SPIEL Siegener Periodicum zur Internationalen Empirischen Literaturwissenschaft

SPIEL: Siegener Periodicum zur Internationalen Empirischen Literaturwissenschaft

Jg. 22 (2003), Heft 2

Peter Lang Frankfurt am Main • Berlin • Bern • Bruxelles • New York • Oxford • Wien Bibliografische Information Der Deutschen Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über abrufbar.

ISSNISSN 2199-80780722-7833 © Peter Lang GmbH Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften Frankfurt am Main 2005 Alle Rechte vorbehalten. Das Werk einschließlich aller seiner Teile ist urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Verwertung außerhalb der engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes ist ohne Zustimmung des Verlages unzulässig und strafbar. Das gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen und die Einspeicherung und Verarbeitung in elektronischen Systemen. Printed in Germany 1 2 3 4 6 7 www.peterlang.de Siegener Periodicum zur Internationalen Empirischen Literaturwissenschaft

SPIEL 22 (2003) H. 2

MEDIEN UND EMOTIONEN MEDIA AND EMOTIONS

hrsg. von / ed. by Anne Bartsch (Halle) Die vorliegende Ausgabe entstand in Folge des Panels „Emotions and the Community Building Function of the Media“ auf dem IX. IGEL-Kongress 2004 in Edmonton. Die Heftbezeichnung SPIEL 22 (2003), H. 2 ergab sich aus produktionstechnischen Gründen und bezieht sich weder auf das Jahr des stattgefundenen Kongresses 2004 noch auf das aktuelle Erscheinungsjahr des Bandes 2005. Die Redaktion bittet um Verständnis. Das Heft wird zitiert: Bartsch, Anne, Hg., Medien und Emotionen. Frankfurt/M., Peter Lang, 2005. (= special issue SPIEL, 22 (2003), H. 2).

The present edition succeeded the panel „Emotions and the Community Building Function of the Media“ (IX. IGEL congress in Edmonton, 2004). Owing to technical reasons of production the title SPIEL 22 (2003), H. 2 neither refers to the year of the congress nor to the actual year of publication, 2005. The editorial team ask for the readers’ indulgence. This issue is cited as follows: Bartsch, Anne, Ed., Media and Emotions. Frankfurt/M., Peter Lang, 2005. (= special issue SPIEL, 22 (2003), H. 2). Siegener Periodicum zur Internationalen Empirischen Literaturwissenschaft

Herausgeber dieses Heftes: Anne Bartsch Contents / Inhalt SPIEL 22 (2003), H. 2

Anne Bartsch (Halle) Vorwort Michelle C. Hllscher & Gerald Cupchik (Toronto) From the page to the stage: Poetry writing, performance and reception 215 Dagmar Unz & Peter Winterhoff-Spurk (Saarbrücken) Emotional processes of TV-viewers: Outlining a method for studying the temporal structure of facial expressions 237 Siegfried J. Schmidt (Münster) Medien und Emotionen: Zum Management von Bezugnahmen 251 Jens Eder (Hamburg) Analysing affective reactions to films. Towards an integrative model 271 Kathrin Fahlenbrach (Halle) Audiovisuelle Metaphern und emotionales Design in Musikvideos 291 Anne Bartsch & Reinhold Viehoff (Halle) Meta-Emotion: In search of a meta-account for entertainment by negative emotions 309

Frank Schwab (Saarbrücken) Are we amusing ourselves to death? Answers from evolutionary psychology 329 Katrin Döveling (Berlin) Emotions and the community building function of the media 339

Susanne Hübner (Halle) Emotionale Kommunikation im Alter: Ein Beitrag zu den Besonderheiten des emotionalen Kommunikations- und Mediennutzungsverhaltens alter Menschen 353 10.3726/80997_215

SPIEL 22 (2003), H. 2 , 215-235

Michelle C. Hilscher1 and Gerald C. Cupchik (Toronto)

From the Page to the Stage: Poetry Writing, Performance, and Reception

Das Schreiben, Vortragen und Rezipieren von Lyrik haben zwei komplementäre Aspekte, spontane Kreativität und die Nutzung intentionaler Strategien. Während Spontaneität und interpretative Freiheit in Reader Response Theorien von zentraler Bedeutung sind, ist die Anwendung formalisierter Strategien grundlegend für den Ansatz des New Criticism. Es wurden zwei Studien durchgeführt, um die Rolle von Spontaneität und Intentionalität beim Schreiben, Vortragen und Rezipieren von Lyrik zu untersuchen. In der ersten Studie beschrieben 12 Lyriker jeweils zwei kritische Schreib- und Vortragserlebnisse. Eine qualitative Analyse ihrer Interviews ergab 10 zugrunde liegende Kategorien (z.B. Lyriker beschreibt positive Emotionen während des Schreibens oder Vortragens), und es wurde die Häufigkeit, mit der eine Kategorie in jedem Protokoll vorkam, festgestellt. Mittels Faktorenanalyse wurden Zusammenhänge zwischen diesen Kategorien für Erlebnisse des kreativen Schreibens und Vortragens festgestellt. Die Ergebnisse zeigten, dass Spontaneität im Vergleich zur Anwendung zielgerichteter Strategien während der Schreiberlebnisse von größerer Bedeutung war. Beim Vortrag hingegen ergänzten sich Spontaneität und Intentionalität, da Interpretation und Ausdruck hier im gleichen Moment ablaufen. Das zweite Experiment verglich drei Rezeptionsbedingungen für Lyrik: lesen, hören und sehen. Achtundvierzig Teilnehmern, von denen jeweils die Hälfte männliche und weibliche Psychologie- und Literaturstudenten waren, wurden jeweils ein thematisch positives und ein thematisch negatives Gedicht von einem der 6 interviewten Lyriker präsentiert. Die Versuchspersonen beurteilten die Gedichte und ihr Rezeptionserlebnis auf 15 Fünf-Punkt-Skalen. Die Ergebnisse der Faktorenanalyse deuten daraufhin, dass, wie im Fall des Schreibens, spontane emotionale und kognitive Reaktionen auf Lyrik überwiegen. Die Ergebnisse beider Untersuchungen unterstützen die Reader Response Perspektive, schließen strategisches Verhalten jedoch nicht aus. (Übersetzung Anne Bartsch)

