»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #2
»
The Golden Rule Is My Ground Rule.
| Critical Analysis #2 |
|
The Golden Rule Is My Ground Rule. |
|
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
There is no substitute for experience . This from an old proverb I take. I always want to be gracious, and give inexperience a break. So if I seem to be to Pollyanna and a little bit to easy to fool. Its only because I’m trying to live by that old golden rule. |
||
| © Copyright 2007 My brother John. - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
You are kind and wonderful, poetic or not.  |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
There IS no SUBstiTUTE for exPER-i-ENCE. This FROM an OLD PROverb i TAKE.('old' can be demoted as an alternate reading) i ALways WANT to BE GRAcious, ('be' can be demoted here as well) and GIVE INexPERiENCE a BREAK. so IF I SEEM to BE too POL-ly-AN-na and a LITtle BIT too EAsy to FOOL. Its ONly beCAUSE I’m TRYing to LIVE by THAT old GOLDen RULE. Other than that, you aren't talking about the golden rule: "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." And that has made all the difference.  |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Were you going for a meter, Chopsticks? Not sure about Brad's scan. It seems he made some modifications ("promotions" or "demotions") that perhaps you did not intend. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Well, I screwed up on the I's and I'm -- all of those should be read as unstressed. But that's pretty much how I read it. How would you read it, Ess? |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Here is the way I scan it:
|
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I think there are many possibilities here. That's not one of them. But I dare ya! Somebody, anybody, give me a call and read it to me like Ess's scan. He's gonna argue 'lesser stress.' But it's still stressful.  |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
I believe when Chops wrote this poem, he was in a mood of self-proud, self-righteous and eloquent. So it should read like THERE is NO substiTUTE for exPERIENce. (Does Australian stress out "there"?) THIS from an OLD proverb I(stress I) take. I(stress I) ALways want to be GRAcious, AND give INexperience A BREAK. SO if I(^) seem to BE to PollYAnna AND a LIttle bit to EASY to FOOL. Its only beCAUSE I’m TRYING to live by THAT OLD GOLDEN RULE. My thought. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"That's not one of them." Nice to see you using such strong arguments to back up your statements  |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Which argument do you want to hear? It is impossible for me to speak English like you've scanned there. It just is. So there! |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Brad, But stress doesn't vary from the general/standard stress unless you apply something special that makes it do so. Until something special is there to begin with and recognized, there isn't any reason the general standard pronunciations shouldn't be applied: for example, that one syllable "Function Words" such as "from" and "to" have no main stress, and that all words with more than one syllable have only one main stress: SUBstitute and exPERience, all the other syllables being unstressed/unmainstressed. The only reason for a difference is if we know something special is being applied, such as a rule of a different dialect or rule of a poetic pattern for which these things may be somewhat modified. Then we may take the difference into account. The only way we may make sense in our scanning of poetry is if we follow a general rule, to which we may understand reasonable variations or exceptions. |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Sir Essorant is absolutely right. I agree! |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
No, TM, he's not. I don't have time to go into this, but this isn't about poetry, it's about how the language is spoken. To put five unstressed syllables in a row is to leave the English language for something else. More later. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
A few quick points: 1. English is a stress/syllable language. 2. Stress is always a relational concept. 3. Scanning is binary in nature. I still don't have time, but I take this a little more personally than most. Presumably, you don't have to listen to English recitation in incessant monotone. I do. And it drives me nuts. |
||
|
oceanvu2 Senior Member
since 2007-02-24
Posts 1066Santa Monica, California, USA |
On the other hand, Ess left the English long ago, or got lost in the English language of long ago. Best, Jim |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
I'd try that scansion thing, but I always start hearing things when I do. (That da/DUH thing? I tried and wrote a mexican hat dance. And no I'm not kidding. And no, nobody got it. )I enjoyed the simplicity of this though. Straight and to the point (unless I missed some subtle underlayer) and I found it refreshing. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Brad I didn't suggest absence for five syllables, but indicated no normal or main stress. That is an important distinction. Secondary stress does not take the role of main stress, unless it is made to maintain a poetic "beat" that is already established in the poem. But even then it is not the same as normal/main stress. That is why it can conveniently be used as normal unstressed syllables in other places. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
