conventions are still alive and respected by poets. T.S. Eliot is another example of a Modernist, poet using old-fashioned poetical conventions in poems such as The Hippopotamus and Burbank with a Baedeker. This is not restricted to Modernist poets either: James Fenton’s The Kingfisher’s Boxing Gloves (1980) for example also has a fixed rhyme and metric scheme, and uses nature, and animals in the natural world as a theme. This is showing these poets have taken influence from earlier eras, while other works show these same poets challenging the conventions of these earlier movements; with works such as Eliot’s The Hollow Men and Ezra Pound’s In a Station of the Metro - this challenge to the previous poets comes most notably in the form of free verse. In Shamus Heaney’s work (another notable modern poet) we can see influence from earlier poems too. Heaney, though there is no rhyme or strictly metered stanzas in most of his work, does use a very idealistic view of country life – like the poetry of the romantics – and very pastoral images in poems such as Churning Day and Anahorish. Pastoral imagery is a depiction of an idealized, simplistic, Sheppard life, commonly depicting an idyllic life in ancient Greece, which John Milton used to good effect in his elegiac poem Lycidas. An elegy is a poem that moans the passing of a person who is presumably close to the poet. Elegiac poems are, too, still found today. W.H. Auden is one poet who still writes elegies; and elegies - in one form or another - are maybe always going to be present in poetry, as people and ideas keep dying, and it is not unheard of to write an elegy for an idea. For example there were many elegiac poems about the collapse of Communism written during the 1990s. Mention has been made of free verse. This style of poetry arose in the early 20th century and it is unmetered and unrhymed – a specific rebellion against the poetry that presided it. This style can be found in many modern poets work; T.S. Eliot being the most famous for it, and poets such as D.H. Lawrance, Ezra Pound, and Christopher Reid to name a few have used free verse to good effect. Does this mean, then, that poems in Free Verse do not share anything with their versed counterparts? Ezra Pound’s poem The River Merchant's Wife: A Letter discuses the life of a woman who marries her childhood love, only for him to leave at sixteen and not return. This poem not only has a narrative, like earlier poems (especially literary ballads such as Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner) but the way in which the life of the two characters in the poem is depicted is almost an idyllic form of childhood; and with the many references to nature in this poem; the Romantics clearly have an influence here. This is not to say that at the turn of the 20th century there was a big rebellion against older forms of poetry either; but this rebellion seems to have been present in the poetry of the 1800s too – only in less obvious ways. Edgar Allen Poe, for example, sometimes broke the conventions in his poetry. Poems such as Dream-Land and The City in the Sea show what could be considered to be the seeds of Modernism. For example, Dream-Land features uneven stanzas and lines, and also has two lines spaced out of place; effectively being their own stanzas; also (unlike the rest of the poem) spaced away from the side of the page. The City in the Sea also features uneven lines and stanzas – while this may not seem so revolutionary today, it was at the time, considering other poems by Nathaniel Hawthorne, Matthew Arnold, Rudyard Kipling and Rufus Griswold generally stuck to strict stanzaic form. In 19th century French poetry we see a rebellion against conventions too, perhaps most clearly in the form of the work of Arthur Rimbaud, who with his short literary life and rather small amount of work has been a notable influence on many modern poets, and especially the beat poets Allen Ginsberg and William S. Burroughs. This rebellion is also more interesting as, unlike English poetry – which was more accepting of new ideas and forms – French poetry was much stricter in its view of how a poem was written and composed. Rimbaud also employed free verse (or vers libre) such as this example from Illuminations: This would have been, at the time, very shocking, and a great departure from what the other French poets were doing. However, free verse – which was not to be popularised for another fifty years – can also be found in English poetry as far back as the 1700s, with Jubilate Agno by Christopher Smart. We can be in little doubt that the world and zeitgeist has changed dramatically since the time of Poe and Rimbaud. Modern poetry then, conforms to this change, and be a part of it at the same time. One of the great events that signaled this big change in the world was The First World War. It is during this conflict that many new poets found notoriety. Much of the poetry from this period is more pessimistic in tone; showing a fractured world, and dealing with the bitter conflict in verse. These war poets: such as Wilfred Owen, Wilfred Gibson, and Siegfried Sassoon: were famous for taking old clichés and turning them into new, and more interesting metaphors. An example of this is Wilfred Owen’s Greater Love which begins thus: “Red lips are not so red/As the stained stones kissed by the English dead.” Wilfred Owen also used unconventional stanzas in his work (such as Dulce et Decorum Est), which not only reinforced the theme of the poem, but also clearly influenced the Modernists who came to prominence just after WW1. The work of T.S. Eliot was clearly influenced by the War Poets, and it is thought that the first part of The Waste Lands could be talking about the effects the war had on the minds of the populous, people who say this often point to these lines as an example: T.S. Eliot was interested in everyday life, and used rather dark and ugly imagery in his poetry and this darkness was influenced by the tone of the work of the War Poets, and also influenced the work of more recent poets as well. So really, modern poetry is far from an ‘incontestable break with the poetry that preceded it’, but it is rather the result of a long evolutionary line of different poets and different styles; all having their influence on the poetry of today, and the changing face of poetry as an artistic form - in one way or another. And since today there is more access to poetry, such as the internet, and through songs, this increasing speed in the development of poetry seems likely to continue; as, like during the Dark Ages, a lot of poetry is now passed around as song. And with the great number of different styles and genres of music, like the great number of different styles of poetry (with more and more emerging and developing all the time) poetry then seems to have a way of developing, challenging and expanding the way no other artistic expression can. So it is true that there are differences between the standard poem of today when compared to 200 years ago – but this is really missing the very many similarities, and not just in form, but in what poetry means to us. Ted Hughes once said ‘Poetry is the voice of spirit and imagination and all that is potential’ and this seems to be exactly the same attitude that the poets of previous ages had held.