Poetry may be penned by a writer and/or voiced by a performer. Likewise, it may be experienced through various modes of reception including reading, hearing, and seeing. Regardless of whether one is a writer, performer, or recipient, the ultimate issue that must be faced concerns the contrast between spontaneity and intention. Intentional strategy incorporates the rules of the discipline, while spontaneity expresses a freedom within it. Clearly, different dynamics contribute to meaningful experiences of poetry and it is of value to determine what combination of spontaneity and intention make episodes of poetry writing, performance, and reception creative and insightful. Spontaneous writing was a topic that John Dewey (1934) addressed by describing a seeming parallel between the random movement of waves in the ocean and the flow of imagination. According to Dewey, “meaningful experiences have unity, they are without

1 Experiment 2 was conducted as part of Michelle Hilscher’s Senior Honours Thesis at the University of Toronto at Scarborough. 216 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

holes or mechanical junctions - they flow from something to something” (Dewey, 1934, p.36). He suggested that poets may go along with the twists and turns of spontaneous thoughts and feelings in the hopes of finding some new meaning, or they may persist with a strategy that anchors them to some pre-determined poetic ideal - the promise of a safe haven in the distance. By naturally adding fresh ideas and restructuring them, spontaneity facilitates this continuity, whereas intentional strategies constrain the outcome according to acceptable conventions. Wilson (1986), like Dewey, felt that creative poets are spontaneously inspired. In particular, he described “a great envisioning” as the moment when a random and original idea springs to the mind of a poet without warning. Rothenberg (1990) interviewed creative individuals and noted that they all shared a common desire to produce new and valuable works, but he went on to say that this desire for success could limit their spontaneity. He argued that poetic creativity reaps the benefit of a homospatial process whereby two discrete ideas or observations are combined to make an original one. Such a process functions best under spontaneous conditions because conscious intention may inhibit the imagination by importing rules and personal biases. Successful writing has also been described as a disciplined and intentional project. Schiller introduced the notion of eloingment, which suggested that poets ought to write “in the tranquility of distancing recollection”, rather than in the moment of strong emotion (in Wilkinson, 1957, p. xxxv). Ehrenzweig (1967) also thought that poets ought to avoid the “inarticulate visions” of spontaneity in favour of a strategic and intentional loyalty to preconceived poetic design. Detachment can be said to facilitate self-criticism, as is evidenced by Jones’ (1995) report that Shakespeare edited his work many times over before considering it complete. While some scholars have described spontaneity and intention as independent aspects of the creative writing process, others have seen them as complementary partners. Creative ideas can only appear spontaneously if poets have prepared themselves to stimulate, recognize, and manipulate these seeming novelties. Wallas (1926) proposed four stages of creativity illustrating his belief that writing is based on a complement of the spontaneous and the intentional. These stages were initiated by a conscious period of preparation in which a poet thinks about potential writing topics before incubation of the idea without further conscious consideration. Illumination is defined as the moment when a new idea comes to mind that promises a new understanding of the topic, and finally the value of the idea is verified by exploring it in a variety of contexts through writing. Similarly, Dewey (1934) proposed that work must be consciously conducted to form the right doors through which new ideas may gain entrance. The idea of preparing one’s mind to recognize novelty continues even nowadays with Tobin (2004) who has suggested that practiced routines ought to be performed by poets so that their minds are agile and sharp when spontaneous ideas need reflective consideration. Clearly, spontaneity and purpose are complementary in all facets of the writing process. Dewey (1934) stated that what is done and what is undergone share a vital intimacy that is reciprocal and cumulative (Dewey, 1934, p. 50). He felt that poets must write and simultaneously reflect on what they are writing so that they may be guided to some new ground of thought. Essentially, one must be spontaneously inspired to create, From the page to the stage 217 but consciously motivated to reflect. Ehrenzweig (1967) echoed Dewey’s point by criticizing the blind application of strategy to manipulate a medium thus preventing artists from recognizing the evolution of their work. Essentially, Dewey and Ehrenzweig felt that meaning is constructed both subjectively and objectively through a recursive process of reflective and self-aware activity. Havelka (1968) went so far as to say that without the spontaneous freedom to reflect on what one is making in the context of current emotions and thoughts, the art form would simply be an “imitation” of what was once in one’s mind. For this reason alone, writing gains long-lasting meaning when it is influenced by the spontaneity that comes from new experiences and ideas. Turning an eye towards the performance of poetry, one must similarly examine the interplay of spontaneity and purpose. Carpenter (1969) distinguished between the freedom of subjective style and its manner as objectified through discipline. Similarly Crease (1987) explored the topic of performance and distinguished technology as separate from artistry. “The technology of performance refers to standardized practices whose successful operation we can take for granted, while the artistry of performance coaxes into being something which has not previously appeared.” (Crease, 1997, 219). Though different terms were used, a clear discrimination was being made between standardized, conscious strategies and spontaneous expressions. A performance piece is considered significant by the poet if feedback is received from the audience that clarifies the poet’s own perspective on an issue. It is likely that spontaneous interactions with the audience are facilitated by a poet’s presentation strategies. Essentially, creative performance poets are able to accept the conflict and tension of performance (Fromm, 1959) because they have well-rehearsed routines ready in case they need to fall back on them. Preparing a back-up plan ahead of performance permits the poet to step beyond any concerns about the end result of a poem (Ehrenzweig, 1967) or other anxieties that might arise from social ideals that pressure the mode and message of a performance (Amabile, 1983). In fact, the complementary nature of spontaneity and intention may foster a new viewpoint such that a performance poet could feel curious and excited about the possibilities of performance, as compared to threatened and anxious about its ambiguities (Dacey & Lennon, 1998). However, anxiety can reduce spontaneous expression (Ehrenzweig, 1967; Fromm 1959) in a way that will prevent poets from expanding the textual poem so that it becomes a meaningful performance piece and such pressure may even lead poets to feel defensive and protective of their work and their role as performers. The issue of spontaneity and purpose has similarly been addressed in relation to the reception of poetry, both in the form of poetic text and performance. New Criticism and Reader Response scholars approached the universals of reception and interpretation with different reasoning about the roles of intention and spontaneity. New Critics emphasized emotional restraint in combination with a formal application of cognitive strategies for the interpretation of literary material (Eliot, 1975/1932; Richards, 1963; Wimsatt and Beardsley, 1954). Champions of Reader Response theory expressed the view that freedom to think and feel spontaneously about literary works is the truest method by which to construct personally meaningful interpretations (Schmidt, 1982; Fish, 1980; Holland, 1975). Havelka (1968) suggested that intentional strategies for poetry comprehension are piecemeal and simply permit access to the shallow, “informative” 218 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