The reason everyone seems to be having trouble scanning this, or at least agreeing on its scanning, is simple. Scanning applies to meter and ther simply is no meter involved.  |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
How Dangerous the Liaisons are! My dear Sir Brad, no matter how right you are you can't mean that for each individual poem, Merriam-Webster has to print a new edition to go with it. and [This message has been edited by TomMark (11-29-2007 02:30 PM).] |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: I know, Ess. But that's what it looks like. Why? Because stress is a relational idea. "Rock" --This has no stress. You can scream it to the mountains or to a professional wrestler and it won't have any more or any less stress as long as it remains in isolation. "Rocky" "The Rock" And now you have two syllables. One is going to be stressed more than the other. No way around it. "on a" In isolation, there is a difference in stress between these two words. "on a rock" But the difference, while never absent, is overpowered by 'rock' and because we're stuck with a binary system, you have an anapest. So far, so good. What about? "jumping on a rock" "Jupiter, on a rock" "Jupiter is on a rock." Read it out loud. What do you hear? This isn't linguistic theory, this isn't poetic theory. I want to know what you hear. TM, If every two syllable word in English has a stressed and unstressed syllable, why does that disappear when we move to one syllable words in combination? Pete, Are you saying that you can't scan free verse? |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Sir Brad "If every two syllable word in English has a stressed and unstressed syllable, why does that disappear when we move to one syllable words in combination?" this is beyond my intelligence. "JUMPing ON a ROCK" "JUpiter, on a ROCK" "JUpiter IS on a ROCK." right? |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
"JUMPing ON a ROCK" --that's what I hear. "JUpiter, on a ROCK" --Did the comma trip you? Don't worry about punctuation (that's another debate waiting to happen but not today). Essentially, I'm guessing here, but you're reading the three syllable groupings in isolation. 'JUpiter' 'on a ROCK' I read it, "JUpiter, ON a ROCK" A comma doesn't carry enough 'wait' to change that. "JUpiter IS on a ROCK." --that's what I hear. No theory, just listen to the sound. |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Thank you Sir Brad and you have wonderful day!! Chops shall make a u-tube show on this. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Somebody scan Dangerous Liasons for me?  |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
“ You are kind and wonderful “ Thanks Tom, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “you aren't talking about the golden rule” Brad that first stanza has all of my parameters for the golden rule, 24 K ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “Were you going for meter” Essorant I was just going. I don’t know from meter yet. I hope Balladeer don’t see this. As helpful as you guys try to be, I know it must be disappointing when somebody murders a poem. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “ I enjoyed the simplicity of this though “ Thank you Serenity Blaze, Btw, the poet is pretty simple too. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No meter, no mama, mo papa, no chow-chow Not A Poet, you saw through my weakness and meter is my weakness. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
That is a good example. "Jump on", I believe falls among other special wordings such as hold on, get on, stand up, etc. in which the second word is given stress. I mentioned this exception more than once in other discussions. Therefore "on" (that as a rule is an unstressed function word) is in a special condition, not a normal one. Normally, as a rule, it is not stressed.
Tom is correct here. The word on is unstressed here, as it usually is.
The only way you may get that is by giving an extraordinary emphasis to the normally unstressed "is". For example, if you were replying to someone that said "Jupiter isn't on a rock!" You may reply back the contrary: Jupiter is on a rock! That is another special condition though, not a general one. Normally, as a rule, the word "is" is not stressed. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Serenity That would be: / (x) x xx / Dangerous Liasons I put the x in brackets to indicate the e of dangerous may or may not be omitted in pronunciation: "dangerous" or "dang'rous". |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
I believe that Sir Essorant is right and reasonable again. have a wonderful day, sir! |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Maybe it's my cajun French? But thank you Essorant, but I still hear le a SAU... I'm trying to convey that the word lilts UP. In that British French sorta way that comes from Canada? *wince* seriously, it's how my gramme' said it but thank you and I still don't know what the heck is going on, but I might re-learn how to hear it in my head? *weird* Thanks tho. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Serenity, "le a SAU..." Nothing wrong with that. |
||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Um, if it's "borrowed" into common usage, is it fair game? (You do understand my confusion and I appreciate that.) and sorry for going offtopic chopsticks. sigh. I thought it was a nice little poem. I really did. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Sorry, I changed my comment. At first I thought you were referring to pronouncing the a with a main stress. But then looked back realized you must be referring to the sound instead. "...is it fair game?" What do you mean by "fair game"? As long as it is in common usage it should have a common usage of stress as well in a particular dialect. Unless the dialect for some reason evolves to something very different the word shall generally be pronounced with the same stress by everyone of that dialect. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
