»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #2
»
You got to have heart
| Critical Analysis #2 |
|
You got to have heart |
|
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
The engineers set the robots up on the new production line. The owners were extremely happy they only saw the dollar sign. The hourly workers plodded on with their jobs in jeopardy. Some would get the final check and say goodbye on Friday Gadgets Inc. Is owned by a group called the 40 thieves. They all get a monthly check and never roll the sleeves. The workers got all the gadgets and put them in a cart. None passed the inspection, the robots, they had a heart. |
||
| © Copyright 2008 My brother John. - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
Good poem, Chops. There were The engineers, robots, owners, The hourly workers, 40 thieves in your poem. Are the robots hourly workers? |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
The engineers,” They work for a contractor out of New York. “ Robot owners “ Gadget Inc. owns the robots. “ Hourly workers “ you know like Tom, Dick and Harry. “40 thieves “ are the owners of Gadget Inc. “ Are the robots hourly workers? “ they get tweaked a little, but never get paid.. |
||
|
poddarku Senior Member
since 2008-01-15
Posts 589india |
your rhym is catching as usual but the ending! The workers got all the gadgets and put them in a cart. None passed the inspection, the robots, they had a heart. - that is great, i amazed at your power to tell a story that easy...and witha poetical twist. clever talks delay friendship! |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Chops: I hope I'm not misreading this. One of the things I like so much about your poems is how you often give the reader something unexpected. As I read this, the plant owners purchased robots to replace at least some of the human workers on an assembly line. This would, at least in theory, allow the executives to cash out on bigger profits. The last four lines are a little harder to follow than the others, but I read this as though the robots failed to perform as expected, and the gadgets they built failed to pass quality control. This, the speaker suggests, is in some way a deliberate act of the machines. That they had a heart (in contrast to the heartlessness of management). This is a very good offering. Thanks for posting ... I enjoyed this very much. Jim |
||
|
RCat Member
since 2008-02-16
Posts 70 |
This was a fun read. A few possibilities I saw… The engineers set the robots (delete “the”) up on the new production line. (delete “up”) The owners were extremely happy (“extremely” could be “money” etc.) they only saw the dollar sign. (could be; “seeing only dollar signs”) The hourly workers plodded on (“plodded” could be improved) with their jobs in jeopardy. (delete “with” and add modifier before “jeopardy”) Some would get the final check (get the pink slip?) and say goodbye on Friday (“farewell” vs “goodbye”) Gadgets Inc. Is owned (Is?) (“owned” could be “bankrolled” etc.) by a group called the 40 thieves. (by a firm called Mart and Thieve) They all get a monthly check (delete “all” and add “fat” before “monthly”) and never roll the sleeves. (“the” should be “their”) The workers got all the gadgets and put them in a cart. (replace “put” with “packed”) None passed the inspection, (delete “the”) the robots, they had a heart. (delete the comma and “they”) Thanks again, this was a smooth easy read and fun! |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
Poddarku, thank you. Sometime I amaze myself. Thank you Jim. You got it just right, the whole enchilada. RCat, thanks for the great critique it shows the different between someone coming and someone going , I’m the one going. Btw RCat, my brother says when he sees your name he wants a RC cola and a Moon pie. ( If you don’t get it , don’t worry about it ) |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
"Thank you Jim. You got it just right, the whole enchilada." I'm glad I did. That is what I liked most about the poem. I suspect that you'd agree with me that, after reading so much, being surprised by what you read happens less and less often. You're ending surprised me ... I thank you for that. Jim |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
