Main Concepts (3)
My basic assumption is that our underlying nature is unconditional love. This latter assumption might appear an outrageous ontological claim in a context that is experiencing the passing of the postmodernist era.
Despite that, my artwork accepts many of the postmodernist claims such as the distrust of grand narratives. At the same time, my artwork also attempts to disrupt these postmodernist claims through a personal narrative that unfolds and reveals the luminosity of unconditional love. Although this could be considered a contradiction, the personal nature of my poetic discourse does not pertain to a universal ontology but a personal ontology that, in empathy and introspection (phenomenological method), you could find the claim to be yours as well through your own experience: The possibility to intuit yourself as Being Poetry, a concept I have developed in relation to unconditional love. [1. This concept will be defined with clarity in the future at the site beingpoetry.com]
Although I use the label of postmodernism to describe my historical context, I believe that labels should not be used to define people who are alive; to label a living human being does not make justice to the fact that we are not static, but constantly changing and evolving. Therefore, I do not adhere to any -ism that could label me. I would prefer modesty by those who would claim for others what they strongly believe are or should be. The closest to a label when trying to define my current of thought is that I consider myself and my surroundings as Being Poetry, i.e. as a poetic act of creativity or unfolded agapism. That said, one should not confuse Being Poetry as a static notion, but as a fluid process that cannot be contained in an -ism.
The word philopoiesis comes from the Greek word philos (φίλος)[1. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=φίλος ] which means love and the verb poiesis (ποίησις)[2. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/morph?l=ποίησις] which means to create.
Together, these Greek terms form a new concept that describes the process of loving creation, that is a creator of love as well as a lover of creation. And because these terms are the roots of our language, the definition cannot be very precise. It can be open to interpretation. In this case, I am using an interpretation that approaches to the process of creative love, and therefore, opens up the possibility of the concept of being poetry.
If poiesis is to create and philos to love, then we have found a word that describes the love of creation or creative love.[1. See the definition of philopoiesis here. ] Thus, a philopoiet is a lover of creating. Whereas creation can be related to social theories and modes of production, the addition of the prefix philo- transforms the word poiesis into a new philosophical stance.
This position adopts the concept of creative love from the work of the philosopher and scientist Charles S. Peirce. He was most noted for the development of the notions of semiotics and pragmaticism. Peirce argues that there are three forms of evolution:
evolution by fortuitous variation, evolution by mechanical necessity, and evolution by creative love.”[2. Peirce, Charles S. “Evolutionary Love.” In Philosophical Writings of Peirce, 364. New York: Dover Publications, 1955. ]
I have focused in the latter because creative love is a form of philopoiesis if we consider the term philo- to be agapistic, that is, related to unconditional love, as Peirce does in his concept of creative love. How can we convert a philos to an agape? I argue that all kinds of love contain an implicate agape. However, not everyone expresses these forms of love with an unfolded or revealed agape. For example, a philial love might not be agapistic at a first glance, but it could be, if one unfolds or unconceals its agape. Thus, a sister may feel an unconditional love toward another sister without this agape losing its philial nature. [3. I have developed this concept of unfolded agape at greater detail in a thesis that will eventually be posted online at http://beingpoetry.com ]
Therefore, a philopoiet is a poet, a poiet, that loves creation and creation loves back, in such a way that their work reflects truth by unfolding an implicate (unfolded or unconcealed) agape in all things, the creative love underlying existence.
Some people might argue that qualifications such as editorial reviews and prizes are the way to acknowledge a good writer. I beg to differ. Consider Emily Dickinson who, was once an insignificant poet, is now one of the major American poets. This occurs because we, as a culture, define “best” authors in relation to our historical context. Therefore, one century’s bad artist is the greatest of another, and viceversa. Prizes and recognition serve well for those who purse fame and success within their lifetime, but there are other artists who create for the love of it.
I am one of those poets. Instead of participating in awards, I believe my work has to stand and speak for itself. Although qualifications are the easiest way for a poet to become recognized in his or her lifetime, I have chosen to challenge the status quo. This status quo is an invisible entity that states ‘what is’ the best practice from a series of individual points of view that became social, such as a tight circle of critics, and that then applied their analysis in every context without understanding ‘what truly is’: what truly is best can only be considered in a delicate balance between the social and the individual, being the individual, every individual, not only a specific group that defines ‘what is’. Right now, this balance is difficult to achieve because the status quo impedes it as a ghost of ‘what should be’ posing as ‘what is’ rather than accepting the quest toward ‘what truly is’ from an uncertain and constantly balancing point of view.