"sorry for going offtopic" Not to worry, I've been off topic since it first came out. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
I thought discussing/questioning the meter of a poem was on topic? |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Sir Essorant, I say that you are right. But wait for Sir Brad to say that you are wrong. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
quote: (Emphasis mine.) If by that emphasized "you", you refer to me personally and you mean free verse by the strick definition, then probably yes. Otherwise, I can't speak for the general "you." More commonly though, I suppose free verse could be metric to some extent although a fixed pattern might make it questionable. I think most professed free verse writers would probably be fairly careful to not embed a fixed recognizeable pattern. The few times that I have experimented with free verse, at least some meter has always crept in although I too tried to not let it become a fixed pattern. All right, I rambled there. In any event, I still think it fair to say the the poem in question here is almost purely non-metric. Any pattern of stressed/unstressed syllables is random. Therefore, scanning provides no worthwhile information and is a futile exercise. This is all JMHO, of course. Others may differ. They would be wrong in doin so though.  |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
A night's sleep did me some good. I can look at this and laugh. Ess's original comment berates me (in a nice way) for following the 'rules' and then I go after him for following the 'rules'(in a nice way) (they happen to be different rules but the point is humorous to my awake but uncaffed mind). Now, I'm still a little confused about what Ess means by normal stress, his example scared the hell out of me, yesterday, "That's how you read your poetry when you're on stage?" x x x / x x x x / x x There is no substitute for experience. There IS no SUBstiTUTE for exPER-i-ENCE. --three points of disagreement. I can live with exPERience so two points of disagreement. Or is it disagreement? I cannot read, normally, in a normal situation, the line by itself, the way Ess has shown here. It is my contention that nobody (without it sounding 'strange') can and more importantly that nobody does. --If you accept stress as a relational or relative concept than I really do think you have problems here. --to my ear, you need two more stressed syllables here. The difference between a 'ryhthmic' reading and a regular reading is not that we should diminish stress but determining where those stresses will go. --it's an open game. x x x / / x x / This from an old proverb I take. This FROM an OLD PROverb i TAKE. --One point of disagreement. Same issue. x / x / x x / x I always want to be gracious, i ALways WANT to be GRAcious, --I changed my scan. No points of disagreement. x / x x / x x x / and give inexperience a break. and GIVE INexPERiENCE a BREAK. This is a trickier line. From Ess's view that 'in' should not be stressed -- but it does have a secondary stress according to the dictionary and it makes sense to me for semantic reasons (experience/inexperience should be clearly stated). Yes, I can live with the second part: PERience a BREAK -- a dactyl followed by an iamb. It does happen even in normal speech. I also think a different scanning system (the 4 point system) might clarify what is happening here. But sit down and watch TV for an hour. I don't think it happens very often. x x x / x x x x x / x So if I seem to be to Pollyanna so IF i SEEM to BE too POL-ly-AN-na --This line was the 'put the gloves on' moment for me. --An interesting experiment might be to check our readings using a 4 point stress system. What do you think, Ess? --Since I suspect you're the only one still reading this post. x x / x / x / x / and a little bit to easy to fool. and a LITtle BIT too EAsy to FOOL. --Hey, we agree. x / x x / x / x Its only because I’m trying its ONly beCAUSE i’m TRYing --and we agree again. x / x x / / x / to live by that old golden rule. to LIVE by THAT old GOLDen RULE. --two points of disagreement, but I can read it both ways so it's really not a disagreement. ---------------- |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
quote: Really? Again, this is the Golden Rule: "To do unto others as you would have them do unto you." the poem: "There is no substitute for experience." --Says nothing about the golden rule, it's talking about experience as a form of wisdom. "This from an old proverb I take." --which can't be the golden rule. "I always want to be gracious," --Because you want them to be gracious to you? Because you have discovered this to be the best course of action for getting what you want? Because people as a group tend to get along better under these conditions? "and give inexperience a break." --This is the downside of the golden rule. You are saying that there is no substitute for experience but that those that do not share that experience should be treated differently than those who do. Or do you mean that the experienced should also be given a break? --If everybody is always given a break, how does one become experienced? "So if I seem to be to Pollyanna" --too Pollyannish. I can live with that. I like your sense of humor and enjoy cheerful banter. --I hope you continue (though you're last few post haven't been Pollyannish, I hope it's just being a little disgruntled. We all get that way.) "and a little bit too easy to fool." --We're all easy to fool. I think it goes with the territory. "Its only because I’m trying to live by that old golden rule." Is 'that' here meant to imply there's more than one? If so, if it's my mistake, I gladly wait for the other one and will cheerfully stand corrected. On the other hand, the Golden Rule I'm talking about is probably not the best rule to follow around here. My reasoning is that people are looking for different things and I doubt very much if the person or people you're referring to really want what I want from others. Good luck to you. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
