Response to the Rant and 7+

I think the whole objection to using poetic procedures as a way to create poetry stems from the shared, and very conscious, belief that poetry ought to be tied to sentiment. Especially in contemporary life, new poems are mainly seen by large audiences on greeting cards. The poetry taught in most schools is often times associated with rhyme, meter, and feeling. Teachers ask and ask "how does this make you feel" "what feeling is the poet trying to convey" and to have procedures that tell you how to write poetry, not be structure but by content, seems very odd. I agree that procedural poetry in itself is very artistic and should be considered art, but the lack of emotion often times comes off as a lack of creativity. 

I believe that coming up with these procedures is in itself very creative and fun. My personal disagreement with "anti-art" as art is the overt brashness. I dislike the "this isn't art...deal with it...evaluate it if u want but u can't" type of attitude that seems to come from the voices within the field, because my personal tastes call for order, objectivity, and direct evaluation. I like being able to push for answers, ask why, and to me poetry, as with all writing, ought to be defended. It is not to say that everyone owes an explanation, but something better than, it is art because I dropped some words into a paper bag and picked them out, seems devoid of any explanation.

Though my views are my views, I completely see the contrary. For one, Dada works of art are incredibly surreal, artistic, unique, and bold in their own rights; and all the aforementioned adjectives make for creative works. I agree that art doesn't always have to be "sincere" to be artistic, but I personally feel that an artist should feel tied to their work and some sort of evaluation should be able to be made.

Thinking of a way to do a +7 for now...