By Brother Said
I call poetry slam the sport of poets. If you want to slam you have to learn how to play the game of what Poetry Slam Incorporated defines as "the art form of competitive performance poetry". Poetry slam is not a poetry reading with judges. It's competitive. That means there are winners and losers. It also means there are strategic aspects to winning and losing. You will need to become a student of the game if you're serious about winning and avoiding losing. By losing, I mean you don't finish in the top three. But along the way you will lose poetry slams. Most poets, especially the novice slammers - are going to lose more slams than they win. Don't let the prospect of losing effect whether or not you slam. Don't be afraid to lose. This doesn't mean you should plan on being a loser. It means that most of the time, because this is a game and games have losers, you might lose and you shouldn't take it personally. It means you should study the game. The real issue is not the loss, but what you learn from losing. You will learn virtually nothing about the beautiful game of poetry slam if you lean only on your talent as a poet. Part of being a good student of slam is realizing early on: you will lose poetry slams despite how talented a poet you are.
Too many poets get involved in slam and lean only on their talent. Slam is a game involving a lot of luck, so good writers can get use to coming in first in a slam and think it's just their talent that's getting them wins. But when they finally do lose they let go of their composure and may even stop slamming altogether. The same goes for some poets that never win. They start slamming, thinking their talent will get them hi scores, then they don't get the scores - and they stop slamming. Neither of the foregoing types of poets, those that win too much early in their slam career and those that lose too much early in their slam career, were serious about the art form of performance poetry. They were good at performance poetry, and that's important - but not all there is to slam. They were'nt serious students of the competitive part of poetry slam, and probably didn't want to be serious students of the competitive part of the game. They want easy wins. Such people inspired the title for this blog: "justaslam". After losing a slam they suddenly wax philosophical and tell you “this is just poetry” or “just slam”. Do you think Tom Brady or Bret Favre say that about football? Do you think Miles Davis or Duke Ellington or even Prince said “this is just music”? Look, anything can be “just” when compared to war or hunger or natural disaster - in which case if you really feel being a poet is a waste of time or not as important as natural disasters, then go work as a fireman, or in emergency response or join the UN. Don't be “just a poet”.
Do you want to be a poetry slammer? Then don't say stuff like: "it's just a poetry slam " or “it's just poetry”. Don't be afraid to lose a poetry slam. You may come in first a lot, but you will lose eventually. You may lose a lot, but if you become a student of the game you will win eventually. Either way never give up. Remember, there are really three winners in a slam, so don't view coming in second or third as losing. Losing is not making the top three. Don't get discouraged when you don't make the top three. The poetry slam game is 70% situational. Sometimes the judges do give stupid scores. Sometimes you get consistently bad position throughout a slam. But 30% of the poetry slam is you. Students of the game really look at why they lost: whether it was the 70% situational which you have no control over; or the 30% personal which you do have control over. You have to write good poetry. You have to give better and better performances. You can't go over time. You have to apply at least basic slam strategy and learn to develop advanced strategy. You have to learn how to play the game of "competitive performance poetry".
In future articles I will detail the remaining six principles of poetry slam.
Too many poets get involved in slam and lean only on their talent. Slam is a game involving a lot of luck, so good writers can get use to coming in first in a slam and think it's just their talent that's getting them wins. But when they finally do lose they let go of their composure and may even stop slamming altogether. The same goes for some poets that never win. They start slamming, thinking their talent will get them hi scores, then they don't get the scores - and they stop slamming. Neither of the foregoing types of poets, those that win too much early in their slam career and those that lose too much early in their slam career, were serious about the art form of performance poetry. They were good at performance poetry, and that's important - but not all there is to slam. They were'nt serious students of the competitive part of poetry slam, and probably didn't want to be serious students of the competitive part of the game. They want easy wins. Such people inspired the title for this blog: "justaslam". After losing a slam they suddenly wax philosophical and tell you “this is just poetry” or “just slam”. Do you think Tom Brady or Bret Favre say that about football? Do you think Miles Davis or Duke Ellington or even Prince said “this is just music”? Look, anything can be “just” when compared to war or hunger or natural disaster - in which case if you really feel being a poet is a waste of time or not as important as natural disasters, then go work as a fireman, or in emergency response or join the UN. Don't be “just a poet”.
Do you want to be a poetry slammer? Then don't say stuff like: "it's just a poetry slam " or “it's just poetry”. Don't be afraid to lose a poetry slam. You may come in first a lot, but you will lose eventually. You may lose a lot, but if you become a student of the game you will win eventually. Either way never give up. Remember, there are really three winners in a slam, so don't view coming in second or third as losing. Losing is not making the top three. Don't get discouraged when you don't make the top three. The poetry slam game is 70% situational. Sometimes the judges do give stupid scores. Sometimes you get consistently bad position throughout a slam. But 30% of the poetry slam is you. Students of the game really look at why they lost: whether it was the 70% situational which you have no control over; or the 30% personal which you do have control over. You have to write good poetry. You have to give better and better performances. You can't go over time. You have to apply at least basic slam strategy and learn to develop advanced strategy. You have to learn how to play the game of "competitive performance poetry".
In future articles I will detail the remaining six principles of poetry slam.
2 comments:
"...when they finally do lose to someone like you and me (you and I are students of the slam game)..."
That is some black belt grammar going on, there. I'll bet 90% of the English majors out there would have second-guessed themselves into caving in on the side-by-side pairing of you and me/you and I. You stuck to your guns and got it right.
Hey, thanks. I try.
Post a Comment