That said, I try to be in a balancing journey toward ‘what truly is’ but the truth is an elusive concept. A poet can approach it from many fronts. In contrast from a philosopher, a poet can bend the rules of logic and speak directly into the poetic, that is, the creative aspect within ourselves. It is here, my dear reader, where I dwell. I want to speak directly to you. If I am not able to, I will continue to practice because I know that the more I practice, the closer we will get to that point in history where you and I will be able to coincide.
So, why should you read me? There is no should. There is only a why, and that why is because you want to grow together with me in a creative manner that is true to yourself. I publish in the web because not only I want to share my work with you freely, but I would love to hear from your perspective: teach me and let me teach you. Be my eyes, see the beauty I see, and if you want, let me see through yours.
I use poetic forms in a variety of ways. For that reason, if you intend to analyze a poetic form I choose, you should be aware that I might make some slight variations from the original form. For example, suppose the poetic form I choose requires a iambic pentameter, such as the sonnet. In this case, I could variate it to a headless iambic pentameter but also make an exception in one or two lines.
I could also choose not to follow the number of syllables required on a certain form. I might approximate or simply ignore the rule altogether, although the poem follows the same rhyme scheme required. For example, a rondelet requires certain counts (4, 8, 4, 8, 8, 8, 4 syllables) per line. I might not follow these, but I would retain the rhyme pattern (AbAabbA). I could also do it the other way around, that is, I could ignore the rhyme pattern but retain the number of syllables required. I could even do a mix of both.
Why would I do this? First of all, I do it because I favor meaning over form. Also, it is refreshing to create variations of a form. These variations might sound successful, but perhaps not. Nonetheless, keep in mind that one of my purposes is to allow poetic experimentation. These experiments might perhaps not appear to be so radical, but again there is a primordial purpose to that, meaning. So, please take this into consideration while reading and analyzing my use of poetic form.
I am a philosophic poet that creates multimedia poetry, but in particular, I am a philopoiet that wants to define poetry as being.
Why multimedia? I combine images (e.g. macro photography, digital art), music (e.g. soundscapes), and text as well as videos to create an immersive experience. I want you to experience with the most of your senses as possible through the web. With that purpose in mind, my work is constantly evolving.
Why philosophic? Although I have developed my craft with different purposes in mind overtime, currently I write with the intention of leaving a body of work that attempts to disrupt structures of thought through the beauty of the mundane. I want you to experience critical thought, and at the same time , I intend to elevate you into the experience of beauty and fulfillment.
Why poet? I have been writing poetry since 1997. I started writing while I attended Middle school. For that reason, to date, I have written more than 3,000 poems. I have only published around 600 poems in my website. I intend to progressively add the old poems as I continue to create as well. I hope that my work will speak to you louder, why I am a poet, than these words.
If you still want to know more about me, please read my poetry.
A lot of the old artwork uses Photoshop brushes created by Obsidian Dawn. I have also used fractals created by open source fractal software such as Chaos Pro, Gnofract 4D, or Apophysis. I have taken all the photographs in this website unless otherwise credited. I mostly use a 100mm prime lens to shoot the macro/micro photographs. I also have used some specialized software to create some artwork such as Flame Painter, ArtRage, and Livebrush.
To answer this question, I would briefly explain that poetry is being and being is poetry. If we consider this point, then what answer could I provide? My favorite poem is you and me, all of us, existence itself opening up each each instant throughout our breath.
You might still wonder, well, what about other poems and poets? Well, I read and enjoy poetry from Rainer Maria Rilke, Arthur Rimbaud, Amado Nervo, Khalil Gibran, Octavio Paz, Rudyard Kipling, William Blake, John Keats, Walt Whitman, Lao Tzu, Rumi, Emily Dickinson, Rabindranath Tagore, Xue Tao, Sarojini Naidu, Gabriela Mistral, Friedrich Schiller, Novalis, Matsuo Basho, Pablo Neruda, and many more. These poets are just a few names of poets that you might already be aware of their existence. These poets are some names with some of my once ‘have been’ favorite poems.
To answer which poems from all of these poets is my favorite, is like asking: from all birds free in the sky, which one is your favorite? I might have only two or three in my awareness at a certain time of the day/year, but on another day, there are other birds in my awareness. So which is my favorite from so many that I can’t even grasp my awareness yet? Each bird that I see is my favorite, and as it passes by, and leaves me behind, a new favorite comes and takes its place. It all depends on my state of awareness and process of maturity.
Furthermore if I try to answer what is my favorite poem, considering the ones I have written, I can only say that my favorite poem is the one I am currently writing, that is the one I currently am being. The beauty of poetry is presence, the transparency of being.
