…has me pondering. Yeah. That’s about all I have to say about it. Well, actually it has me wondering a bit about thematic restructuring within my own poetry but first, let me say that when I read the article written by A.S. Byatt I was immediately reminded of this video. Byatt’s article made me believe that Munch would probably have enjoyed the video in a way his critics probably wouldn’t have. Then it also reminded me a recent show by Regina artist Donna Kriekle. Her miniatures, while not reproductions, reproduce paintings in a new way. I was struck by “Not Again” and was pleased to learn how Donna had come to title the work ( I won’t steal her thunder by telling you and if you want to hear it, you’ll have to contact her); suffice it to say, I was intrigued by reproduction of art and theme.
I began to wonder how many poets become fixated on rebuilding the same theme in a poem. How many carry forward these themes from book to book? Does this make the poet write the same poem over and over? Can one have twelve different versions of a poem, and would they then be twelve different poems? How different would each version of the poem have to be in order to be a new poem?
I thought about having a dozen links in this post. What would that do to the post?
Ha! Love the video!
Me too! It really makes me think about the story behind any painting!
Interesting links, Tracy. And I think reworking is pretty common – in fiction, too. But it’s not the theme itself but the variations that are interesting.
Thanks Shelley! I agree–this probably could’ve been twelve different posts on one theme! If only I had more time!