Format & Design versus Content

[lotus]

Will Bibles designed for the Instagram generation get millennials into religion?


The Christian startup Alabaster expects to sell nearly $1 million worth of religious books this year.


https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/3/11 ... illennials


Does this approach have significance
also for creating interest in p0etry ?

-

[CalebPerry]

Ordinarily this is a conversation that I'd love to participate in, but Christianity is not my religion. I will say, however, that the manner in which information is presented to the public makes a big difference in the way that it is received. The language of the Bible, however, is archaic and enigmatic, and that's a barrier for a lot of young people, in my view.

I did start reading the article, and I noted that Chung went from being a Buddhist to being a Christian, so he jumped from a sophisticated religion to one which is based primarily on fables. That says a lot about him.

[Charles]

Well Perry, ordinarily I would leave such a comment be but as you said you wanted to discuss religion... *cracks knuckles*

Nah, Honestly I don't know enough about buddhism to discuss really.

Interesting article, and although tangendental to the argument about form and design - made me look up what translation their bibles use. It's the NLT (New Living Translation) - so a fairly up to date modern one, which is my point vis a vie: "The language of the Bible, however, is archaic and enigmatic, and that's a barrier for a lot of young people, in my view." only, I think, if you insist on reading the KJV all the time. The NLT in particular is quite understandable and contemporary.

I think it does have relevance for poetry. My favorite children's books were the poetry collection, and because they were so well illustrated. There is also a terrific illustrated edition of "The Ballad of Reading Gaol" which is a joy to look through.

And while were on poetry collections, while I don't was to turn my nose up at anthologies, because when done well they are great. But there's so much less sense of immersion reading from "the Oxford book of 20th century English Verse" than from reading from actual collections by a specific author...

[CalebPerry]

I posted my comment above basically because I felt bad that Lotus had started a topic and no one had joined in. I started reading the article she referenced, but didn't finish it. Stories about young people turning to Christianity do not please me, since I feel that Christianity isn't the best religion. My views are "New Age" in nature.

Poetry anthologies can be wonderful, but they often reflect the taste of the editor, and that isn't always my taste. One thing that is obviously happening throughout history is that many, many poets come up with one, two or a few really good poems; but because their overall output is not remarkable, the few good poems they came up with are lost to humanity because they are never anthologized. I wish there were a way to "catch" such exceptional good poems, and to save them from obscurity. But then we would get into an argument about which poems are the good ones and which are not. I've noticed that there are a few authors who get anthologized over and over again, and it is always the same one or two poems that are anthologized. Sometimes, for example, I find myself wondering if Coventry Patmore wrote anything besides "Magna Est Veritas" -- although I see that Wikipedia says he is more famous for a poem called "The Angel in the House". I guess that attention to old poems must fade for the newer poems to have their day.

[lotus]

thankyuuu Perry & Charles

over the years as i have joined in on public open mic readings

and programed readings
some including special poetry radio broadcasts for the blind

i notice how i am one of the few who still read from paper

and many have their scribbles
formatted to read more easily from the screen tablet or semi-smart phone

with the short tension span
of many young people i wonder if
new formatting of older poetry might make it more appealing

.

[CalebPerry]

I think that the way poetry is presented always matters. It doesn't, of course, have the drawbacks of the Bible, which is long, hard to read, and archaic in tone. What concerns me most about poetry is that it used to be more mainstream. A couple hundred years ago, I believe that a majority of people read poetry. Poems would go "viral" and become famous. (Their version of "viral" meant that it would be printed in large quantities and many people would have copies.) That doesn't happen any more. People don't look to poetry to express their feelings. I think that has happened for a few reasons: first, there are more forms of entertainment than there used to be, so poetry has more competition; and second, poetry is more obscure, more the province of the snob and the intellectual. In today's environment, it is considered unsophisticated to write poetry which is easily understood. A possible third reason may be that books may be more expensive, although I believe they were expensive for the average person 200 years ago too.

The multiplication of forms of entertainment is probably the main reason poetry is less popular. Think of all the things they didn't have 200 years ago: movies, radio, television, stereos, computers, smart phones. People did have the theater, of course. But as for entertainment in the home, books and live music were pretty much it. Back then, poetry -- being clearly written as it usually was -- was one of the easiest to digest forms of entertainment. Now it is much more difficult. With so many forms of entertainment available today, only those people who specifically love words will gravitate to it.

[lotus]

dear Perry

you inspired this thought
considering 200 years ago
what percentage of the world population
could read
and how does that compare to the present day

of course back then you didn’t have to read to appreciate theater,,, yet who could afford a ticket to go to a performance

and similarly who doesn’t have a tv these days

thankyuuu for entertaining this conversation

silent lotus

[CalebPerry]

You make valid points, Lotus.

At some point in the last 200 years, literacy became the norm in the U.S., but I couldn't say when that happened -- somewhere between the late 1800's and the early 1900's -- it all depends on when school became mandatory. I do know that various poems have gone "viral" in the last couple hundred years, although perhaps some people just had those poems read to them. As for TV, most people in the U.S. have TV's. In fact, it is much to the annoyance of Republicans that government benefits are given to people who can afford appliances. The Republicans want the poor to be totally destitute before they get any help.

[Charles]

Haha,

Just to say I've been seeing adverts for Alabaster all over my facebook and instagram since I came across this thread. They run an engaging advertising campaigns too!

And to be honest with you, I'm even tempted to completely prove your point lotus - by actually buying the gospels in this format.

Flicking through their preview it makes me realise how difficult the layout of my bible is. It's a Knox translation from the 50's, everything is in columns, lots of footnotes, it's not the most appealing book to read. Maybe I would read it more if I had the gospels in Alabaster's edition...