Daniel Songer is a YouTube sensation: screenwriter, poet, comedian, and much more. I have decided to analyze, in depth, at least all 240 of his currently posted videos in 365 days.
Timeline.
June 5th, 2007. This video has reached just over 1200 views. This video is phenomenally disliked at 2-8. There are four comments, none of which are particularly clever or interesting. Four years ago johnnymilkshark said "You're a butterfly." So you get why I'm not diving in too deep here. In the description, there's a dedication: "Dedication to Jesus Christ." We've established Daniel Songer's religiousness, but this is the first time he's put something like this in the description.
Presentation.
This whole entry isn't going to be very long. The most I get to do is in this section right here, since the content has already been examined back in October. Before I get into any of the gesticulations, I feel the need to point out that this is a new low. He's trying to do opera, which is a very niche skill and not easy even for the most talented and practiced. So how bad will it be for someone who just woke up one day, without talent, and decided to sing opera? In presentation, Dan's overwrought gestures fit the cliche concept of opera, and he seems to take to it pretty well, given he only understands things via stereotypes.
His style of singing has changed, for what it's worth. He's still not particularly good at hitting any notes, but he sure knows how to hold his voice at the same place. Actually, he really can't do that either. So he's just elongating the hell out of everything he was saying in the poem version of this song. Because that's opera.
His types of gestures are still very limited. He holds his hand out. Just longer. He holds his hat for a second, and then turns it into holding his hand out agaiin. Just longer. He does the invisible microphone, which is about the least classiest thing one can do when attempting something as classy as opera. He reaches up and then holds his hands out in front of him. Again. Just longer. Around 0:35 he does a really quick motion and throws his hand upwards. I'm really uncertain what kind of effect he's going for here. I can't even begin to count how many damned times he opens and closes his right hand as to feign some sort of feeling. Jesus Christ, man, you're not fooling anyone.
I'm glad there's no lengthy introduction in this one. Also, I'm amused that now we can see a house in the background somewhere in rural America. Still, there's something far greater going on here that is almost unnoticable: his camera is not on a tripod. Did you hear that? His camera is being held by someone. Someone is recording this poor man? I'm certain of it. The camera shakes enough in the way that it's being held by someone, rather than just affected by wind, and there are other moments where it's clear the camera is deliberately following Dan. Who did he get to record him? Does he have family or friends who are willing to go along with this torture? I suppose this would be long in the What exactly is going on section, but I'm willing to forego that since I don't have much to analyze this time around. Who could possibly be recording this? I would feel bad for them if I thought they were forced to do this. I imagine this is someone who considers themselves more of an "encouragment" when really they're what we call a "detriment." You know these people. Someone who thinks it's a good idea to lie to someone when all they're doing is embarrassing themselves.
Content. See the former blog. Dan doesn't know how to create images or establish rhythm. This will be the mantra of this blog.
What exactly is going on?
See the final paragraph. There is likely someone who thinks it's best to lie to this man. Someone so willing to commit to this embarrassing lie they will record him. They are the worst. You. You're more of the problem than Daniel Songer. There are no words for the feelings you incite within me. You shall never know peace. You shall never understand the horrors that you have unleashed. And I regret to consider that you shall never truly feel the regret and sorrow you so deserve to bear.
Timeline.
June 2nd, 2007. The last of the poems, this room, and this outfit. All three were updated on the same day and clearly edited from the same footage. This one comes in at a humble third place in views, too, totaling just over 1500. It has six likes and seven dislikes. It has only three comments. Four years ago johnnymilkshark wrote "You are one of a kind." Three years ago felixcostello wrote, very astutely, "what the FUCK." Indeed, felix, indeed. Finally, only three months ago (showing people are still stumbling across Daniel Songer and the ass-end of the internet), Mr. angrygrunt commented, "u suck." All of these commenters show their own uniqe and accurate insight.
Presentation.
You would think by now, given this is the third video of Dan the Poet Man from the same footage, that I would be out of insight into his presentation. It's true that I've exhausted much, if not all, there is to his overused gesticulations, ridiculous outfit, and bland setting. It's true that I've explored much of the poor editing. But is it true I've said all there is to say? Yes. No! I'm just getting started! This video's gesticulations strike with avengence, bringing in a whole new breed of weird and stroke-like physicalization! You thought there was nothing left to say about Daniel Songer crouching? You. Thought. Wrong.
