Talk:Howl

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Howl is part of WikiProject Poetry, a WikiProject related to Poetry.
Start This article has been rated as start-Class on the quality scale.
High This article has been rated as high-importance on the importance scale.

Contents

[edit] Carl Solomon

As far as I know Carl Solomon was never Ginsberg's lover -- only his friend. Ginsberg only liked pretty "angelic" men and Solomon wasn't pretty. I found no indications that they were ever intimate. Then again, Ginsberg didn't often shy away from convenient intimacy. If somebody else has indications otherwise, please let me know. F. Simon Grant 14:57, 16 October 2006 (UTC)


Clicking on Carl Solomon in the references part just redirects you to the article, which really doesn't accomplish much. Thoughts? Bolt Vanderhuge 04:56, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Right, there is not much use for this link. I came here from Howl-article in german wikipedia because of the reference list, especially in the hope of finding some info about Solomon, but there's not more info about him than in german article. I don't have an account on en.wikipedia so I'll leave it as is... Greetings 80.129.180.169 18:55, 22 June 2006 (UTC)


There should be a reference to Howl USA by Kronos Quartet --jenlight 14:39, 21 February 2006 (UTC)


I don't think Penny Rimbaud's "How?" belongs on this article. There have been many works based on howl, why should this one be part of the article?

  • Why not include these as well rather than getting rid of something that is relevant? quercus robur 18:53, 20 Dec 2004 (UTC)

[edit] Trivia reference?

Is it worth note as a pop culture/trivia reference that a parody of Howl appears in a Simpsons' episode?

I don't exactly remember the episode, although the subject was the ruin of a Thanksgiving dinner.

This was the episode: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/The_Simpsons#Bart_vs._Thanksgiving_.5B2.07.5D --83.39.87.102 17:39, 2 December 2007 (UTC)


I believe "El" refers to the Elevated trains in Chicago.

[edit] Rhythm

The information under the heading "Rhythm" doesn't really tell us anything about the poem's rhythm at all. It doesn't even really discuss meter or the poem's prosody. It merely cites the obvious fact that the lines in the fist section are long and that the first section has anaphora, though it calls the anaphora of "who" a refrain, which it isn't. A refrain would be a repeated phrase, line, verse, or verses. In this case, anaphora is a repeated word at the beginning of a verse paragraph (which, itself, is formed into long lines that make up the run-on sentence). Anaphora is prominent in William Blake's poetry, and that might be where Ginsberg learned the poetic device. The long line has been around in American poetry since Whitman (going back to Milton's enjambment, if you want to take it back that far), though I'm not sure that Ginsberg's long line or its rhythm receives any significant treatment here. I'm also not sure that this section should exist, at least not in its present form. Somebody should either focus on Howl's rhythm, meter, and prosody--or argue that the poem has no discernable prosodic form--or delete this section entirely. Josh a brewer 16:51, 26 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Obscure References?

Would anyone mind if this section was revised? Most of the terms in the glossary don't seem to be obscure at all, such as "amnesia," "boxcar," "Edgar Allan Poe," "Hebrew," "insulin," "ping pong," and "sphinx," to name just a few. Terms such as this coupled with the phrasing of the beginning sentence ("Not all things in Howl are easily understood by the common reader...") has the effect of coming off as almost snobbish, and doesn't seem to give the reader much credit for his intelligence. Most anybody who paid the slightest bit of attention in school knows what most of these terms are. To me, much of the list sounds like an excuse to give oneself a pat on the back for having some basic knowledge, and doesn't really benefit the article much at all. I suggest severely trimming the list to preserve specific references such as "Carl Solomon," "Fugazzi's," "The Vibrating Plane," etc., that most people really aren't familiar with. I'll be happy to do it myself, but I'd like some feedback first, particularly on which terms to keep if the section is to remain in any form. Intooblv 09:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Trim away, the section is patronising and condescending, it should probably be removed completely IMHO quercus robur 19:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
Renamed the section to "Glossary" for the time being and for lack of a better title, removed the first (and most condescending) sentence from the intro, and reduced the terms in the list to those that I felt were most relevant. Let's see how that sits for a little while. Intooblv 13:34, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Other Poems

Does anybody else feel that the "Other Poems" section doesn't belong in the article? I could understand a sidenote referencing the Blake connection between "Howl" and "Sunflower Sutra," but it seems like the information presented for each poem would be more appropriately used in the development of new articles, rather than as a cling-on to this one. While interesting, most of it just isn't relevant to "Howl" as a seperate work. It's like tacking on a plot summary to "The Cask of Amontillado" in the article on "The Raven."