message of poetry. However, deeper and “evocative” qualities of poetry were only available by spontaneous interactions between a person and the work . Clearly there are three vantage points from which a person may experience a poem - as a writer, performer, or reader/viewer. The current research project, comprising two studies, examined relationships between spontaneity and intention, as well as emotions and thoughts, for these three modes of engagement. During the first study, twelve poets were asked to describe their experiences of writing and performing poetry. Qualitative content analysis was used to identify similarities and differences of content and emotional tone, followed by a factor analysis to indicate the clustering of such patterns. In the second study, participants were exposed to the works of six poets chosen from the previous study through three modes of reception; reading, hearing, and seeing. Nuances of response were captured on a set of scaled questions and factor analysis revealed patterns of poetry reception. Analysis of variance showed main effects of mode of presentation, and interactions of this variable with the emotional theme of the poem. These findings were considered along with those from the first study in order to assess the relationship between intentional strategy and spontaneity across all forms of poetic experience.

Experiment 1

Method

Overview During the summer of 2003, Michelle Hilscher attended poetry readings around Toronto and videotaped poets performing their work on stage to a live audience, after which each poet was invited for an interview over dinner. In this way, a total of six female and six male poets were interviewed about their experiences of writing and performance.

Respondents The poets were each deemed to be experienced performance artists because they were very active within Toronto’s poetry community. In particular, the poets had performed at numerous poetry readings and also released published collections of their work. The age range of the poets was fairly broad, encompassing poets in their 20s, 30s, and 40s.

Interview Format Prior to the interview, each poet was given the same set of instructions over the telephone. The poets were told that they needed to report their experiences of writing and performing two poems. The majority of the interviews took between 45 minutes and 1 hour and the poets were encouraged to speak freely about their creative and performance episodes. They each began by identifying the poem to be discussed first, and then described the lived experience of writing the piece, followed by the experience of performing it in front of a live audience. The interviews were audio taped and transcribed to produce written protocols of the conversations. From the page to the stage 219

Results

Overview of Analysis Categorical analysis was used to analyze the protocols that were collected. Initiated by Braun and Cupchik (2001) during the qualitative analysis of absorption in literary narratives, the success of categorical analysis requires: (1) an unbiased approach to the data that is free of expectations or hypotheses; (2) an objective assessment of the patterns that exist within a randomly selected subset of the data; and (3) a rigorous definition and application of these categories across the data set. In order to generate a set of categories, 4 writing and 4 performance descriptions were sampled from a total of 48 episodes. The writing episodes were randomly selected from 2 male and 2 female poets and the performance episodes were randomly selected from 2 other male and 2 other female poets. The content of these descriptions were compared for similarities and differences with regards to such things as subject matter, structure, and emotional content. Similarities and differences that seemed to distinguish writing from performance episodes were rigorously defined and 10 categories were selected which were applicable to both types of episodes (see Table 1). The frequency with which each category arose within each of the 48 protocols was determined and a quantitative data set was formed. The categories distinguished between (a) experiential and (b) analytical aspects of the poet’s experience. For example, when poets described positive or negative emotions, this was deemed experiential in comparison to typical analytic descriptions of intentional strategy being employed during the writing or performance of a poem. Some of the categories captured the momentary nature of certain episodes, whereas other episodes of creativity were long-lasting, reflexive experiences. For example, some respondents merely described the setting of the episode and the actions they took during their experience, while others established a historical context for the episode by providing background information about themselves and others, and took some insight away from the experience, as was evident from their statement that the experience was meaningful. 220 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

Table 1. Definition o f Categories for Writing and Performance

Category Definition Example

Background Poet provided background - “I lived in the Annex for 5 Information information about past events - relating years, and had just moved to to themselves and others. the Danforth...”

Positive Poet described a positive feeling “I loved expressing myself Emotion experienced during writing or and being on stage...it was performance. thrilling!”

Negative Poet described a negative feeling “After I’d read the first few Emotion experienced during writing or words I was just so performance. embarrassed.”

Environ­ Poet described aspects of environment “I was sitting in a café...it was ment/Setting or setting in which they wrote or a sunny morning...” performed the poem.

Actions Poet described their own actions during “I went and got my notebook, the creative episode. and then sat and handwrote the poem.”

Conscious Poet reported that they used an “I made an effort to project Intention intentional strategy, or that they had my voice.” goals in mind to be achieved through writing/performance.

Spontaneity Poet reported spontaneous inspiration, “When I was on the subway, or the feeling of an urge or impulse to the first line of the poem just write or perform. came to me out of no where.”

Orientation Poet reported that they focused on the “I got very focused and To Poem poem’s words and meaning. couldn’t stop thinking about each sentence as I wrote it.”