These things have begun to make me nauseous: putting his hand out up and open, leaving his hand off to the side awkwardly and not fully closed, putting his hands up in a W, fiddling with his pants, jacket, or tie, gesturing to the air with his right hand, and when he thinks yelling his poem somehow provides intensity.
So the crouching only happens twice in this video, which is still two times too many, but in the analysis of Mr. Songer, it's a relief. Notice, in the first crouch around 0:19, where he is clearly pulling up his pant legs so he can get down. He doesn't even do it smoothly. Not that it isn't already awkward and weird, but now it's embarassing. Also, in the second crouch around 0:50, did you notice anything else he just won't stop doing? Fiddling with that damned tie. A huge part of these videos is performance. Dan clearly understands this: over gesticulating, spinning around, wearing that hat, but he doesn't rehearse, film again, or even know the basics. This is the kind of stuff you do in the mirror, alone with the door shut. The stuff you do on film and stage takes time and practice. Not to mention this thing we call effort. It's strikingly obvious, not just in the stupid things he thinks are a good idea, but more emphatically in these little things he's less conscious of, that he is just winging it. It's true that he's written these poems, but even these poems come off as extremely early rough drafts done by an eighth grader. He clearly has never exposed them to sincere, in depth criticism, whether from himself or others, and it's highly unlikely he's ever changed them from their first incarnation. And this bleeds more heavily in these three videos, all clearly edited from one straight shot of footage, that he takes the same approach in his acting. This is not okay.
The only thing I noticed that's particularly new is a circular motion Dan makes with his hand. It happens around 0:43 when he says, "I came to Atlanta" and at 1:04 when he says, "I traveled all over the world." So whenever you're trying to tell someone of your travels, and you want to express that physically (if, say, English is their second language or they're hard of hearing), the best way to do it is to lift your right hand up and spin it around in a circle. Either do it at the wrist like he does the first time, with his index finger out, so you basically look like gay dancer, or torque at the elbow with your hand completely open, so it looks like you're wafting some horrible smell out of your ear. Seriously, what made him think that these motions in any way capture or emphasize what he's saying? I can't find any reasonable justification for this that isn't stretching thin. So let's stretch! Spinning your hand around captures "around" really well! Normally you would do that in front of you, not up and to the right, and usually with both hands, and even that is still kind of weird, but whatever. The finger in the first one was somehow pointing to an invisible globe with Atlanta on it. That's why he implements the index finger the first time and not the second.
One final thing about Dan's presentation, given that this is the last of his poetry videos: I don't think I can properly emphasize just exactly how bad his presentation is. The best way for me to try and explain it is to describe an alternative. Imagine Daniel Songer was just a bit more flexible, energetic, expressive, or eccentric. More eccentric? More eccentric in his physicality, less monotonous, dull, and redundant. This is why he crosses that threshold from comically bad to painfully bad. What if he ran in place, put his hand up to shield his eyes from a pretend sun and scanned that room? What if he stopped, pointed at the camera, as if he had found the love of his life? You know, as if he was the host of Blues Clues or some other children's show. At least then he would be funny. One of these videos might have even gone viral. Instead, he does the same things over and over again. There is not a single gesticulation in any video that he only does once. This is the depth of the horror that is watching Dan the Poet Man. This is the heart of the awful awful beast.
Content.
My Georgia Peach is absolutely shocking at times. This poem, unlike "I'm a Statue" or "Queen of the Thunder," truly takes me by surprise and even makes me feel uncomfortable. Any religious undertones in the first two, such as "hope and pray," are suddenly full blown Bible belt religious right homophobic preaching. It practically comes out of nowhere in the poem itself, too.
You can be a woman, or you could be a girl.
Open your heart, and you'll find beauty.
Just as you open a shell to find a beautiful pearl.
You can put on your business look, or you can put on your athletic wear.
You can put on your birthday suit,
if you dare.
Today we have police women, muscle-bound women, and women who search for their career.
Out of all the women in this world,
It is the transvestites, I fear.