Therefore once I finish the poetic process, that poem stops being my favorite after a while. The process shifts the moment my pristine awareness acknowledges the end of a process and the beginning of a new one, thus a new favorite arises into my consciousness. The new process becomes the new favorite until it is time to let it go. I might read an old poem and realize there is room for improvement, so I add upon it as it makes me feel happier and fulfilled. However beyond the textual, poetry is an ongoing process just as being is.
Therefore, my favorite poem is me, you, and everything we are as we exist within the embrace of creative love. That said, I know that there are a lot of poets out there doing amazing work. I will eventually compile a list of contemporary poets and friends that inspire and create lovingly, so if you would like me to read your work and perhaps add you to the list, contact me.
All of my acoustic material comes by combining several VSTs through Ableton Live. Ableton Live is a software for musical production, also known as a DAW. The midi controllers that I most use are a Maschine Mikro, an Axiom 25, and a Line 6 UX2 to capture sounds through the cardioid condenser microphone. The VSTs I most enjoy working with are from Native Instruments and Soniccouture.
I love creating music. I have been slowly growing my poeticacoustic collection and hope that my work might inspire you into creating poetic soundscapes too. If you would like to create music too, I will let you know how I got started. If you do plan to work with poeticacoustic productions for the long run think consider saving some money and buy some good software. I would personally recommend the following software for their live performance capabilities:
However, you might want to get right on hands but still don’t have the budget and the knowledge to work this out. You can start with Reaper, Garageband or Acoustica Mixcraft. I started out with Garageband. I learned that using loops can limit creative potential but it will surely enhance your poetry. Theres is a limit with this approach. As you feel the need to be more precise acoustically, you will outgrow using loops and will start learning music theory.
That said, I also believe that small but concrete projects are the way to progress yourself step by step when you don’t want to spend most of your time with music theory. The danger of focusing only with music theory is that you might not practice and practice is the most important thing to do. Start with an idea and see how far you can go by yourself. If you need help, slow down and don’t get frustrated. Every artist becomes good after a lot of practice and then…. From even a lot more practice, just don’t give up!
A ‘good’ song comes after a lot of hard work, and even then, you won’t please everyone so just remember to be yourself. If you create to feel good about yourself and to share to others no matter their response, then you will get better and better at it because you will keep practicing. However practice might not make your work ‘perfect’, but you sure will find fulfillment as you create what reflects your transparent self and that is ‘perfection’.
Note: If you want to get the basics first I recommend you to start with Coursera’s Introduction to Digital Sound Design to understand how sound works and Introduction to Music Production to understand what is a DAW and what how to create your own music. In order to keep going, search for tutorials if you have questions about a particular midi controller or DAW.
I write poetry in this website with a copyleft licence: I am using a Attribution-NonCommercial 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC 3.0) License. This means that you can copy and remix my work for non-commercial purposes (artwork, poetry, and music) elsewhere as long as you credit me and this website.
Feel free to use this work elsewhere but if you do, I would love to hear about it. Contact me here.
I can’t give you any advice but this: to go into yourself and see how deep the place is from which your life flows; at its source you will find the answer to, the question of whether you must create. Accept that answer, just as it is given to you, without trying to interpret it. Perhaps you will discover that you are called to be an artist. Then take that destiny upon yourself, and bear it, its burden and its greatness, without ever asking what reward might come from outside. For the creator must be a world for himself and must find everything in himself and in Nature, to whom his whole life is devoted. … What else can I tell you? It seems to me that everything has its proper emphasis; and finally I want to add just one more bit of advice: to keep growing, silently and earnestly, through your whole development; you couldn’t disturb it any more violently than by looking outside and waiting for outside answers to questions that only your innermost feeling, in your quietest hour, can perhaps answer.1
With this on advice on mind, I shall seek for new venues of expression which shall be posted here in the future. Till then.
Lina Ru is an explorer of the poetic. She spends most of her time searching for patterns in nature and language to create better poetry. She loves learning languages to find new ways to say the same ol’ same ol’ by changing grammatical structures and finding etymological bridges between languages.
Lina loves not only languages but also science. She has a degree in engineering which has helped her understand how poetic science actually is. She wasn’t interested in sharing her love for science as much as she does now because she thought that science didn’t need her poetics. Instead, she devoted her time trying to poetize about philosophical and ethical ideas.