Orientation Poet reported that they focused on the “I looked out into the To response of audience members. audience...” Audience

Meaning Poet reported that writing/performance “The poem helped me to find clarified some question they had, or some answers.” gave them a new perspective. From the page to the stage 221

Factor Analysis A factor analysis was employed to show which categories clustered together. The same categories were used for both the writing and performance episodes and so it was possible to compare them. Writing episodes. Four factors with Eigenvalues greater than 1.00 were derived from a factor analysis, with varimax rotation, that examined the intercorrelations among the 10 categories during episodes of writing (see Table 2). These factors distinguished between four styles of writing that characterized the overall group of poets. Factor 1 (Eigenvalue 3.15) had three categories with loadings greater than .50. Referred to as creative embodiment, this factor demonstrated that poets who described their physical actions while writing (.96) also tended to feel that their work had been meaningful (.87) and spontaneous (.66). The intercorrelation of these categories suggests that meaningful writing is primarily linked with spontaneous action. Two examples of this factor have been extracted from the transcripts of one female and one male poet:

FEMALE: On one particular night I looked out the front window and it must have been dusk, but the sky was so big and there was this tangerine glow because the sun was setting. I went and got my notebook and then sat with this view of the sky and hand- wrote the poem. I just started to describe what I saw and the poem just fell out. I could hardly write fast enough to keep up with the ideas coming to mind. Emotionally I put the isolation I was feeling right into the poem... I was a bit emotional and feeling close to nature in a way.

MALE: I keep a journal with me and the first line of the poem just came to me out of the blue ‘there’s nothing different to say about love...’. It was a poem that just came to me naturally, the images came and I just wrote the poem. In the end the poem let me communicate and clarify some of my issues.

Factor 2 (Eigenvalue 2.14) focused exclusively on the setting of the writing episode. The poets described the setting of their writing experience (.73) without mention of any negative emotions (-.77) and did not provide any background information either about themselves or others (-.76).

FEMALE: I was walking to the post office and the whole string of events I described in the poem simply happened in front of me - the little girl and her mom throwing litter into the flower pot - I just started looking for things at that point that I could string together. As serendipity would have it, things just happened and they fit well together. Right there on the street I began to write the poem - in fact on the envelope I was supposed to be mailing - so I had to go home where I finished the poem from scraps of words I written to that point.

MALE: I was in the car listening to a Beatles song - T am the Walrus’ - which is a very weird John Lennon song that he wrote on various acid trips. What was in the song was that there was a mixture of things near the end - a portion of a BBC broadcast was 222 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik blipped in along with the music. This gave me the inspiration for mixing up different references. I pulled over to the curb, and the poem took me very little time to write.

Factor 3 (Eigenvalue 1.47) described a writing experience in which the poets were pleasantly preoccupied with their own emotions. In this case, the poets described their positive emotions (.94), but weren’t oriented to the poem (-.88). Like Factor 2, this factor was concerned with aspects of the episode unrelated to the actual process of writing.

FEMALE: I had gone out to a bar for a drink one night and met this really good looking guy and I guess it was just in my mind to imagine having more than a flirtation with him. I would never do that type of thing, but when I was thinking about it I got the idea to write a poem about flirtation. It was funny and crass and flippant at the same time and I enjoyed imagining something that I wouldn’t do.

MALE: Writing that poem was me putting in my memories - me enjoying and exploring my favourite type of music. I was remembering how it felt to love those songs... I had a lot of fun writing this piece...

Factor 4 (Eigenvalue 1.21) was labeled conscious and intentioned, as it pertains to the poets’ use of strategies for their writing (.94) together with the belief that the writing was not spontaneous (-.50).

FEMALE: A lot of my poetry has had long lines, so I wanted to structure this one differently with short lines. I was very focused on spacing the words so that there would be a visual cue setting up a split for the reader.

MALE: I didn’t know what to do about [the situation], so I decided to write him a poem in the attempt to give him a kick in the ass. I decided to write the poem in a style that would really make my friend angry. It’s written in an antagonistic way - like rap or hiphop - sort of typical beat poetry. It was vindictive because of the way I wrote it. These findings show that, from the viewpoint of the poets themselves, spontaneity was of central importance in the creative process in comparison with the strategic application of technique. They were also sensitive to the actual setting within which the work was composed and the pleasurable emotions accompanying the creative act. From the page to the stage 223

Table 2. Factor analysis of qualitative categories used to describe episodes o f writing

Factor and Eigenvalue Question Weight

1 Creative Embodiment Describes one’s own actions .96 3.15 Reports that writing was meaningful .87 Reports that writing was spontaneous .66 2 Focus on Setting Describes setting of writing episode .73 2.14 Doesn’t describe negative emotions -.77 Doesn’t provide background of self/others -.76

3 Pleasant Preoccupation Describes positive emotions .94 1.47 Not oriented to the poem -.88

4 Conscious and Intentioned Reports strategies used for writing .94 1.21 Writing wasn’t spontaneous -.50

Performance Episodes. Three factors were derived from a factor analysis, with varimax rotation, that examined intercorrelations among the 10 categories during the performance episodes (see Table 3). These factors distinguished between three aspects of performance that characterized the overall group of poets. Factor 1 (Eigenvalue 4.71) had six categories with loadings greater than .50, and represented the complementary roles of spontaneity and intention in the performance of poetry. This holistic experience of performance included descriptions of their own actions (.95), the experience of spontaneity (.94) in addition to intentional strategies (.94), felt pleasure (.87), found meaning (.82), and orientation to the poem (.59).

FEMALE: The experience was filled with many different emotions - anxiety and excitement. I was feeling uptight, but not scared because I knew I’d practiced the poem before. Once I began speaking I was thinking about how I was expressing the words - questioning myself. It was a battle of wills not to get caught up in any mistakes I’d made as I went, or challenging the way I’d read a certain line. The audience was so warm and open that I relaxed and went beyond what I’d practiced, tried out new ways of expressing certain parts of the poem. The audience response was great, it really helped to shape the poem. Overall I loved expressing myself and being on stage... it was fun!

MALE: I had wanted to read this poem out loud for a while. I was very nervous. I got up there and started out by completely concentrating on the poem - its words and its flow. I was also making an effort to project my voice. The poem started out slowly, the audience wasn’t really into it, so I started glancing at them, trying to synchronize myself to them. Soon I felt them coming into the poem - focusing on me - and I knew that I had them! Then I could emphasize whatever I wanted, fluctuate my voice however I felt. It was that brief moment when you connect with them that makes you perform again - trying to recapture the connection of that moment. 224 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

Factor 2 (Eigenvalue 2.08) depicted a negative performance experience. Poets who provided background information about the audience (.92), felt negatively about the performance (.83), and who weren’t oriented to the poem (-.53) in their accounts of the performance appear to have endured negative feedback by considering features of the audience that might be to blame as opposed weaknesses in their own roles as performers or poets.