The first stanza is standard for Daniel Songer Poetry(tm). It's just awkward, shitty rhythm about love and a woman. Originally I just thought he was trying to be funny with the next stanza, but under the surface it is extremely creepy and mysoginistic. Right now he's talking to a woman, or a girl, and she has apparently three looks she could do: business, athletic, or naked. Wink wink women (or girls who like pedophiles), you can put on your birthday suit. If you dare. Really Dan, as if you weren't creepy enough? And the next stanza increases this exponentially. It turns into a preachy, almost "did you know?!" poem, where today we live in a world where women can be police officers, have muscles, or even careers! Get back in the kitchen. And the creepy, mysoginistic, backwards frosting on this fucked up sundae comes courtesy of the last line in the third stanza. Out of all kinds of women, he fears tranvestites. All the women...transvestites...women...transvestites... Of course, my first thought is Quagmire from Family Guy, constantly hitting on women at bars, desperate and over compensating, always with an undertone of homosexuality. Holy crap.
I'm not sure what Mr. Songer's goal is in this poem, what exactly his overall message and theme of the poem are. From the first three stanzas, it sounds like he's talking about how every girl, no matter what she wears, on the inside is a beautiful pearl. Even if she is one of them strong career-type women that exist now. Just not transvestites. Ew. The following stanzas are where it seems to turn into something preachy, some sort of religious message for his audience, when originally it seemed to be about "My Georgia Peach." You know, Dan just waiting for love, as always.
God created man and woman in his image and gave us the opportunity to excel
I came to Atlanta to implement my career
And to find a beautiful angel they call the Southern Belle
The first stanza seems to emphasize "man and woman in his image," as if to make sure we know that transvestites are not a part of God's plan. They're gross and weird and ew. Ew. I still find it funny how he says "I came to Atlanta" because it's the gayest thing I've seen him do. I'm also really uncertain about his use of the word "implement." I think it might work, but you have to stretch it or go with its fourth definition. In the final line we seem to get back to what I think is the original purpose of this poem: Dan's ideal lady. That being said, it's still awfully mysoginistic. Isn't the Southern Belle a more old south thing? "Well I do say there, Mr. Songer, your cotton looks mighty fine today. I made you some tea while you sit out here on this porch smokin' your pipe." But it quickly dissolves back into that weird homophobic right wing message as he continues.
There's a lot of women in this world,
and you hope to find a woman that won't be a pretender.
My angel will come to me
And for her my heart I will surrender.
You hope to find a woman that won't be a pretender. You know, it's not really the first thing I'm worried about. Hell, it's not even the 100th thing I'm worried about. It's kind of something that I only worry about if she pulls down her pants and has a penis. When I'm out looking for love, my first thought isn't whether or not she's a transvestite. I'm really starting to wonder about Daniel Songer's past. More importantly, is his real sexual preference, but more on that later. Also, did you notice again that his angel will come to him? He's certainly never going to be the one going to her: passive passive passive. I also can't stand that he feels the need to yell at me, "FOR HER MY HEART I WILL SURRENDER." I get it, geez.
I traveled all over the world to give love and the word of god, to teach
the South is where I want to be
and to live my life as one with god
as well as my Georgia peach
So I don't really see Dan as the master of the sentence structure, and this by no means proves me wrong. That first line is just atrocious. I feel like he could have just given love and the word of god, but for some reason he felt the need to add "to teach" at the end. I also don't entirely understand why he feels that the South is necessary in order to live his "life as one with god." Hang on, let's get really nitpicky for a second. Did you notice the use of the word "as" in this? Don't most people just live their life one with god? Think of it like this: "to live my life one with god." Isn't that enough? What purpose, exactly, does the word "as" serve in this sentence? Yes, I'm seriously asking! All the word "as" does here is weaken the conviction and image Dan the Poet Man is creating. Basically, he isn't going to live his life one with god, he's going to life his life as one with god, like being one with god, kind of similarly to living life one with god. I guess he's not too confident in his abilities to be an extreme Southern religous individual. Only in his fear of transvestites, maybe. And finally, in the last line, we get the title. Whatever.
What exactly is going on?