P.S. - The more I look at this article, the more I feel it needs an almost complete rewrite. Any takers? Intooblv 13:54, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Are you unaware that "Howl" was the name of a collection of poems and a poem within that collection? If the article was on a book called "The Raven" which contained "The Raven" and "The Cask of Amontillado" then I'd say yes! definitely you'd need to talk about both! Are you suggesting that we make separate articles about "Howl" the poem and "Howl and Other Poems"? That seems ridiculous. Understanding all of the poems in "Howl and Other Poems" is important to understanding "Howl" itslef. Plus the link is to "Howl and Other Poems" -- Not just "Howl" the poem. Creating two articles would just be confusing and entirely unnecessary. F. Simon Grant 19:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC) 20:08, 5 February 2007 (UTC).
No, I am not unaware of that fact. However, as it stands right now, the article seems to be largely about "Howl" as a work on its own - the introduction itself states that "Howl is a poem by poet Allen Ginsberg," not "a collection of poems" and the title of the article is "Howl," not "Howl and Other Poems." Searching for "Howl and Other Poems" does not redirect to this article, but rather to a match page which lists it, and also happens to list "America," which has a very short, concise article to itself. The fact that "Howl" is anything other than a single poem by Ginsberg isn't even mentioned until section five, and in the following sections the "other poems" are promptly forgotten once again, as the subject matter seems to revert back to "Howl" by itself. My point is that it needs to be decided which is being discussed; the one poem (in which case the "other poems" should probably be removed), or the collection as a whole (in which case they seem to be getting the shaft - anyone looking for information on "Supermarket in California" or "Sunflower Sutra" would have to magically know to come to an article simply called "Howl," which gives no indication of having the information they want until midway through). As it stands right now, the article is simply inconsistent and, as I see it, not very encyclopedic. I realize the difficulty in constructing an article that will provide a reasonable grasp of a work by someone such as Ginsberg (especially this one), who was able to cram a lot of meaning into a few well-chosen words, but it seems like this one tries very hard to act as a substitute for actually reading the thing. Finally, I don't see a problem with creating separate articles for "Howl" and "Howl&OP." The article on "The Canterbury Tales" does this to good effect, with separate articles on each tale. intooblv 13:56, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
Well quit talking and do it. Geez.

F. Simon Grant 19:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC) 21:00, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but just thinking about sifting through all this makes my head hurt. Besides, I thought it would be nice to get the opinions of OTHERS before making drastic changes to suit my own tastes. Geez. intooblv 04:05, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Where is the separate entry for "Howl and Other Poems"??? Simply deleting all the "Other Poems" in this article doesn't help anything. Having no link to the "America" article doesn't help anything. My motivation behind working on this page is to help students; simply deleting useful information is not helping students. Information about "Sunflower Sutra" is certainly not irrelevant to Ginsberg and to "Howl and Other Poems" -- a connection really needs to be made between "Howl" and "America" since they were 1) written only a few months apart, 2) included in the same collection, 3) a side-by-side comparison is very enlightening when considering Ginsberg's technique and subject matter at this time. I don't believe inclusion of that information on this page is clutter; I believe it's very useful. If that's not satisfactory, we really must make a separate page for the collection of poems. When the poem is mentioned on the main Ginsberg page, it should link to the poem. When the collection is mention (for example at the bottom of the page) it should link to the collection. The worst solution is to just delete stuff. "America" and "Sunflower Sutra" are, I'd say, his fourth and fifth most important poems and they're best understood next to "Howl" -- to have an absence of any connection to them here is helping no one.

F. Simon Grant 19:30, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Here's the deleted content in case anyone's interested in actually making this page informative:

The "Other Poems" in "Howl and Other Poems" Though "Howl" was certainly Ginsberg's most famous poem, the collection includes many examples of Ginsberg at his peak, many of which garnered nearly as much attention and praise as "Howl"; these include:

"America" -- a poem in a conversation form between the narrator and America. When the narrator says "It Occurs to me that I am America", he follows with "I am talking to myself again." He's criticizing past events in the U.S., using a sarcastic tone. His references to Communism are a sign of his sarcasm. He refers to himself as a psychopath who's nearsighted; by referring to himself as a psychopath he's criticizing America's lack of tolerance for change and differences, as well as acknowledging that he sees the problems that are at hand. He criticizes America, saying they make a lot of changes abroad but they ignore the persistent issues here. It was very radical for its time, 1956, by discussing drugs, sex, mental issues. He talks about being a Communist when he was seven after McCarthyism florished. He references several heroes and martyrs of significant movements such as the labor movement. These include: Leon Trotsky, the Scottsboro Boys, Sacco and Vanzetti, the Wobblies IWW. Some of these were persecuted without evidence. Despite the fact that he does not approve of all that is going on in America, he is still an American and loves America. "A Supermarket in California" -- a short poem about a dreamlike encounter with Walt Whitman, about a hunger for collaboration or meeting with his idol. The admiration is almost sexual, food occasionally serving as sexual puns. The poem suggests the stereotypical pattern of shopping for groceries and how Whitman went out of the norm. Early in the poem he mentions tomatoes which is a fundamental fruit. Later in the poem it says Whitman was tasting artichokes which is out of the ordinary. Perhaps he was trying to show how Whitman was different from most of the fellow shoppers who stand in for people in general. Whitman and Ginsberg steal some of the food. He employs a different tone in this poem, a calmer tone. He references Frederico Garcia Lorca who wrote Surrealist poems about Walt Whitman. Garcia Lorca could be stealing stuff too. "Sunflower Sutra" -- an account of a sojourn with Jack Kerouac in a railroad yard, the discovery of a sunflower covered in dirt and soot from the railroad yard, and the subsequent revelation that this is a metaphor for all humanity: "we are not our skin of grime." This relates to his vision/auditory hallucination of poet William Blake reading "Ah, Sunflower": "Blake, my visions." (See also line in Howl: "Blake-light tragedies" and references in other poems). The theme of the poem is consistent with Ginsberg's revelation in his original vision of Blake: the revelation that all of humanity was interconnected. (See also the line in "Footnote to Howl": "The world is holy!"). This may also be consistent with one reading of "Ah, Sunflower": a soul on its way to heaven. "Transcription of Organ Music" -- an account of a quiet moment in his new cottage in Berkley, nearly empty, not yet fully set up (Ginsberg being too poor, for example, to get telephone service). The poem contains repeated images of opening or being open: open doors, empty sockets, opening flowers, the open womb, leading to the image of the whole world being "open to receive." The "H.P." in the poem is Helen Parker, one of Ginsberg's first girlfriends; they dated briefly in 1950. The poem ends on a Whitman-esque note with a confession of his desire for people to "bow when they see" him and say he is "gifted with poetry" and has seen the creator. This may be seen as arrogance, but Ginsberg's arrogant statements can often be read as tongue-in-cheek (see for example "I am America" from "America" or the later poem "Ego Confessions"). However, this could be another example of Ginsberg trying on the Walt Whitman persona (Whitman who, for example, called himself a "kosmos" partly to show the interconnectedness of all beings) which would become so integral to his image in later decades. "In the Baggage Room at Grey Hound" Some editions also include earlier poems, such as:

"Song" "In Back of the Real" "Wild Orphan" "An Asphodel"

F. Simon Grant 19:35, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] I'm with you in Rockland

Apparently Carl Solomon was not in interned in Rockland, AG only uses that refrain for the sake of convenience. I have that on good authority but have no verifiable evidence for it. Does anyone? Haiduc 04:37, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Not at hand but you are right. We need to get Solomon's birth and death dates up also. Circa 1925- circa 1993. we need to get the right dates-they are available. 72.221.82.214 13:26, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Howl and The Six Gallery Reading

Respectfully, I would like to bring the following to your attention:

Wally Hedrick – a painter and veteran of the Korean War – approached Ginsberg in the summer of 1955 and asked him to organize a poetry reading at the Six Gallery…At first, Ginsberg refused…But once he’d written a rough draft of Howl, he changed his “fucking mind,” as he put it. Reference: Jonah Raskin, American Scream: Allen Ginsberg’s “Howl” and the Making of the Beat Generation.

Thank you...--Art4em 16:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why there are so many different versions of the origin of the Six Gallery reading (including date, who planned it, etc.) The version I've heard most (and this is in reliable sources like the Barry Miles biography of Ginsberg to name just one off the top of my head) is that Michael McClure was originally supposed to plan it (he'd been in a Robert Duncan play at the Six Gallery earlier that year) but he passed the duty off to Ginsberg. I read American Scream a long time ago. I don't remember that inconsistency. How do we know which version is true? Or is it like the discussion of the Beatles name on the "Beat Generation" page, just a misreading on somebody's part?

F. Simon Grant 16:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)


I am going to let Allen Ginsberg's testimony validate Allen Ginsberg's, Howl, Six Gallery Reading...if there is no objection.

Respectfully,

--Art4em 00:29, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Howlandotherpoems.jpeg

Image:Howlandotherpoems.jpeg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:11, 2 January 2008 (UTC)