FEMALE: There were these two girls in the front row who gave me a 5 out of 10 during the slam. It came as a real surprise. I felt angry and yet realized that they hadn’t gone beyond the superficial level. I spoke and they heard, but they didn’t think.

MALE: The audience was very young relative to me - early twenties. I could tell - though artists are notorious for misreading - that they didn’t really connect with me as I got on stage, so they weren’t prepared to listen. They never got the meaning of the poem and I felt let-down.

Factor 3 (Eigenvalue 1.42) refers to a positive performance experience. Poets who alluded to the environment, such as the stage or feeling in the room (.88) as well as to the audience (.85), were the ones reveling in their dual roles as poets and performers.

FEMALE: Last night the people were a good, laughing crowd. The guys were a bit touchy, while the girls tended to nod and agree. I looked for some interaction with the men in the crowd during the poem. At some lines I would make eye-contact with them and some held my gaze while others got squirmy and embarrassed.

MALE: There was no formal stage and I liked that. I got up at the front of the room, and I didn’t start formally, rather I just got up there and chatted a bit. Looked at the audience, said a few pleasantries about the venue and the weather. I put everyone at ease and then took a deep breath to signify that I was going to start. The audience was soon hooked and I got them to understand that it was more of a comic piece than anything. I would pause at words and give the eyebrow up to let them realize that it was okay - I’m just making a joke. It was comfortable because I didn’t force my poem down their throats...

These results show that, in relation to performance, spontaneity and intention work in a complementary manner as part of a unified experience of recreating and interpreting one’s own poem in front of a live audience. The experience of positive or negative feedback also has a strong impact on the poet. From the page to the stage 225

Table 3. Factor analysis of qualitative categories used to describe performance episodes

Factor and Eigenvalue Question Weight

1 Spontaneous and Intentional Describes one’s own actions .95 4.71 Reports that performance was spontaneous .94 Reports that performance was intentional .94 Describes positive emotions .87 Reports that performance was meaningful .82 Oriented to the poem .59

2 Negative Performance Provides background of self/others .92 2.08 Describes negative emotions .83 Not oriented to the poem -.55

Positive Performance Oriented to the environment .88 1.42 Oriented to the audience .85

Experiment 2

Method

Participants Forty-eight students from the University of Toronto participated in this study. Twelve of the males and 12 of the females specialized in literature, while the other half were students in psychology. Participants were divided into 12 subject groups, each comprising one male and one female from the two represented disciplines, literature and psychology. Materials The poetry. Twelve poems were selected for use in this experiment. They were obtained from 3 of the female and 3 of the male poets who participated in the first phase of the study. Each poet had a high degree of activity within the Toronto arts scene which helped to ensure that there was an equivalent level of performance experience across the sample of artists. With regards to the poetic material that was provided, each poet contributed one positively-themed poem and one negatively-themed poem. The poets had been videotaped as they presented both poems to a live audience at a reading or poetry “slam” (i.e., competition). These videotaped clips were then converted into digital video files from which audio files were extracted. In addition to video and audio clips, written versions of the poems were also prepared for the experimental sessions. Samples from four poems that were used in the study illustrate the difference between negative and positive emotional poetic tone: 226 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

NEGATIVE POEM {male poet): He wishes there was only a single photograph of what would happen thirty years later when brother lay down on the railroad tracks. Perhaps thinking it will make something flat and smooth of his body - as if he were a coin.

NEGATIVE POEM (female poet): Skunk drunk smokers stumble by having the time of their lives. Teenage moms smoke in the midday sun. Kids shove fries in their mouths while bins of avocados and cheap bananas rot.

POSITIVE POEM {male poet): So I’m sorry to interrupt you when you are laughing or brushing your teeth only to repeat a cliché...but if I had said it 250 000 years ago it would have sounded really original.

POSITIVE POEM {femalepoet): It’s not a treat she needs: simply, the wide stretch of lake shimmer, whistling scent of cherry blossoms, and the luscious purr of seagulls overhead.

The poems were divided into three Sets (A, B, C), each comprising one positive and one negative poem from one female and one male poet randomly assigned to the set. Each of the Sets were read by one Group of subjects, heard by another Group, and seen by a third Group. Accordingly, the works of the poets were received under the three presentation conditions of interest in this study. Subjects were presented with the poems in all possible sequences of the presentation medium (e.g., read, hear, see; read, see, hear; hear, see, read; and so on). These counterbalancing procedures ensured proper randomization of the poets (male/female), poems (positive/negative theme) and presentation medium (read, hear, see). Poetry reception ratings. Students rated the 12 poems on fifteen 5-point scales of the Poetry Reception Questionnaire (PRQ). Participants indicated how much they: liked the poem, imagined some sensory aspects of the poem, imagined the main character's actions, thought about the poem’s literary devices, felt confident that they understood what the poet was trying to say, found the poem to be vivid, would like to experience a live performance by the poet, and felt inspired to be creative by the poem (1 = Not at all, 5 = A great deal). The participants indicated if the poem had evoked emotional memories or had an impact on them (1 = None at all, 5 = A great deal), and also recorded how clearly they’d imagined the poem’s plot and setting (1 = Not at all clearly, 5 = Extremely clearly). Finally, the participants recorded how negative or positive their emotional experience had been (1 = Extremely negative, 5 = Extremely positive), the direction in which this emotional experience had been centred ( 1 = In the poem, 5 = In their personal reaction), and how relatively involved they had been in the poem (1 = Extremely detached, 5 = Extremely engaged).