I don't feel I really need to reiterate his passiveness for love. I've gotten into this a bit, but Daniel Songer reveals an intensely religous side and some serious homophobia. The "women" he fears most are tranvestites, and the logistics of that sentence aside, he feels the need to emphasize this issue when he hopes the woman he finds "won't be a pretender." What does his search for love have to do with transvestites? Can't he let them do their thing and he can do his? Of course not, because "god created man and woman in his image," which--even though includes the ability to give/have sex changes--does not include pretenders. And in addition to his overwhelming fear of "fake women," Dan's "traveled to Atlanta" motion is, without a doubt, really gay. This is not to say he necessarily has to be gay because he does a motion that's really effeminate, but it's clear that there is a side to himself he fears. Oh Mr. Untrained-Not-Actually-A-Psychologist thinks he can claim Daniel Songer is projecting his fear of himself onto transvestites. I'm not claiming to have some sort of reliable knowledge when it comes to the study of Psychology, I'm just calling it like I see it. And it seems to me that Daniel Songer is scared of transvestites and is kind of effeminate. Draw whatever conclusions from that you want.
But it's really the religious overtones that got me in this one. Atlanta, The South, living life "as" one with god, god creating "man and woman in his image," etc. It's fine to believe in god and--in this particular religion--Jesus, and sure, you know, preach it if you want, but it's how it ties in with the rest of his views. Dan notes that he wants to be in The South, because, I assume, that the Bible Belt has better Christians. Whatever-who-cares-deal-with-it. Couple this with his notion "the Southern Belle," and the "informative" stanza about how today we have "police women," hell, even "muscle-bound women!" That's so crazy! Fine, so Dan is from another era, but notice that he still wants a woman from that previous era, the not-really-in-existent-anymore Southern Belle. Certainly in these days we've got them police women, but hell if I still don't want me a good ol' home cookin' honey. Meh, I don't really care. He wants what he wants. Still, it's revealing.
Timeline.
June 2nd, 2007. Likely uploaded right after I'm a Statue (Poem Version). This one tops the previous one with a little over 1900 views. Five likes and sixteen dislikes, this one seems to be more hated. The only vaguely interesting comment is by mvpkent, who writes, "Jack of many trades. Master of NONE!" And it has two thumbs up. I tried to stalk two of the four commenters--because they were encouraging--but results were inconclusive. My guess is they're just assholes.
Presentation.
So, clearly edited from the same footage, Daniel Songer recites his poem "Queen of the Thunder." Part of me wonders how exactly he is editing this footage, because though you might not have noticed the pause symbol in the top right corner at the end of "I'm a Statue," the play symbol at the beginning of this one is obvious. To make the beginning of this video more awkward, it is clearly in mid-sentence. Not to mention he is still fiddling with that goddamn tie.
I'd like to do for you. It's called Queen of the Thunder.
My assumption is he cut off "The next poem," but if that is really the case, then why am I still seeing that damn play symbol? Also, this calls into question not just Dan's editing skills, but more importantly: Is it possible that he was embarrassed by the way he delivered that line? Why else would he have edited it out? Enough speculation. It really is entirely likely that he was working off cheap editing software and just had no clue what he was doing. I think that explanation might be the mantra of this blog.
There's not much to add, obviously, from the "I'm a Statue (Poem Version)," when it comes to the setting or Dan's dress, demeanor, and delivery. He's still a cliché poet from the mind of a child, talking in a "fancy" voice, and still throwing his arms around like he's having a stroke. There are few subtle differences in his gestures and vocals, however. I think he's running out of gestures and "razzle dazzle." And as for his vocals, well, I'll get to that.
I thought he was bad in the last video. It goes to show just exactly how naive I really am. It's only going to get worse, my friends. Do you really want to take this ride all the way to the end? He's still doing that stupid thing with his hand where it's not really closed, but it's with his left hand now, so I know it can't be a particular injury or something. My best guess is that he's just never learned how to actually make a decent fist or he has a birth defect. There's another mantra. He opens his arms up and out six times as if he's making a W. If that's not bad enough, the fourth time he does it he spins around. He fucking spins around?! I really don't have an explanation for this. The opening of the arms is supposed to be a grand gesture and to the sky, which he repeats because he's not creative enough to find other ways to make us feel like The Queen of the Thunder is big and amazing. Even that might be giving him too much credit. But the deeper I explore the spinning, the more confused and frustrated I am. I really don't know what he thinks he's doing. I was going to compare his poetry to a bad play, but that's not really any closer.
