I have, in recent years, been interested in why I am personally more attracted to the particulars of poetry and painting/drawing as opposed to the particulars of music. I took up the guitar in high school and I still play it, but I never could stick with--what I now see to be--the abstraction of music (I'm not talking about what we call lyrics here but what we might call tune). (I also could never muster up the energy to handle the exactitude needed to really learn how to play "my axe"). Stephen Henderson over at Trees Walking has an insightful quotation by the poet Richard Wilbur on this subject. I'll insert a little of it below.I think I can say why there are more painter-poets, or poets who are would be painters, than there are poets who have to do with music. It strikes me that music is infinitely more abstract then painting or poetry. That you can't make any precise statements as to what music is up to. Poetry simply has to be exact and concrete or it bores to death. And on the whole, I think--despite some successes in abstract painting-that it's the same with painting.