“I always want to be gracious," --Because you want them to be gracious to you? “ Brad , that is the golden rule. Be gracious to others as you would want them to be gracious to you. Brad I think you have the golden rule mixed up with the CA rule “ Do unto others before they do unto you “ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- “--I hope you continue (though you're last few post haven't been Pollyannish, “ Brad, I wonder why. Good luck and good night. |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
But it also means tell people what you really think because you want others to tell what they really think. The rub if you will. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
“ But it also means tell people what you really think because you want others to tell what they really think “ Caveat lector : The first rule of listening to what others think is, can they think ? |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
Some years back, (long before PIP), when I was feeling a bit frustrated, having problems understanding the basics of meter as it applies to scansion, I inquired--via email--of someone whom I already respected as very knowledgeable in Form Poetry, which I was desiring to learn well. He recommended a couple of primers which I found on Amazon.Com: Poetic Meter & Poetic Form by Paul Fussell, and Perrine’s Sound and Sense by Arp & Johnson. Nowadays, you can find these books, used, for about five dollars. At the time I ordered, they weren’t available used and I think I shelled out something like fifty bucks for the two with shipping. It seemed a bit expensive for a couple of paperbacks. Yet, in retrospect, considering the value I place on my time, it was a lot less expensive than wading through the morass of clouded commentary in threads such as this. So far, this has been just one more wasted thread wherein critics come in from various opposing directions, attempting to teach basic meter to someone who obviously has only an elementary grasp of it at this point. The time would have been better invested recommending the above, or similar primers. Many of these arguments go back to basic laziness on the part of people unwilling to do a bit of basic Googling on a format which provides a vast and virtually limitless source of knowledge: To think, all it takes are a few light taps on a keyboard--how cool is that! For all of us older folk, this is an awesome, thrilling source. All you younger kids on the other hand, may not fully appreciate the difference between that, and looking up bits of reference information and quotes in library books, via the Dewey Decimal System. If that’s the case, then your underdeveloped constitutions may never fully digest the actual bits of meat in this and similar threads anyway. At least, not until you actually go out and study it for yourself--rather than relying on someone else to hand you the paper with all the answers. Sid |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
“ So far, this has been just one more wasted thread wherein critics come in from various opposing directions, attempting to teach basic meter to someone who obviously has only an elementary grasp of it at this point “ SO WHAT AND SAYS WHO, With the accent on the SAYS WHO ? |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
With the accent on the SAYS WHO ? Say’s I, of course. What, was my name not on my post? Or do I suddenly not have the right to be as opinionated as you? If you disagree, feel free to explain why. If you need help doing so in complete, cohesive paragraphs, feel free to ask for help--only not from me please. I’ve got children to teach--who actually pay attention. quote: It was a common childhood bluster on the playground. The all too common response was: Oh yeah! Sid |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I disagree, Sid. I wasn't wasting my time. I can't speak for Ess, but sometimes I just like to talk meter. I do not think it is objective (though some points are of course), I think you have to follow your ear, and sometimes things will sound different to different people. You can do the same thing with syllable counts. It's true enough that Chop will either pay attention or not, but I can't change that. The value is in the discussion, not the result. Sometimes. |
||
|
cynicsRus Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591So Cal So Cool! |
Brad, I actually agree with you more often than not, and your critiques and commentary do often make up the "meat" in my above reference. With all due respect though, I’ll disagree on this point. Sometimes it’s discernible early on when a discussion is simply pointless, and there is no value in carrying on conversations with the incurably obstinate. Sid |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Yeah, okay. But since I have a moment, I'll bring something else up. Certain words simply bring with them their own historical baggage -- a memory trigger if you will. Here for example: experience -- I 'hear' Jimi Hendrix. substitute -- I 'hear' the Who. This is by no means the case all the time nor even necessarily with these words all the time. But it's a consideration often overlooked when talking about how a thing sounds. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