You know what else he does even more this time? Crouching. I had a field day making fun of Mr. Songer for crouching down while reciting "I'm a Statue." It was this amazing discovery I made where he was too damned lazy to get down on one knee because he would have to get back up too soon. And now it's like he's already jumped the shark, on his second poem, crouching at three different times. I'm starting to think that crouching isn't lazy because it's not one knee but because he's actually too tired to stand the whole time. No, see, because this is DanPoetMan and that would make too much sense. He actually thinks all of these gesticulations are in some way indicative of the deeper meaning in his poetry. Somehow all these movements--all four of them that he does over and over again--are just the natural physicalization to his material. Perhaps the moments of crouching are meant to be intimate, kind of like I suggested previously. Still, though, he did this three times and they last nearly ten seconds each. How much intimacy do you need? Let's not ask him that.
He yells a lot in this one. I mean, he's really loud. The logic behind this is quite simple, though. It's relieving to me sometimes that I can actually figure out Daniel Songer's rationale. This should not be so comforting. He's loud because this is about thunder. I'm really surprised he's not opening and closing his hands and yelling "crackow!" So instead he just yells things that we're supposed to imagine as being loud. "THE THUNDER ROARED" subtext: Thunder is loud. It roars like my voice. Imagine the loudness of the thunder. The subtext to this subtext: Dan doesn't think very highly of his audience. He doesn't expect us to know or be able to imagine thunder roaring, that it's loud, or that we could apropriately imagine being shocked or frightened at this moment. I wonder if he just assumes we're as smart as he is. I don't think he's deliberately being condecending. I think this is just indicative of a larger problem: He's trying to be a one man play.
Content.
The first thing I did was consider the title. Is "Queen of the Thunder" a reference to something? Could this be a Greek god or some similar allusion? No. Why even spend time asking that? I really wanted to believe that maybe Mr. Songer would consider one of the most essential elements to writing poetry: allusions. Oscar Wilde, among many Victorian poets, loved constantly referencing to Greek gods just to show off. Maybe there was more to it. T.S. Eliot is known for his allusions being so damned innocuous that he gave us footnotes. I'm not expecting Dan to be pretentious or anything, but especially when dealing with something weather-related, there's a ton of poetry and lore out there. If you're going to join that large collection of narrative and poetry, you should make some allusion. Don't even mention Thor? That's one even us shlums know, we've seen him in action blockbusters! Alright fine whateverwhocares.
The rhythm is still all wrong and it pisses me off. Not to mention how some of the images don't even make sense.
THE LIGHTNING FLASHED! Then I heard the thunder roar.
As I gazed up, the love of my life came walking through the door.
First, let me explain to you the rhythm within these two lines. They are structured as a couplet: they accompany each other, ending on the same sound. You know, they rhyme. The rhythm is more than just ending with a word that rhymes. Couplets generally need to be the same amount of syllables. Maybe I'm demanding too much poetic knowledge, but if Daniel is going to self-claim the title of poet, he should have at least peripheral knowledge, if not a substantial foundation. This is foundation. He should know how to create some rhythm, damn it! The lightning and the gazing are parallel, basically serving as a set up for the rest of the line. Here, he knocks it out the park: both are four syllables. The second half of the first line is seven syllables. The second half of the second line is eleven. And this is why, if you're wondering, it sounds so awkward when he says "walking through the door." He says it almost as if it should serve as one syllable. That's because it needs to be in order for the poem to maintain any rhythm. And don't even try and defend this as being a nitpick. Especially for spoken-word poetry, which is clearly how this poetry is designed--need I even point out the amount of rhyme-schemes, let alone that he's fucking dancing--rhythm is the most essential in this style. It's lazy. That's all it is. It's lazy. He picks a word that rhymes and that's enough for it to be poetry. After all, what else is poetry? It's shit that rhymes, duh! No wonder he's so good at it, he knows how to make words rhyme!