She distrusted modernist grand narratives while still striving for wholeness, love, and beauty. Her focus is to establish a particular connection with you. By doing so she is able, not only to interact, but even collaborate with you to extend the notion of poetry as a process of being. “Poetry, for me, is alive. Poetry is the trees, the water, the breath, and even you because poetry is being and being is poetry,” Lina says.
That said, a shift in her thinking occurred that convinced her that science needed her poetic voice. It could be said that science isn’t poetic, but that would be a reductionist approach to the scientific. Richard Feynman’s Ode to a Flower teaches us that science hides a poetic essence that needs to be unveiled:
Lina has decided to unveil that beauty. After at least five hundred poems published on her website http://linaru.com, Lina will now spend her time trying to unveil the poetic in science. She is always in search of new areas for continued development. Hopefully, her poetics can be proof of that.
Her goal is bridge the sciences with the poetic to reveal an experience of growth, solace, fulfillment, and creative love through a semiotic play of images, sound, and textual meaning. If you are looking for a dose of sanity, beauty, and tranquility that attempts to poeticize science and philosophy, follow Lina’s work!
Lina is a multilingual sound poet who composes her own music. As a sound poet and filmmaker, she plays and experiments with images and sound to extend the boundaries of what poetry is. She holds an MPhil in Humanities graduate specialized in the philosophy of poetry. For her, poetry is an unfolding creative process, a way to play endlessly, not a finished state. For that reason, she revises and re-edits her work publicly until a poetic form (other than an exploratory) comes to being. Her poetry is a thoughtful play that explores sound and visual patterns and poetic forms. She attempts to bridge the sciences and philosophy with poetry and art. When she’s not writing, composing, or learning languages, you’ll probably find her running.
These are sample blurbs for informal press:
These photos can be used by the press.
Poetic Lina Ru, Puebla, Mexico (click here for higher resolution):
Official Online Profiles:
You Tube: http://www.youtube.com/user/linarupoet
For Media Inquiries fill the contact form at:
Editorial Process (3)
First, I free write or write with a purpose in mind. After 15 years of poetic practice, I can write a poetic piece with some rhythm and self-contained imagery during the free write. Then, I work with several creative/editorial processes:
- I might choose to reread and polish that piece until it is published. I read the poem out loud. That confirms if the poem sounds and reads as I most prefer. During this process, I value more images than sounds.
- I would take a free write after some days. I read it out loud and rewrite the piece. I work through it until it works as I intended initially. During this process, I value images and sounds evenly.
- I write with a poetic form in mind. I write about the imagery and rhythms I want to express in a whiteboard. Then, I go back to the poetic form. I count syllables if required. I am much more rigid when I write with a poetic form in mind. I read it out loud, but I am still flexible. I break the rules if needed. During this process, I value sounds more than images. I would then create its music and repeat the sounds until it feels right. This would confirm the sounds are appropriate.
As you can see, these processes appear to be static once the process ends. I’ve lived under the assumption that publishing is static. This assumption comes from the idea that works of art are finished once published. I now realize they are not static. Why?My work is under a Creative Commons License. Everyone can reuse; therefore, I am not bound to a “copytight” that prevents the continual improvement of your own work.
- My work is under a Creative Commons License. Everyone can reuse; therefore, I am not bound to a “copytight” that prevents the continual improvement of your own work.
- I write on the web. It is really easy to edit and leave an older version behind.
- Poetry changes the way we think and speak, secretly, ever heard of an old expression or a cliché? It might come from an ancient poem. That’s right! Poetry might feel static, until it becomes a part of us.
If poetry changes within us, it is not static. If it is not static, I allow myself permission to make mistakes. We are human. Mistakes happen. You don’t like something. Let me know. You love something, let me know too! I’ll try and repeat the good things.
As a result, I have changed my editorial process from being close-ended to open-ended. Mistakes happen. Change happens. Rather than being fearful of mistakes, I’ll embrace them. Teach me, if you will, your opinion matters to me.
Leave a comment or rate a poem. It’s as simple as that.
Not every edit would be implemented to the poem being critiqued, but I would consider it thoroughly, and it could affect my writing as a whole. I would value the kindest and most respectful opinions that actually improve the writing. For example, a critique that says: “This is not poetry. It is a blabbering nonsense.” would not be considered at all because it does not bring anything constructive to the writing. However, a critique that says: “You could improve the writing by removing the word love and adding a particular instance of that love” would be taken seriously.
That said, poems that are open to substantial changes and criticism would be the ones that have no audio. Poems that have an audio have been heavily edited previously, and I have sometimes used poetic forms that make it difficult to make changes. Nonetheless, I am willing to do substantial changes to poems with an audio if it is merited.