I still think you are making a mountain out of a mote, Brad. The distinctions I make are Stress (the main stress) and Unstress (anything lesser than the main stress). I am familiar with some more complex approaches, but none of them in my opinion make as much sense as this simple one. No matter how you treat it the stress of a word such as "to" or "from" or a syllable such as "tute" of substitute is not normal or main stress such as that in a word such as SEEM or a syllable such as SUB in substitute. In respect to the way they act in the word, and how they generally act anywhere in sentences in English. Whenever you use the word substitute the mainstress is always on SUB. I think it causes confusion for many people trying to learn meter when they see a syllable such as "-tute" of substitute treated as if it is a mainstress too. But it can't be a main stress, because there is only one main stress on a word with more than one syllable, and that is always on the same syllable, unless a special force or condition makes it otherwise. Anything that is not stress (main or normal stress), but that is used where stress is expected in a meter and works, is a form getting the same or similar effect but with less stress. I think it is important to make this distinction. To scan "of" in one place as OF (stressed) and of in another place as of (unstressed) doesn't make sense, because the word of as a rule does not have mainstress such as the word DOG, but it may be modified to maintain a beat of a poem, even though it does have less stress. I made this distinction when I scanned my verse in the "Poetry Contest" thread: The red x's indicate where an unstressed syllable is pretending to be a main stress. And the word "turn" is only unstressed because it is not acting by itself, but makes one of those special pairs ("turn back" "set up" "hold on" etc.) that takes the main stress on the second element (in this case "back") |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Ess to recap what you’re saying: A word’s stress is always on the same syllable - unless it isn’t. Or to put it more succinctly: A word’s stress isn’t always on the same syllable. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Grinch I am just saying that the general rule isn't defeated just because there are specific exceptions to the rule. By all means you may force HORror to be horROR, and perhaps there is a dialect out there that pronounces it thus, but that doesn't change the fact that HORror is the general/standard pronounciation of the word. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
I know what you’re saying Ess. The problem is you’re taking one possible understanding or method of scansion and trying to describe all possibilities as a single inflexible and fixed art when the reality is that it’s neither inflexible, fixed or even much of an art. I believe Brad hit the nail on the head when he wrote this: quote: Scansion is dependent on a whole host of things, accent, dialect and context, to name a few, all change the stress patterns of words within a line of poetry, making one overriding rule to guide you through creating a scansion impossible unless you’re prepared to explain all the possible exceptions within that rule. If you really need a rule for scansion I suggest this one: Every scansion supplied should be followed by the disclaimer “At least that’s how I read it”. Don’t believe me? Try scanning this for a tune: You know that it would be untrue, You know that I would be a liar, If I was to say to you Girl, we couldn’t get much higher. Come on, baby, light my fire. Try to set the night on fire. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
After all these critiques on my poem, I still don’t know what to believe . It does remind me of something that happened one upon a time: The owner of a masonry company came down to one of his jobs and told the masonry foreman that the job was about finished and to lay one of the bricklayers off. The foreman told the owner, they are all good bricklayers and I don’t know which to lay off. The owner said, come with me and I will show you which one to lay off. The owner ask the first bricklayer what are you doing, his answer was making $18 dollars an hour.. He ask the second bricklayer what are you doing , his answer was laying bricks. He ask the third bricklayer what are you doing, his answer was I am building a cathedral. The owner told the foreman to lay the third bricklayer off. WE ARE BUILDING A SERVICE STATION. So my dilemma is, I don’t know who is building a cathedral. However, if I had to pick one before curfew rings tonight, it would be Essorant no contest . I did like TomToo’s interpretation . I hope this has been helpful. [This message has been edited by chopsticks (12-02-2007 12:18 PM).] |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Grinch, I will make the distinction of where the "beat" (B) is in contrast to the stresses. There is no question because most of us are familiar with the way it is sung and accompanied with music. But the lines are full of words that normally are not stressed. This is why singing with musical accompaniment more easily gets away with using almost anything as a "beat". Although there is flexibily in poetry too, it is much more limited.
