Comments on: Why So Serious: Are Happy Poems Taboo? http://litbits.tengrrl.com/2009/08/10/why-so-serious-are-happy-poems-taboo/ Just another WordPress site Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:24:58 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=5.2 By: nick richardson http://litbits.tengrrl.com/2009/08/10/why-so-serious-are-happy-poems-taboo/#comment-228 Tue, 11 Aug 2009 21:24:58 +0000 http://blogs.bedfordstmartins.com/bits/?p=2122#comment-228 Sing it!

So, that being said: What’re your top 5 happy poems, Mark?

]]> By: Mark Fullmer, Fullerton College http://litbits.tengrrl.com/2009/08/10/why-so-serious-are-happy-poems-taboo/#comment-227 Mon, 10 Aug 2009 17:58:03 +0000 http://blogs.bedfordstmartins.com/bits/?p=2122#comment-227 I find this discussion fascinating, if also contradictory. But I guess that’s the nature of art. I’d just add: perhaps the reason for scant “happy” poems is also why there aren’t very many happy stories. Even stories with happy resolutions have mega crisis & conflict during the development (Freytag, etc). This is basically what the above graph seems to get at above: viable happy poetry is more about the movement between quandrants, rather than the homeostatic BEING of any one happy quandrant.

After all, who wants to read a flatlining poem?

]]>