Design Two between-subjects variables included the Gender of the participants and their Educational Background (specializing in psychology or in literature). Three within- From the page to the stage 227

subjects variables were also manipulated in the experiment; Mode of Presentation (ireading the poem, hearing the spoken poem, or watching a video-taped performance of the poem), Emotional Theme of the poem {negative or positive), and Poet’s Gender. Procedure Participants were run in groups of 4, each comprising one male and one female specializing in literature and psychology. In accordance with the assigned presentation order of the conditions, the students read, heard, and watched the video-taped performance of sets of poems (A, B, C). The spoken versions of the poems were played in a darkened room using a CD player. The poetry performances were electronically projected onto a screen at the front of the room, approximately 2m from the participants (1.5m X 1.5m image) who were seated at individual tables. The participants rated each poem on the Poetry Reception Questionnaire’s set of fifteen 5-point scale questions. All participants in the group completed their responses to one poem before the next one was presented and so each session lasted from 70 to 80 minutes.

Results

Factor Analysis Three factors were derived from a factor analysis, with varimax rotation, that examined intercorrelations among the 15 questions of the Poetry Reception Questionnaire (see Table 4). These factors represented the three main aspects of responses to the styles that were demonstrated by the participants during their experience of the poetry. The results are based on poetry ratings collapsed across three presentation conditions; read, hear, see. Factor 1 (Eigenvalue 7.75) illustrated an emotionally engaged and internally oriented experience of poetry because participants found it to be stimulating and personally meaningful. Specifically, participants liked the poem (.87), felt the poem had impacted them (.86), wanted to see a live performance by the poet (.74), were involved with the poem (.66), felt internal emotional intensity (.65), identified with the poet (.65), experienced pleasure (.64), felt that the poem was vivid (.63), experienced emotional memories (.52), and had a sensory experience of the poem (.50). This factor replicates the primary absorption factor found by Braun in her studies on absorption in literature (Braun and Cupchik, 2001) and poetry comprehension (Braun, 2003). Factor 2 (Eigenvalue 1.71) involved a focus on the poem that entailed imagining a poem’s plot or setting (.81), thinking about literary devices (.78), imagining the main character’s actions (.78), having a sensory experience of the poem (.70), experiencing emotional memories (.68), being inspired to be creative (.61), and identifying with the poet (.58). Finally the third factor (Eigenvalue 1.16) represented a focus on the poet that resulted in participants reporting they had understood the poet (.90). This factor clearly illustrated a response to literature that involved participants who focused on the author to the exclusion of all else. 228 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

Table 4. Factor Analysis of Poetry Reception Questionnaire (PRQ)

Factor and Eigenvalue Question Weight

1 Emotionally Engaged Liked the poem .87 & Internally Oriented The poem had an impact .86 7.75 Wants to see a live performance by the poet .74 Was involved with the poem .66 Emotional intensity centred in self .65 Identified with poet .65 Positive emotional experience .64 The poem was vivid .63 Experienced emotional memories .52 Had a sensory experience of poem .50

2 Focus on Poem Imagined the poem’s plot or setting .81 1.71 Thought about the literary devices of poem .78 Imagined the actions of the main character .78 Had a sensory experience of poem .70 Experienced emotional memories .68 Was inspired to be creative .61 Identified with poet .58

3 Focus on Poet Understood the poet .90 1.16

When experiencing poetry, a person can focus on the poet’s identity as an author, or the poem’s merit as a literary work. Nonetheless, the most striking and meaningful connection one can have with poetry comes from being engaged in a manner that is emotional, personally relevant, and spontaneous. This engaged and absorbed response style supports Reader Response theory, however the suppositions of New Criticism are evidenced by the other two factors. Scholars of Reader Response and New Criticism should therefore recognize that a combination of their theories would lead to the richest understanding of what it is to experience a poem. Analysis of Variance An analysis of variance was performed treating Gender and Background (Psychology, Literature) as between-subjects variables with Mode of Presentation (Read, Hear, See) and Poetic Theme (Positive, Negative) as within-subjects variables. Each of the 15 scales served as dependent measures. Main effects of theme of poem. Significant main effects of the poem’s theme were found on two scales (see Table 5). When participants experienced a negatively-themed poem they were significantly more likely to report that they would like to witness a live performance by that poet, F(l, 44) = 6.62, p<.01, and that they felt inspired by the poem to be creative, F(l,44) = 5.35,p<.05. From the page to the stage 229

Table 5. Main Effects of Mode o f Presentation and Poetic Theme

Mode of Presentation Poetic Theme

Dependent Variable Read Hear See Positive Negative

Had a sensory experience of poem 3.25 3.11 2.86* 3.08 3.08 *

Imagined main character’s actions 3.51 3.42 3.11** 3.37 3.33

Imagined poem’s plot and setting 3.27 3.14 2.91* 3.06 3.15

Thought about poem’s literary devices 2.70 2.36 2.44* 2.46 2.54

Would like to witness a live 2.80 2.63 2.68 2.58 2.82** performance

Was inspired to be creative 2.16 2.20 2.31 2.13 2.32* *p<. 05 **/?<.01

Main effects of mode o f presentation. Significant main effects of mode of presentation were found on four scales (see Table 5). When participants watched the poems being performed by the poets, they were significantly less likely to have a sensory experience of the poem, F{2, 88) = 5.07, p<.01, to imagine the main character’s actions, F(2, 88) = 6.67, p<.01, to imagine the poem’s setting or plot, F(2, 88) = 4.60, p<.05, or to think about the poem’s literary devices, F(2, 88) = 4.08, /?<.05. These findings are consistent with what is taken for granted about reading poetry. Specifically, it stimulates mental activities having to do with imagination, sensory experience, and reflection on literary devices. Interactions of mode of presentation by poetic theme. Two significant interactions of mode of presentation and poetic theme were found. The first interaction related to the participants’ liking for a given poem, F{2,88) = 3.69, p <.05 (see Figure 1). Figure 1 shows that poems with Negative themes were liked more than the Positive themes when read. As additional dimensions of experience were added with voice and live (i.e., filmed) performance, the Negative poems were liked progressively less and the Positive poems were liked more until the differential disappeared. While the Negative poems may have been more challenging than the positive poems in the read condition, additional 230 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

have been more challenging than the positive poems in the read condition, additional tonal and expressive (i.e., bodily) realism appeared to magnify the affective (i.e., pain versus pleasure) qualities of the poems. The second interaction between Mode of Presentation and Poetic Theme was found for the scale that asked participants how much they would like to see a live performance given by the poet (see Figure 2). Participants were more likely to express such a desire if they were reading a negatively-themed poem, as compared to a positively-themed poem, F(2, 88) = 7.22, p<.0\. As in the case of liking judgments, this difference progressively disappeared under the voice and live conditions. While readers may have wanted more input (i.e., voice and live performance) to help them understand the poem more deeply, in fact these conditions magnified the affective quality of the Negative poems to the point of making the experience less appealing.