In the last line the stresses and beats correspond perfectly. [This message has been edited by Essorant (12-03-2007 04:34 PM).] |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Thank you Sir Essorant for your mentioning the Beat and comparing it with stress. Now, Chops, we have to sing your poem out. Tom |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
" Now, Chops, we have to sing your poem out." Right Tom , I sitting here trying to soak it up too. |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
The Anthem of CA...Chops' Golden Rules.and the Code. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
Tom, I have an idea . I am going to hook a mike up to my scope. Set a camera up to shoot over my shoulder ,read a poem while the camera is filming the scope screen and see if I can tell by the sine wave where the stress is. Does anybody think it will work , That way we can turn out 30 are 40 good poems a day. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
If that don’t work, we can convert the Gulf Stream up the Hudson and make a tropical paradise out of Harlem. |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Chops, marvelous idea. Show them to us. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
Which one the Gulf Stream or the scope |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
My dear Chops, care not stresses and care less streams. show me all your dramatic dreams. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
The special distinction is that with poetry we usually don't have the "beat" of music in the background or the author's special voice guiding us. The musical "beats" instead are indicated by the pattern of stresses of the words themselves:
The flexibility is, even though stressed syllables establish the meter, once the meter is established and recognized, it is flexible enough sometimes to use an unstressed syllable where the beat is and still maintain the beat. The unstressed syllables that still maintain the beat here are indicated above by the the red x's. A similar thing may be done with a stressed syllable. Once the stressed syllables establish the general "beat", then sometimes a stressed syllable may be used where an unstressed syllable is usually expected, without changing the beat of the poem. Maybe the distinction between "stress" and "beat" was the key to clearing it up for some of you? Does it make more sense seen from this angle? |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Thank you again, Sir Essorant. I do, indeed, in general read poems with the beats in my mind. I do not particularly stress the should-be-stress part. It sounds better to me. I can not read everything as Shakespeare's ups-downs. and I can not tell the distinct difference between lyrics and poems. they are same, or quite similar. Thank you again. Have a wonderful day, Sir! |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
"I do not particularly stress the should-be-stress part. " You probably do for the most part, Tom. We often don't recognize how casually we use stress in the normal place, but we do usually recognize the strangeness of when someone uses it abnormally. memory...memory...memORy...memory Which one sounds strange? |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
colorful rose yellow red white In bud, in bloom, wither and blight shall you tell me love is alike I surely blindfold him tonight This one does not follow a readable stress rule. But because I wrote it so I can read it my own way...it may be not the acceptable "poetic" way. For this, I shall never call Sir Brad to read a poem to him. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Tom, I like that. But it does follow a "rule", that is, the 4x4 pattern: four lines, with four stresses that are beats in every line. The word red in the first line is also stressed, but we may tell that it doesn't carry a beat: / x x / / x / / colorful rose yellow red white B B B B x / x / / x x / In bud, in bloom, wither and blight B B B B / x / x / x x / shall you tell me love is alike B B B B x / x / x x x / I surely blindfold him tonight B B B B Are the beats in the same place when you sing it, Tom? |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Thank you Sir Essorant. Is it wrong way to only stress the beat? no matter if the beat lands on "is" "and" "An", me, or of? I felt comfortable to read beats. truly. However, reading by rules is no doubt beautiful and poetic. That is why I am striving to get there. [This message has been edited by TomMark (12-03-2007 04:53 PM).] |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Tom, "Is it wrong way to only stress the beat?" Generally the only way you may make a beat is by placing stressed syllables in a consistent pattern amidst unstressed syllables. Once you place the syllables such as the HOR of HORror and BIT of BITter or words such as HEART or SOUL, etc.--- stressed parts and stressed words, into a pattern and consistency, then they will become beats of a meter. Can unstressed syllables do the same thing? No, not unless there is something else that is special to tell us they are beats, such as corresponding to a beat established by background music instead. But once you establish a meter with stresses, and they dance as metrical "beats" (as they do in your verse above), putting an unstressed syllable sometimes where a stressed one is expected often won't hurt the meter. Does that make sense? |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Thank you again, Sir Essorant. You are right. and always right when talking about the poem style. You know, I am keep thinking that when children read poems, they make every words loud and clear. I must be doing the same thing when I read some poems. I am learning to sense the sense. Thank you again. and take Sir Brad's poem as an example(how great the Time zone), I hardly found the beat so I still can not read it as a poem though it is trochaic pentameter(as Sir Brad said). David Foster Wallace People, they are smaller than they're used to Being, aren't they? David Foster Wallace Thinks so. Wallace doesn't say it, not in Essays written for Atlantic Monthly, Rolling Stone, Premier, or Harper's ― "Host" is Wildly post-post-something, wear your glasses When perusing that one. No, he doesn't Say it, not exactly. What he says is Nothing. Well, it's not exactly nothing, More like shifting focus, not to answer Something, but to ask about the question. [This message has been edited by TomMark (12-03-2007 07:31 PM).] |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
