Poetry

I just got finished reading the Ballad of Sand and Harry Soot.

And I just don't know quite what to make of it yet. I should perhaps preface this all by saying that I'm not much of a poetry person. I should also admit that it took me most of the poem to figure out the (somewhat obvious point) that it was about silicon (sand) vs. carbon (soot).

And while it was frustrating (but then, again, I find most poetry frustrating), I think I liked it.

I'm struggling to say exactly what it was that I liked. I think it had to do with the pictures (perhaps I am very lame).

The pictures somehow unified it—and they matched the text so well—particularly the Sisyphus project images of the ball swirling the sand. Indeed, it seemed as if the text could have been written for the pictures rather than the other way around. The text is so abstract (at least to me), that having the images there somehow gave me a grasp on what sort of emotions or relationships or … drives?... were being discussed in that moment. I would say the pictures were just as much a part of my "understanding" of the poem as the text.

It's weird that this was originally a print poem, published in a book. The pictures, the colored texts, they all came later, when Strickland decided to make it into a hypermedia composition.

So, originally, there was a fixed order—this was a linear idea—although there isn't a fixed order anymore. And somehow that works for poetry for me—it doesn't disconcert me in the same way that a book without a set plot-line does. I have a different set of expectations for a poem author.

But then, here comes that question of authorship—Strickland is listed as just one of 17 different "contributors", although she composed the text.

I guess there's lots of different ideas floating around here--authorship, poetry as the ideal hypertext, the role of pictures in a story (or in a poem)... Has anyone else looked at the poem/had any revelations on the subject?