How does the poem differ in its two versions? What role does spoken word (orality) privilege? What does the textual writing space (unconventional as it is) play in the transmission of meaning?
After watching the two versions of Taylor Mali's poem, there were some major differences. Once was during the live performance of the poem you were able to see his body language. This helped emphasize certain points of the poem. It showed how strongly he believed what he was saying. You were also able to see the audiences reactions. Most people seemed to look like they were enjoying it. Both versions had the audio version of the poem. It is a key element in the presenting of the poem. The way he read it made it sound like the laid back vernacular which most people speak in. It sounds more like a simple conversation than a poem being read. Also he is able to raise his voice at points that are important. If we were reading it then we wouldn't be able to tell what points should be important. The format that the textual presentation is in is very interesting. If it was normal text it would be very boring and not have a big impact. However the way the text flows goes with his words well and really helps us see what he is saying.
I pretty much had the same ideas as you. You also used a word that for some reason I couldn't think of while I was writing this! Vernacular. Ah. I'm hitting myself. I don't know what else to say, so nice job, keep it up =)
ReplyDelete