This leads me to my next point, which is how much this image makes no sense. Comparing just this poem to the only other one I've analyzed ("I'm a Statue"), it's clear "door" is a popular vocabulary word. It's a short, simple word, an easy image, and really easy to rhyme with. You know how you thought of writing poems when you were a kid? You would write a line, then you would sit there and start trying to come up with words that rhymed the last word of that line. "Or, door, more, tore, lore, sore, roar, whore, nor, store, poor, pour, pore, adore, etc." Given Dan the Poet Man's lazy vocabulary, you would think he'd be able to use those simple words to create a sensible image. That's the other major thing about poetry: creating images, communicating with images. So imagine seeing lightning flash, hearing the thunder roar. Simple enough. Now you gaze up. Alright, gazing upward. Now the love of your life walks through the door. Where in the hell did she come from? Who is she? Where did that door come from? Are we inside? I thought we were outside? If you go step by step, the final image is completely out of left field. All the images up to that point are outdoor images, gazing up is even an image associated with looking at the sky, especially when, you know, we were just talking about thunder and lightning. The image makes no sense. Before I was outside, clouds were dark and foreboding, rain and wind were whipping by my face; I'm startled by a bright flash of lightning, the thunder that follows, and I look up to the sky, squinting to keep the rain out of them. And then suddenly I'm in that stupid boring room Dan is recording himself in, crouching down like he does every thirty seconds, sort of looking up at the front door of his boring house. Complete deflation. The man has lived such a boring life that even his imagination is boring.
So she shows up, The Queen of the Thunder, right? What happens after that? She says, "I'm the Queen of the Thunder." Then Dan looks at her beauty and his heart and mind wonder. I don't know what they wonder, but whatever. She gave him three wishes, apparently. After hoping she might stay, she immediately is gone because the sun "came shining through the window." It's at this point I realize, even in his poem, he never leaves the house. So, again, by the end of the poem, he is just praying for the love of his life. Though he employs this genius move of calling rain, "tears," and the employs great imagery of "the lightning to fly." Then he yells that he can SEE THE RAIN AND THE BLUE SKY, because yelling also means excitement. Yelling means BE SHOCKED, THIS IS SUDDEN, AND I'M EXCITED, but not all at once. It just depends on what he's yelling. Then the weirdest line hits me.
And on our rainbow we can rejoice.
Okay, so rain and blue sky could lead to a rainbow, so I get why he's mentioning it. But why is this where "we" rejoice, specifically Dan and his Queen of the Thunder? Can't he just go outside whenever there's thunder and lightning? Rejoice with her then? And on the rainbow also makes no sense, but I guess suddenly we moved from being in a house to living in a fantasy world where rainbows aren't just reflections. Asking for consistency from Daniel Songer is definitely pushing it, I know.
He then says that she "came to me with love and wishes," even though he never really talked about the wishes. I'm really confused by this wishes thing. I almost want to go on another endless search to try and find some sort of complex allusion. More importantly, if she gives you three wishes, shouldn't we get to the part where you say what your wishes were? Or does she really just leave right after she offers them? In which case, wouldn't you be pissed? Whatever, he also does a weird thing when he says "eternity" where he seems to be reaching higher than he's capable.
What Exactly is Going On?
Once again, there is a dark undertone of lonliness. As I noted, though briefly, the poem actually takes place entirely indoors. This could almost be a childhood fantasy, where you're just lying in bed, or if you're an adult now, sitting in some recliner, and then magically a really hot woman shows up. A magical hot woman just shows up, and recall that though it's never said explicitly, Dan was on his knees. I mean, he's "gazing up" at the door, and he does "stand up so that she could see something she might like." So he wasn't standing up before. You could easily turn this into a poem about how he was busy praying like hell for a hot woman to magically materialize, and then BAM she came walking through the door. It definitely has that element.
It's sadder than the lonely childhood fantasy, though, because even in his imagination, Dan can't keep the woman there long enough to grant him his three wishes. Even in his imagination, after standing up hoping she might find him attractive, she pretty much vanishes before conversation. All he can do, yet again, is "hope and pray" for her to come back. He's so damn passive in these poems. He's always pleading his case for someone to love him, come to him, or come back to him. Part of me wants to dig into marital undertones, like he went through some sort of divorce or horrible break up. Both poems thus far reveal lonliness and a heavily passive approach to love, as if he's either uninterested in putting in the effort or that he's willing to for anyone. The thing about this poem is, though, it has an undertone of abandonment. I'm starting to feel trapped in that room Dan's filiming himself in, as if he spends all his free time there.