Figure 1: Liking the poem. Figure 2: Wanting to see a live performance by the poet.

Mode of Presentation Mode of Presentation

Discussion

Writing Poetry The results of the first study showed that spontaneity was more salient than purpose in accounts of poetry writing episodes. The central feature of the poets’ discourses about creative episodes (Factor 1, creative embodiment) described their being driven through spontaneous action to produce meaningful poems. Factor 4, the intentional use of writing strategies, was less important than the poets’ focus on the setting (Factor 2) or pleasant preoccupation with their emotions (Factor 3). While both spontaneity and purpose were described in these accounts, the author’s vision was paramount as demonstrated by the reference to spontaneity, reference to spontaneity, the setting within which it takes place, and the feelings that accompany creative activity. Give one round to the Reader Response theorists! The results of this study concur with those of Wilson (1986) who interviewed twenty- four poets and reported that they identified spontaneous thinking and feeling as the most From the page to the stage 231 important features of creative writing. On the other hand, the poets reported being less creative when they consciously pursued the goal of writing a meaningful poem. Clearly such findings lend strength to the idea that spontaneous writing is meaningful, while intention may inhibit the writer’s imagination.

Performing Poetry Unlike the writing of creative poetry, meaningful performances depended on a combination of spontaneity and intention as shown by the dominant factor (Factor 1) underlying descriptions of performance episodes. It seems that spontaneity and intention act complementarity during meaningful performances, rather than competitively as they do during the process of creative writing. This finding is consistent with Dewey’s (1934) description of the skilled artist as moving back and forth between the creative and receptive viewpoints. In order to perform poetry or other dramatic text it is essential that authors/performers monitor their expressive activity to determine that it matches with their intellectual and emotional understanding of the text. The pressure of the moment demands the skilful shift between perspectives. It is important to remember, however, that the poets in this study were performing finished texts and not composing as they performed. This makes the challenge of “free style battling” all the more impressive. The negative and positive outcomes of these performances were also addressed in the poets’ accounts. The importance of a fit between the poet, the work, its performance, and the audience was underscored. When the performing experience produced negative feelings, the poet appears to have been distracted from the text (Factor 2). Performances associated with positive experiences revealed more harmonious relations with the setting and the audience (Factor 3). Harris (1969) described the creative musician as one who must conceive and translate, and a parallel may be drawn between such an artist and a performance poet. Creative musicians and creative performance poets share a world that is characterized by its dualistic nature, as spontaneity and intention frame all meaningful performances. Structure, such as simply holding a copy of the poem when stepping in front of the audience or having a verse memorized, provides a foundation for the performance. Within this comfortable framework of what psychologists call “overlearned” (i.e., highly practiced) responses, the poet can vary the parameters of delivery, such as pace, voice inflection, and so on, to express meanings implicit in the text and spontaneously uncover new ones in the re-interpretation of it. Performance poets are more comfortable taking unplanned risks when they have well-rehearsed routines as part of a backup plan.

Poetry Reception When participants experienced poetry by reading, hearing, and seeing it performed, they were most likely to respond through emotional engagement and internal orientation, in that they enjoyed the poem, felt impacted and involved, wanted closer contact with the poet, experienced intense internal emotions and memories, experienced pleasure, identified with the poet, found the poem to be vivid, and had a sensory experience (Factor 1). This response style was both spontaneous and meaningful because the emotions and memories that defined it were unforced and uncontrolled. 232 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

Such a holistic response replicated the primary absorption factor from a factor analysis of poem response ratings during a study of poetry comprehension by Braun (2003). Specifically, participants in Braun’s study were described as absorbed when they identified poems as emotional, engaging, likeable, and interesting. Clearly, the spontaneity of such a response style fits well within the framework of Reader Response theory. As such, there is spontaneity in the attitudes of both poets who create their works and receivers who must be on their intellectual and emotional toes to appreciate the meaning as it is presented to them. New Criticism was also reflected by responses that focused on the poem or focused on the poet. These styles of response were not focused on meaning, nor were they spontaneous. Rather, participants generated evaluative judgments about the poetry and poets through conscious and conventional thought processes.

Creativity and The Mode of Presentation A poem’s mode of presentation influenced participants’ creative input. Reading poetry independently facilitated participants’ personal involvement with the text, while watching poetry be performed tended to inhibit subjective interpretation. In particular, participants who read poetry were more likely to create mental images of the main character’s actions, and the poem’s plot and setting. Readers also had more opportunity to consider the literary devices of the poem, and often had sensory experiences that weren’t characteristic of viewers. It seems that participants who watched videotaped poetic performances didn’t employ their imaginations. In this case, subjective interpretation was not required because ambiguity was being clarified by cues from the performer. As well, finding personal meaning might have been inhibited by the performer’s evident ownership of the performed poem. Watching a performance seems to lessen a person’s experiential and cognitive participation, while reading a poem demands such involvement.

