I’ve been looking at a bunch of poetry slam sites that advertise their upcoming features.
A couple of thoughts:
— I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to describe the performance style of the features;
— I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s work to describe their poetry.
Certainly, it’s about knowing your audience…but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the artists themselves.
Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.
I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an observation.
Dark Matter 
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:30 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
>>This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
Once again, I’m just going to chime in and say, awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 8th, 2005 at 1:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Awoman, brother!
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 10:47 pm
In the 1997 Southern Fried, when I ran it, I put out an anthology of poetry from the poets that year. After all the poet bios and all the poetry being deadly serious (and often, lower quality), I named the book Velcro Poet Femme Warriors From Planet X. And some of the poets were upset about that, but I had to do something to salvage the book. I’m lucky it sold as well as it did.
Poets take themselves too seriously sometimes. It’s one thing to be professional, but another to use the anthology to list your resume, and yet another to state things like how you felt the pain of the Wobblies. 🙂
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Re: Possibly the Wrong Answers
Oh I dunno. I found some of that quite profound.
Then again, I’m pissy too.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:10 pm
Nope. Jan. 17th.
Any requests, other than “Magellan Song?” 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 5:52 pm
Possibly the Wrong Answers
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to musicians to >describe the performance style of the features;
Music relates to people, whereas poetry doesn’t. If you’re looking to get people interested in coming to see your performance, pick one of the following:
a) WordMaster JJ Hype-Z sounds like a younger, angier version of Kid Rock. Someone may be shot at the venue.
b) Dave Eye sounds like Dave Mac, except different.
Which would appeal to the “average” person more? Seeing someone get shot, or hearing someone who sounds like someone you’ve never heard of.
>I noticed a lot of comparisons to other slam poets’s >work to describe their poetry.
This is because all Slam Poetry sounds the same. It’s like the Rubik’s Cube of Poetry, people making different patterns out of the same six words. Comparisons are made because, no, *really* they all do sound like each other. Perhaps the most apt and honest observation yet.
>but it’s also lazy and a little too self-referential.
But…but…Slam Poetry *IS* lazy and self-referential. It’s like saying your dog’s breath smells like dog breath. Lacking the ability to define itself by anything else, it defines itself *BY* itself. Seriously. In 1999, when I took a brief (ahem) hiatus, Slam was just beginning to be about changing our society through poetry, or (for those who wanted to go against the grain) changing yourself through poetry. Well, 5 years later and:
a) Judging from the content of Slam Poems, our society has pretty much gone the entirely opposite direction of what everyone seems to have been saying would happen.
b) And, Judging from the fact the *same* poets are reading the *same* pieces from 5 years ago, *they* haven’t changed very much either.
>I know many if not most venues use the bios they’re >given. I can’t really blame them as much as I do the
People are so actively engaged in telling us things, they’ve forgotten to tell the truth about themselves.
>Such an insular group…it’s like we only understand >our art in reference to each other’s work.
I think what permeates is a marked LACK of understanding. Perhaps the root of this lies in the most basic and inherant LIE of all slam; which is, why do you Slam? The most honest answer is a) to get famous or b) to feel better about myself and my work in reference to others, who are, by nature of being not me, worse than me. Any other answers smack of arrogance, to say the least.There are at least 9,839 *other* ways of more effectively influencing the world than through Slam. Go find them. This is a HOBBY, no matter what those golden rings around Mos Def’s fingers say.
>I don’t have a profound thought about it; just an >observation.
s’ok, I’m not being profound, just pissy 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:47 pm
Hey, when are you featuring at Jester’s?
Did I miss it?
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:33 pm
Re: FRESH
For me, that language keeps slam poetry in the adolescent camp. Whenever I venture into the slam scene (which is very rarely), I feel *so* out of place. It would be comical for me to refer to myself as a RAWK STAR or FRESH. So I guess I stay away more and more. Not that I begrudge anyone else their time in the spotlight – I just don’t fit in.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:26 pm
Re: FRESH
Yup.
And excuse me for saying this…but two decent poems and a lot of derivative crap do not a Rawk Star make.
One hit wonder, maybe.
Fewer poets should tour than do tour.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 4:24 pm
Honestly? I’d prefer to read a bio like yours.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:59 pm
“…we only understand our art in reference to each other’s work.”
Uh-huh. I’d say this is one in the same phenomenon as the “three minute imperative” that you are oft to mention – slam newcomers want to conform to the format and the sure route to achieving that goal would be to emulate other slammers. And then, we see the same 10-20 people on a regular basis at our home venues and pick up even more influences from them. So, I’m not surprised that we can easily define our own work in terms of one another.
And I don’t think that’s bad – I think a lot of us are happy with those ties and identifications and don’t need to set ourselves apart in every aspect. Maybe we’ve relinquished a little individuality but gained some community. I am personally ok with that, I just go to readings for the company most of the time.
I will say also that some people go a bit too far with the whole “slam” stereotype. I mean, I don’t want to tell people they’re too slammy if it’s making them happy to be slammy, but I confess I become easily annoyed with a certain group persons who sound exactly alike and think they know everything.
I have some other problems with my own bio:
a) I don’t have any “Credentials” in poetry so mine is always something dreadful like this:
“Ted’s a young man of few words, but that doesn’t make his words any more important than anybody else’s. He harbors discontent but tempers it with openness. He has a couple chapbooks but probably didn’t bring any to this feature. No, he has not been on a slam team. Deal with it.”
b) If I start talking about what my poetry is actually about, I start believing in the bio and confining myself and then I get block and whine a lot. Plus, most of my poetry is about a singular, vivid and ephemeral experience that really can’t be explained particularly well.
c) I’m not a particularly interesting person when it comes to the most important things in my life. I work, I eat, I sleep, I hang out with my boyfriend, sometimes also with poets. I’m also a foodie and map geek and could write a thesis on the best route to Wellesley Center and what to order at the Blue Ginger when you get there, but who cares but me?
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:57 pm
FRESH
RAWK STAR! RAWK ON. Isn’t that the general description?
or, FRESH.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:51 pm
*sigh* i’m glad to report that our venue uses the bios that we’re given.. and often elaborates on them. Thankfully, i’ve never heard anyone get compared to other slam poets.. or musicians.
it happens all the time.. comparing musicians to other musicians.. my friends and i use that tactic to describe new music that we find. we end up comming up with some very interesting comparisons.. but.. it never really does anyone justice. it’s just kinda sad.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 3:07 pm
“I described one of my hobbies as snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass”
That is EFFING funny as hell.
I agree with Tony’s observation, and I also agree that taking ourselves
(even though I am not a competitor) too seriously is not a good thing.
There, my unsolicited two cents…for what it’s worth.
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉
January 7th, 2005 at 6:22 am
hehe In the 2004 Nationals “handbook” everyone described themselves very seriously and ho-hum. I don’t remember the exact quote, but I described one of my hobbies as “snorting crack off a dead hooker’s ass” or something to that effect. It’s good not to take yourself too seriously… 😉