»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #2
»
Iambic Pentameter (a question)
| Critical Analysis #2 |
|
Iambic Pentameter (a question) |
|
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738
|
Instead of hijacking someone's thread, I thought I'd ask here. I've always had a problem with iambic pentameter. It always seemed to me that meter could be written perfectly, and still be read right out of a poem, depending on the recitation (even if only in my head). I've been asking for years if anyone knew of a site that had audio examples, and finally I found this one: http://vccslitonline.cc.va.us/sonnet116/metrics.htm What I would like is for any of you guys in the know to take a look (and listen) and check it for accuracy. (Requires RealPlayer though) Thanks in advance, and if anyone has anymore links to share, I'd appreciate it much. (And if this is more appropriate in the Workshop, feel free to move it--just let me know where the heck it is if it disappears from here.  |
||
| © Copyright 2007 serenity blaze - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I suggest we leave this here for the moment -- as an exception. It is a valuable and, I hope, interesting topic pertinent to what we are doing right now. Unless Pete disagrees? |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: If you mean is this particular information accurate? Yes and no. The background information is accurate enough. But the sample given is a very poor choice to teach a student. First of all, it is of a Patrarchan Sonnet (#292), and has lost a little (or a lot, depending on your view) in the translation. Lines 3, 4, 9, 11 and 12 could not be considered completely Iambic, except maybe by some prosodic contortionists. For more perfect examples of Iambic Pentameter you need look no further than the master of the English Sonnet: William Shakespeare. Any bumps you may find in his sonnets are always the result of purposeful modulation. You can't always say the same for the Italian Sonnets. Sid |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
My problem is, I've got to hear it. (When I write, I don't follow rules, but "beats" in my head--not very helpful if I don't know the "time signature" for iambic pentameter.) Maybe this page might be more helpful? http://www.eaglesweb.com/Sub_Pages/shakespeare_sonnets.htm 'cause I dunno--smile, I've heard Shakespeare slaughtered by bad actors before--what I'm looking for is something that is for certain correct iambic pentameter to the ear--then I can drive my kids crazy while I listen to it ad nauseum. The Shakespeare that I enjoy is recited more conversationally, but that doesn't help me much--or am I just making this more difficult than it is? Wouldn't surprise me.   Thanks Sid, Thanks Brad. |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
quote: Maybe just a little more difficult than necessary. This particular link is not bad. I've heard better readings but I've heard worse as well. You may have been looking for the stresses to stand out in every recitation the same way they would when only the single word or foot was spoken--as in an elementary reading of a nursery rhyme. In a good poetic reading, such stress emphasis will be more subtle. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
No disagreement from me Brad. It's a known fact that I am a rhyme and meter junkie. I'm pleased to see the forum looking into it again. Actually Karen, after reading your original post and reviewing the link, I was about to say almost exactly the same thing Sid wrote next. That is an unfortunately poor choice of a sonnet to demonstrate IP. Shakespeare is, of course, the master and one can hardly find a better place to study. Some of his sonnets more obviously match the pattern than others but, again as Sid said, where there are deviations, there was a distinct reason. Your second link is much better although one might differ with the reader's interpretation in some cases. It would definately help to have the written text of the sonnets being read. They can be found here: or possibly better here. |
||
|
guyoverthere Member
since 2007-08-12
Posts 58 |
You've got a good point serenity. It is easier to understand when you hear it. I was reading earlier how in the line "Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow" - the 'mor' and the 'and' were the syllables he intended to stress. He did this because 'tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow' is kind of boring. So by stressing the 'and's he emphasised the tomorrows. It's funny because if you practice saying it: read toMORrow AND toMORrow AND toMORow - it provides for a very dramatic affect. (It's like saying, "Can you believe this, toMORow I have to go to the doctor AND then the dentist, drats!) I found it interesting because it is soooo subtle and had it never been pointed out to me, I'd have never noticed. (in fact I was made to read this in high school and college, and the drama of that line was never made clear.) |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: And, uh, please don't forget here. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Oops, Sorry Ron. I should have known that.  |
||
Stephanos
since 2000-07-31
Posts 3618Statesboro, GA, USA |
....rumblings in the great blue sky. Stephen |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
*laughing* Actually, I also happen to have 'em over there----> in a nice leather bound edition too! So I can lay down, and listen, and I can luxuriate grandly as I study. (gawd) But thank you kind gemtlemen. (and laughing @ Ron, 'cause I do forget where I am alot when I'm here--and don't act like you don't know what I'm talking about either)  too cute, all of you!  Thanks again for the help! |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Karen, ok if I email you through PiP? I have something that might help you that I'd prefer to send by email. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Absolutely, Jen. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