Writing, Performing, and Reception The freedom that characterized meaningful writing and reception existed outside of discipline. This is to say that conventional rules were entirely discarded during spontaneous moments of creation and insightful interpretation. Writers and readers/viewers lived an experience that wasn’t structured with tradition, instead following their thoughts and feelings with abandon. Conversely, creative performance poets were influenced both by purpose and by spontaneity. Dewey (1934) stated that meaningful experiences come from a mutual adaptation of the self and the artistic product, as well as a merging of thought and emotion. In the case of performance, a partnership of spontaneity of intention is forced by the immediacy of the performance itself. Being tangible but for a moment, the connection between performer and audience can only lead to a meaningful performance before the curtain drops. Hence, poets are best to have a conventional delivery of the poem as a backup so that they are confident enough to pursue a new idea when it comes to mind as they are performing. If a new direction of expression proves unsuccessful, the performance can always be saved by returning to the ground of practiced material. From the page to the stage 233

Writing and reception were not characterized by the simultaneous cooperation between spontaneity and intention. In fact, spontaneity was the clear victor if one sought to create and interpret insightfully. Nonetheless, it seems that intention defines some parts of both the writing and receptive processes. Writing and reception differ from performance in that they are reflexive processes that occur across time. Hence, spontaneity and intention are unlikely to occur in direct combination. For example, a writer may in one moment be inspired by words that come out of the blue, and then at some separate time intentionally set out to edit the poem. Likewise, recipients might experience poems spontaneously during the first encounter, but refine their interpretations through re-reading (Cupchik, Leonard, Axelrad and Kalin, 1998) or the recalling of memories. Writing and reception were insightful experiences when they were spontaneous though intentional actions also played an accessory role. This was the primary finding of a study comparing the read, hear, and see conditions for poetry composed by Michelle Hilscher (Hilscher and Cupchik, in press). The read condition was found to be most favourable, particularly because recipients could work interpretively and recursively on the material. The degrees of interpretive freedom were associated with greater pleasure. The addition of voice (on the CD) or performance (live) may have actually distracted recipients from their roles as interpreters. The results of this new experiment showed that poems with negative themes were liked more and participants wanted to witness a live performance by the poet, compared with positive poems, under the read condition. The read condition stimulated representational processes involving sensory experience, imagination, and reflection on literary devices. Interestingly, the negatively-themed poems were liked more than the positively- themed ones in the read condition and participants also wanted to see a live performance involving the poet. With the addition of voice and then actual live performance, this difference disappeared. This finding is consistent with results of a study by Cupchik and Gebotys, (1990) showing that aesthetic pleasure is shaped by two factors, interpretive activity and warm associations. The negatively-themed poems stimulated interpretive activity but with the addition of voice and life performance the negative affect finally caught up with it and impacted the emotional experience by providing negative associations.

Conclusions There are two facets to the writing, performance, and reception of poetry - spontaneity and intention. During periods of writing and reception they are generally separate in a way that sees meaningful writing and reception linked exclusively with spontaneity. Comparatively, when poets perform their works to a live audience, it is a combination of conscious strategy and spontaneous energy that leads to the most rewarding and meaningful experience. When it comes to scholarship about poetic experience, the multifarious nature of spontaneity and intention treats Reader Response and New Criticism in a complementary fashion. 234 Michelle C. Hilscher & Gerald C. Cupchik

References

Amabile, T. M., 1983. The social psychology of creativity. New York: Springer-Verlag. Braun, 1. & Cupchik, G. C., 2001. Phenomenological and quantitative analyses of absorption in literary passages. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 19{ 1), 85-109. Braun, I., 2003. Poetry comprehension: A description of the cognitive and emotional processing of literary experts and novices. Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Toronto, OISE, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Carpenter, R., 1969. The basis of artistic creation in the fine arts. In: M. Anderson, R. Harris, & R. Carpenter (Eds.), The bases of artistic creation. New York: Octagon Books. (Original work published 1942). Coleridge, S. T., 1983. Biographia literaria (2 vols., J. Engell & W.J. Bate, Eds.). In: The Collected Works of Samuel Taylor Coleridge 7. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1817). Crease, R. P., 1997. Responsive order: The phenomenology of dramatic and scientific performance. In: R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Creativity in performance. London: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Cupchik, G. C. & Gebotys, R.J., 1990. Interest and pleasure as dimensions of aesthetic response. Empirical Studies of the Arts, 8(1), 1-14. Cupchik, G. C., Leonard, G., Axelrad, E., & Kalin, J., 1998. The landscape of emotion in literary reception: Generating and receiving interpretations of James Joyce. Cognition and Emotion, 12(6), 825-847. Dacey, J.S. & Lennon, K.H., 1998. Understanding creativity: The interplay of biological, psychological, and social factors. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Dewey, J., 1934. Art as Experience. Capricorn Books: New York. Ehrenzweig, A., 1967. The hidden order of art: A study in the psychology of artistic imagination. University of California Press: California. Eliot, T. S., 1975. Tradition and the individual talent. In: Frank Kermode (Ed.), Selected Prose (37-44). London: Faber and Faber, (originally published in 1932). Fish, S., 1980. Is there a text in this class? The authority of interpretive communities. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Fromm, E., 1959. The creative attitude. In: H. H. Anderson (Ed.), Creativity and its cultivation. New York: HarperCollins. Harris, R., 1969. The basis of artistic creation in music. In: M. Anderson, R. Harris, & R. Carpenter (Eds.), The bases of artistic creation. New York: Octagon Books. (Original work published 1942). Havelka, J., 1968. The nature of the creative process in art: A psychological study. Netherlands: Martinus Nijhoff. Holland, N., 1975. Five readers reading. New Haven: Yale University Press. Rothenberg, A., 1990. Creativity and madness: New findings and old stereotypes. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. Richards, I. A., 1955. Principles of literary criticism. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd. (originally published 1924). From the page to the stage 235

Schmidt, S. J., 1982. Foundations for the empirical study of literature: The components of a basic theory. (Robert de Beaugrande, Trans.). Hamburg: Helmut Buske Verlag. Tobin, J., 2004. Creativity and the poetic mind. New York: Peter Lang Publishing, Inc. Wallas, G. (1926) The art of thought. London: J. Cape. Wilkinson, E. M. (ed.), 1957. Aesthetics: Lectures and essays by Edward Bullough. London: Bowes & Bowes. Wilson, R. N., 1986. Experiencing creativity. NJ: Transaction, Inc. Wimsatt, W. K. & Beardsley, M.C., 1998. The intentional fallacy. In: David H. Richter (Ed.), The Critical Tradition: Classic Texts and Contemporary Trends, 748-56. Boston: Bedford, (originally published in 1954)

author’s address: Gerald C. Cupchik University of Toronto at ScarboroughLife Sciences Division 1265 Military TrailScarborough, ON Canada MIC 1A4 Cupchik@utsc. utoronto.ca