Visual Poetry

Comment

Comment by yves maraux on August 2, 2009 at 12:50pm

The main merit of the paintings of the ancients , without speaking about the part of the drawing in which they were admirable, consisted, it seems to me, in the sublime of the expression. It is there that they put all their genius. When Horace said: ut pictura poesis, the painter said : Ut poesis pictura.
Grimm, Correspondance littéraire.
Horace, dans son €pitre aux Pisons, compos€e vers l'ann€e 14 et plus connue ensuite sous le nom d' Art poEtique,

We call figurative verses those who are arranged so as to represent the material objects.They have for inventor Simmias the grammarian of Rhodes : he made The wing , The egg , The axe . The comic Panard ( +1763) is known for The bottle , The glass . Apollinaire did'nt invent the calligrams

Comment by yves maraux on August 2, 2009 at 11:20am

ut pictura poesis

Comment by lefebvre on July 26, 2009 at 9:02pm

Hola buenos dias
alquien me puede decir lo que es la poesia visual
me parece que toda creacion es posesia visual no?
si lo hago con todo el amor, mis sentimientos es poesia...
bueno a ver lo que me podeis aprender
un saludo sebastien

Comment by Lancillotto Bellini on July 26, 2009 at 8:08pm

By Lancillotto Bellini...

Comment by John M. Bennett on July 26, 2009 at 6:16pm

Yo creo que toda poesía es visual.

I think that all poetry is visual.

Tal vez sea inútil esta definición.

This definition may be useless.

Pero quiere decir que todo es posible.

But it means that anything is possible.


Prof. Doctor John M. Bennett

Comment by El Taller de Zenon on July 26, 2009 at 5:48pm

to Gik Juri/ John Bennett/all

Would somebody rot to contribute their personal definition of visual poetry here?

Meanwhile, there are some intents of the own visual poets here of defining the visual poetry:

... there is who sees in the PV the drawer of all the unclassifiable one (Adolfo Vargas) Guillermo Marín, author of the book of visual poetry "The Print", and that he also adds: "... of all the unqualifiable one, of the qualifiable thing and of the upstart."

If we take the book of Visual Phayum/Poéticas, we will meet with simple definitions: "Visual poetry is the art of to see poetry in the things and to know it to express plastically" (I. Jover); and other much more complex: "The visual poetry is the poetic metalenguaje of the writing that rotates around the ideogramático." (Xavier Canals); "The PV integrates the space that surrounds to the sign" (Bertomeu Ferrando). Surprisingly this same author understands that these definitions don't help the reader a lot in the search of the understanding of the phenomenon, so he doesn't doubt to supplement his theory with other much more affordable definitions: "The PV contains suggestions, blinks and sense" advances.

In that that if they seem to coincide most of the authors, and very especially Julian Alonso, is in the impossibility that PV exists without the spectator's complicity. Something like that as if the work took in its interior a moving potential load that alone he could to explode when entering in contact with the spectator when this is able to capture the poetic one internal (Rafael Marín). Equally they coincide in pointing out that it is an intent of looking for an universal language that this above the languages and the races. Something like that as the dimension of the infinite thing (Pablo Del Barco).

Gustavo Vega says that the PV, besides visual, it must be poetry. And with this perogrullo truth, he wants to mean that "something" that so much worries the doctors of the art and that he consists on knowing how what is art of that to differ that nr. So G. Marín doesn't doubt in its definition: "Visual poetry is the likeness that exists between a sentence and the image that the expressed one with a poetic effect or músical". And this that seems so simple, for other is a mystery: "If he knew what is the Visual Poetry, probably that he could not be visual poet, since the beauty that locks this in proportion to the indefinición grade that wraps" it (Cesar Reglero). So to these heights of the writing, I trust in that nobody doubt that the language sometimes voucher to communicate and other many times to isolate us. Since this grade of ambiguity is shared by many authors: Francisco Aliseda, Julian Alonso, etc...

There is another idea that it is strained in the texts of "Poetic Visual", and it is the idea of the minimalism outlined by Tomás Camacho in the sense of "taking place with the minimum forms the maximum art", and that R. Marín also develops : "The poet must transfer all that has read and thought to an unique image synthesized to the maximum with a minimum of resources". therefore, we fall in the bill that only through the multiple sensations of the own creators, we can leave bringing near to what is the PV, and taking away from what is not the PV: He is not visual poet the one that plays visual poet because he doesn't know how to write a sonnet." (Paco Pérez)

It doesn't stop to be interesting Clemente Padín´s opinion , when he requests us to leave ourselves of "representations and let us that the languages speak".So is putting the things in its place when trying to tinge that "the things are like they are" and that we won't change them with our definitions,... although, on the contrary, if we can them to oppress them with the same ones....

Comment by El Taller de Zenon on July 26, 2009 at 5:32pm

to Gik Juri/ John Bennett (hello my friend)

If somebody sends me a very traditional portrait and he tell me that it is visual poetry, reason I must do not believe him?
Only the fact of carrying out that action would make him enter in the field of the new thing, of the experimental thing...
The cubism is already defined and classified. Also the impressionism. Or the abstract expressionism.

But what is the visual poetry? If your you have the solution to that question, you are very fortunate...

If I like something of that field it is their own definition lack...
Must reason define it?
There already are not too many definitions in the art, in the life..?

Comment by John M. Bennett on July 25, 2009 at 7:32pm

ótimo, fátima!

y me gustan tus calzones, samuel - tienes unos calcetines? gorra?

john

Comment by fátima queiroz on July 25, 2009 at 7:12pm

fantástico, samuel!

Comment by Samuel Montalvetti on July 25, 2009 at 7:10pm

Teatro Negro-DADA

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 85
• 86
• 87
• 88
• 89
• …
• 102
• Next ›
• Page