No Flo Joe: The Unpoetic Poeticness of Modernized Poetry

How do I feel about poetry? The crafty arrangement of words that pulls at your heartstrings and conveys years of emotions in a single line?

I love rhyming pieces more than anything, especially when the piece doesn't come off as contrived. I'm always amazed at how classic poets pulled off rhymes so flawlessly without sounding like "she looks at the flower... every hour." But I don't pay much attention to poetry in general, especially since I attended a workshop with a "professional poet" who bragged about the quality and depth of his work, but the pieces he shared all seemed contrived and empty to me.

Personally, the times I tried free verse, it came naturally. But I can't derive any pleasure from it. If I purposely blow meaning out of proportion, people snap and hum about how deep it was.

Which brings me to spoken word, an art form I really got to absorb in college.

Spoken Word

I recently fell in love with spoken word. And I fell out of love with it just as quickly. This isn't always the case, but spoken word is an example of an art form that started out great and got watered down over time. But this is because it had a purpose--an original focus and a particular group of artists--that it is being drawn away from.

Anything goes nowadays at spoken word gatherings. People throw analogies so strange no one could possibly identify with them, yet everyone snaps because "it's gotta mean something deep, right?" The recent changes in spoken word I've experienced are that pieces tend to be very shallow in the regard that they compete for snaps and leave behind true emotion, rhythm, and meaning.

Spoken word originated in Harlem and naturally flowed with the hardships Black people faced. Today, people use it to talk about the time their sister ate their sandwich and other things that don't flow the same way Black and Hispanic artists can make the art form work as they tackle themes of discrimination and oppression. At the same time, many of these artists of color have stopped telling their own stories to catch up with the hype of social justice and "deepness."

The great thing about spoken word is that your favorite poem can be your own, and that's okay. It makes sense that you can be most enthralled by the beauty your own experience naturally produced. This is also how the poetry serves as a coping mechanism--it reveals the beauty in the struggle. Though, as I mentioned above, the beauty of spoken word is melting away because people are trying to force it rather than let it come. The rhythms today are very contrived and every other artist sounds the same [to me].

People who are really into spoken word get offended at this, but some are quick to agree and say that's just how it is. No--that's what it has become. Your unique perspective has the same rhythm as the dude next door? I don't think so. And why does your voice change to sound like Gustavo's? What happened to Charlie? I want to hear Charlie. Charlie has a story that is just as powerful as Gustavo's. (Maybe--again, it's an art form attuned to minority struggle. This is my opinion, but this is why spoken word has stopped resonating with me.) I'm sure plenty of people are satisfied with the direction the art is going because it is becoming more inclusive.

I am not a spoken word artist myself because, as I said, I don't like writing free verse and I can't write rhymes. I wrote one piece and never performed it. I do love, however, how the community is so close-knit and supporting and everyone has their favorite poem from each artist in their community. I also love how frequently poems are performed in duos and trios.

And on a note that almost seems tangential at this point, my favorite poem is A Rainbow of Friends by P.K. Hallinan. It's been my favorite ever since I was a child. Now that I think about it, I performed it as spoken word many times when I was a child. Everything comes full circle!

But I suppose I prefer my poetry with vocals and rhythm nowadays.

How about you? Has your life been changed by poetry? Do you wish it were more popular or used in more creative ways? Do you have an undying love for spoken word that will persist no matter how much the art form changes? Don't forget, music is poetry, too!

Another blog prompt brought to us by Wriye.

Prologue: A Creationist Novelist

So, I was doing some research and came across a post on how to make a great prologue. I was interested to see that it listed creation prologues as a big (and definite, no exceptions) no-no.

Really, I was filled with disappointment because my own novel currently has a "creation" first chapter.

Although I will be reworking the chapter, I was curious to find specifics of why creation shouldn't be included in the story and directed my research to focus on creationist prologues.

Say No to Creation!

As I read more and more articles on prologues, I realized there weren't any reasons to declare creation prologues a no-no, as long as they were relevant to the plot. Some went as far as labeling these type of prologues overdone and "crappy."

That's when it clicked in my mind.

The message seemed less like "creation chapters always subtract from the plot" and more like "I personally don't like creation." Articles that gave the low down on improving plots obviously did not mention creation prologues, while those that did went well out of their way to rag on them. I've read my share of fantasy novels with creation prologues (or ancient war history, which is another prologue that got the no-no label) and was glad for the background to better understand the world.

I had to remind myself there are quite a few 'anti-creationists' out there. I'm not saying people should be one way or the other, but it was a bit disappointing to realize that people's negative mindsets against God and Jesus (specifically for God knows the reason) could affect seemingly unrelated advice and be so easily disguised when giving out such information.

And the bigger the name, the more likely people are to follow without hesitation. With great power, you have to be more careful about misleading your flock.

Creation Belongs with the Creatures

If a story centers around God, a god, or gods, it makes sense to involve creation. It can't be described as an overdone measure because there is nothing new under the sun. Even fantastical stories are based on our daily lives. Of course, unless it's a scifi fantasy, God (or some similary entity) exists, but there's a difference from him being pivotal to the progression of the story and him/her/them/it just being (or never actually being 'created' by the author).

I saw advice given that creation prologues are only okay if the god is pivotal to the plot, but creation also has to do with the creatures themselves. Depending on how you tell your creation story, it can reveal necessary information about the creatures more effectively than any history. The question then is less, "Is it important to the plot?'"(Because it should be.) And more, "Do you want to reveal those things?"

People frequently use the disclaimer "this is just my opinion" or that there are exceptions to the rules, but this was one of the few cases where the authors had an unusually firm stance, which, as I say above, I believe in this case was the result of their beliefs about creation in general.

When giving advice, I believe the point is also to encourage and not mislead. If my novel hadn't been greatly influenced by my journey and discovery with Jesus, I would have trashed my first chapter without hesitation after seeing those two or three articles dismissing creation prologues. Like I said, I do have some big edits to make to it.

The Mainstream Genre

I came across a similar problem when I tried to find what genre my novel fit into. I quickly narrowed it down to scifi/fantasy or Afrofuturist. Then I was caught in a revolving door.

My novel didn't "transcend" or "expand" upon what is capable on Earth. The creatures in my novel weren't magical or a product of scientific advancement. A new world was involved, but it wasn't a different dimension, the future, or the past.

As I thought more and more on it, I felt a little offended at labeling my novel a fantasy just because a god was involved. That view of the balance between scifi & fantasy seems to proclaim "if it ain't science, it ain't real."

Was my novel idea really that unconventional? I didn't think so.

Because of the increase in self-publishing, less novels are being sliced and diced by editors to fall into certain genres. Additionally, underrepresented novels are being published because they are bypassing the process that would reject their novel for not falling into a certain genre.

I still have a bit of searching to do before I decide the genre for my current and upcoming novels, but I'm certainly glad that I don't have to put someone else's beliefs over my own and my readerships' and label them a fantasy.

But I do love me some fantasy.