...Then again, for all we really know, he might be far more well-adjusted than I am.
Timeline.
This video was uploaded on June 2nd, 2007. It has over 1,800 views and seven likes and dislikes. Three comments, none of which are of note. Unless you count "ur gay." No, seriously.
Presentation.
The first and most notable thing is Daniel's outfit. A suit and tie isn't particularly exciting or new, but also notice the hat. I don't know if you've ever been to a poetry reading, "poetry slam," or open mic night, but generally poets have a dress that is semi-professional but also artsy. Dan goes full on business, except he adds the hat. My best explanation is that in his imagination, this is what classy, professional poets look like. Think of how you thought of poetry and poets when you were ten and assumed all poets were boring old white dudes who lived in the forties or something. This is what Daniel Songer is doing in 2007 as middle aged adult.
It's not just the hat, though. Note the setting. He deliberately chose to film in front of the fireplace in what looks like my grandmother's house. There is a bland painting and everything. If the setting and outfit aren't enough to make sure you know he's a poet, he also talks in a deliberately low voice, as if he is on some late night radio show. Hang on, though, are you still not convinced he is a poet? It isn't enough to mention that he has books on Amazon, he needs to bring them with him and show you.
As he recites his poem, this is where the comically bad sets in. I think what happened here is that Dan confused emphasis of voice with emphasis of gesture. When you read a poem, part of it is the cadence, especially in this style of poetry where everything is trying to rhyme. This poem has a rhythm--or should, anyway--and the recitation should try to capture that. He doesn't completely fail here, so I won't pick on him for that, but his physicalization of the poem is just absurd.
What the hell is he doing with his right hand? Did you notice this? He holds his right hand up in a fashion that almost looks closed, but his index finger, pinky, and thumb are out in a way that looks as if he is counting. Maybe he's counting all the things he is, making sure he isn't leaving any out. I think sometimes he is gesturing a hand out to his side or to the camera, but then he forgets what he's doing with it and lets it rest awkwardly where he left it. Like Mr. Burns keeps his arms rested limply in front of him.
The best part on this delivery, however, isn't when he readjusts his clothing or leaves his hand floating off to the side. The moment comes when recites the line, "take my hand, and great fortune is what you'll be seeing." At this point he is reaching out to the audience, but to make sure it's truly felt, he crouches down. Take note: He does not get down on one knee. He crouches. The distinction is essential. Dan wants to provide some sincere, dramatic moment by lowering himself when he offers his hand. It resembles the accepted custom of a man asking for a woman's hand in marriage. By lowering himself, the man's question becomes a humble request. It's not only romantic, it emphasizes the woman's power and choice in the situation, as if it would be a great honor if she would spend her life with this lower being. This is what Mr. Songer is trying to accomplish, though I don't think he's doing it consciously. And yet it's very clear this is what's happening here. He's offering his hand, but he's too damn old and out of shape to get on one knee and then get back up in a few seconds. It's not that this is somehow different than the marriage request metaphor, that somehow crouching sends a different message that's equally as deliberate and useful here. It's that the crouching is just the closest he can get to getting down on one knee. And if all this isn't enough, he remains crouched for over ten seconds as he continues to deliver additional lines.
Content.
The problem with Daniel Songer portraying himself as 10-year-old-imagined poet is that his delivery, right from the beginning, undercuts his authority. He might toss the books aside or adjust the hell out of his pants and then his tie, but the dead giveaway really is the first few words after his little introduction.
I'd like to do a few poems for you...out of my book, "I'm a Statue." The first one's titled, "I'm a Statue."
Given a more artful sentence structure, it might not sound so redundant. But he doesn't soften the blow with any qualifying clauses. A good way to handle this smoothly would be, "I'd like to do a few poems out of my book, 'I'm a Statue.' This is from my collection of poems, called 'I'm a Statue,' after this poem." So it might still be as awkward as crab walking at fifty, but at least it shows a level of self-awareness. Instead, he just repeats the phrase "I'm a Statue" as if you've never heard it before. Yeah, you mean, the title of the book you just mentioned in the last sentence?
