O'Connor really enjoyed the poems his students created. They were deep, meaningful, and insightful. The only problem was that his students didn't see the deep, meaningful, and insightful things within their own poems. All they saw was the task completed, and the literary techniques implemented. All the poems that they thought were their best works were the ones that O'Connor found the most unoriginal. I'm glad that O'Connor finally transferred over to writing short stories instead of poetry.
I could have a biased opinion on this because I don't like poetry myself. I know that I can write potentially good poetry, as can just about everyone else in the world with the right guidelines. But I don't know what makes good poetry. I am just like O'Connor's students in the sense that I know how to write poetry, but I don't how to create good poetry and know that it's good. I feel like there are very few people in this world that can write truly outstanding poetry, and I am not one of them.
However, I really enjoy writing short stories. Short stories are very simple to write, once you've learned what literary techniques are required in order to create one. Short stories can be about anything at all, just like poetry. But you can tell when a short story is good, and when it isn't. When a short story has meaning, it was put there on purpose, not by accident. When literary techniques are used, they were meant to be there, not put there because that's what is expected.
No comments:
Post a Comment