A good poem communicates through powerful and/or parallel imagery. For example, imagine a poem with three stanzas all creating three different images: a dusty, crooked street sign; an empty house with faded paint, and dried up pen hidden under a box. What do all these images have in common? What conclusions could we draw based on these images being described in the poem? They're all lonely images, there is an implication of neglect or having been forgotten entirely. And through this analysis we can discover a deeper meaning or message within this poem.
Let's examine Dan's images, shall we? Let's just list here, briefly, everything that he is: picture, reflection, window, door, statue, being, reality, and dream. Every stanza begins with two images. Now, maybe I can see deliberately conflicting images, like window and door, statue and being, reality and dream. The problem is that picture and reflection don't fit this mold. They're not really opposites. Now what would Dan the Poet Man be trying to accomplish by describing himself as a contradiction? Is this supposed to be like that Alanis Morrisette song where he's everything, including a bitch, mother, lover, and other boring nouns? There is no creative connection that I can see, at least not intentional. Window and door and statue and being aren't really opposities. I am really just trying too hard.
Is there anything else to really say about the content? I do see a pattern, don't you? My assumption is that each stanza is four lines, and that the first line is always, "I'm a something, I'm a something." The following line is then, "whatever it is that rhymes with something." I want to look at the second half of two stanzas.
The moon is rising. The sun is falling.
I look for love and hope that it will come calling.
So the third line of the first stanza is indicating night. But the following stanza has to do with him looking for love, hoping it will come. I am going to dig in deeper here as a precursor to the next section, because I, again, don't see this as intentional. Two cliché images: moon and sun, rising and falling. Other than days going by and night being on the horizon, I'm not sure what else he's going for other than setting up the rhyme for "calling." Though unintentional, there is something very depressing about looking for love as night is on the rise. Searching for something in the dark is not a very promising endeavor. The fact that he's simply hoping that love "will come calling" is also not too exciting, because he's not actively finding it. I can't help but think this guy is really lonely. Allow me to quickly glance at the final half-stanza before I move on.
Here I stand with open arms
For all eternity.
I don't have many words for this. Sad. Dan is waiting, eternally, for love to come calling, for someone to "pursue" him "and make the quest." Maybe this part was done intentionally, but mostly, I think this is just a part of something else.
What Exactly is Going On?
This whole poem is sad and lonely, even though all it talks about is love. The implication, at every moment, is that Daniel Songer is looking or pleading a case for love, usually in a fashion that involves waiting or getting someone else to come to him. Self-publishing books and uploading himself reciting these poems on YouTube only reinforces this hope that if he just puts himself out there that some special person will come find him. I don't think it's intentional,but I do think it's awfully revealing that the first poem he uploads is called "I'm a Statue." Hell, he named the entire collection of poems after this title. Given that he is a shit ton of things, according to this poem, why isn't it called "I'm a Reality"? I'll tell you why: because that's not the image he most relates to. He relates to the statue because he's cold and lonely as stone, and is hoping someone will walk by, see its beauty and find love. Take a look at just a few of the lines in this poem more closely.
Here I stand full of affection.
If you look into my heart, love will be your addiction.
Take my hand, and great fortune is what you'll be seeing.
Persue me, and make the quest.
I hope and pray for love between you and me.
Here I stand. Notice he's not moving in the direction of love. He is stagnant. The following three cherry-picked lines all involve "you" whether implicit or explicit. All you have to do is look into his heart. If you do that, love will be your addiction. It's about you giving him a chance. He's already willing, he's where he needs to be, that's why he's standing. You just have to make the little leap. Just take his hand, just make the quest, and your life will be the best. Finally, as if this isn't desperate enough, the final line is "hope and pray" for love. He even gesticulates prayer. Not to make too big a dig at the religious notion of prayer, but it is often mistaken for action. Someone can pray long and hard for the sick and homeless, but if they still don't donate money to causes or help a homeless man themselves, they're not a part of the solution. Dan wants love between you and me so badly he is hoping and praying, but he's still just standing as still as a statue.