Rcat, after I wrote the poem I checked the syllable count and all lines had six syllables. This is the first time I have done that . This was a fun read. A few possibilities I saw… The engineers set the robots (delete “the”) ok up on the new production line. (delete “up”) would mess up my syllable count The owners were extremely happy (“extremely” could be “money” etc.) my count they only saw the dollar sign. (could be; “seeing only dollar signs”) my count The hourly workers plodded on (“plodded” could be improved) I guess with their jobs in jeopardy. (delete “with” and add modifier before “jeopardy”) ??? Some would get the final check (get the pink slip?) I like check and say goodbye on Friday (“farewell” vs “goodbye”) ok Gadgets Inc. Is owned (Is?) (“owned” could be “bankrolled” etc.) my count by a group called the 40 thieves. (by a firm called Mart and Thieve) I like 40 thieves They all get a monthly check (delete “all” and add “fat” before “monthly”) ok and never roll the sleeves. (“the” should be “their”) my count The workers got all the gadgets and put them in a cart. (replace “put” with “packed”) ok None passed the inspection, (delete “the”) ok the robots, they had a heart. (delete the comma and “they”) my count Btw, 40 thieves is what we call the U S custom's , so that is an old favorite . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Rcat, after I wrote the poem I checked the syllable count and all lines had six syllables. Chopsticks, I'm afraid we don't count the same  The engineers set the robots.................8 up on the new production line................8 The owners were extremely happy.........9 they only saw the dollar sign.................8 The hourly workers plodded on..............8 with their jobs in jeopardy.....................7 Some would get the final check............7 and say goodbye on Friday..................7 Gadgets Inc. Is owned.........................5 by a group called the 40 thieves...........8 They all get a monthly check...............7 and never roll the sleeves....................6 The workers got all the gadgets...........8 and put them in a cart........................6 None passed the inspection,..............6 the robots, they had a heart...............6 Not a lot of six-syllable lines there that I can see. I love the thought behind the poem, as I do with all the wonderful ideas you come up with for poems. This one needs a LOT of work, however, to make it worthy of your idea. First, I would get rid of awkward words that damage the flow without adding anything themselves. In the first stanza this would be 'engineers' and 'extremely', both deadly words with regards to meter. After doing that, determine which syllable count works best for the stanza. Engineers don't need to set the robots up. Management could do it, foremen could do it, etc, etc, etc, "Foremen' works best with the iambic, in my opinion. 'Up', beginning the second stanza, needs to go. The robots don't have to be set up, they can also be set (placed). That means we have two lines with 7 syllables each. Let's continue that. We will replace extremely in the third line and 'they' in the fourth, making both 7 syllables. So what do we have? The foremen set the robots On the new production line. The owners, faces smiling, Only saw the dollar sign. Second stanza....'plodded on' adds an unnecessary syllable and does nothing for the poem. There is no way you can rhyme "jeopardy" and "Friday"  So we need to correct those two things and maintain the 7 syllable flow. 'plodded on ' is easy enough to replace. Either 'toiled' or 'labored' would work well and produce 7 syllables. Either 'jeopardy' or 'friday' needs to be changed. I would change both since 'friday' isnot an easy word to rhyme with the accent on the first syllable..I'll come up with something that will incorporate the same idea. So what do we have now?The hourly workers labored With their futures in harm's way. On Friday some would line up To receive their final pay. Third stanza.....first line is a couple of syllables short and the second line is long. Let's balance them a little. Gadgets Inc. is owned by those We call the 40 thieves. They all get a monthly check And never roll the sleeves. Final stanza....meter needs to be cleaned up a bit. The workers got the gadgets And they put them in a cart. Not one passed inspection. Why?? The robots had a heart! In the third line I could have used 'cause' or 'for' but I felt that WHY? made the delivery of the final line much more powerful. In conclusion... The foremen set the robots On the new production line. The owners, faces smiling, Only saw the dollar sign. The hourly workers labored With their futures in harm's way. On Friday some would line up To receive their final pay. Gadgets Inc. is owned by those We call the 40 thieves. They all get a monthly check And never roll the sleeves. The workers got the gadgets And they put them in a cart. Not one passed inspection. Why?? The robots had a heart! Hope there is something here that is helpful to ya...peace!  |
||
|
TomMark Member Elite
since 2007-07-27
Posts 2133LA,CA |
I am so sorry that you got caught by Sir Balladeer, Chops Sir balladeer's version is good though. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
“ I am so sorry that you got caught by Sir Balladeer, Chops “ Tom, your quote is priceless. Yes Balladeer’s version is much better than mine and I am going to study his critique in depth. Thank you sir, I’m quite sure you are a hundred percent right.. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Glad to help, chopsticks. On further review, change the third line of the first stanza, "The owners, faces smiling" to "The owners' smiling faces". It's smoother that way. |
||
|
RCat Member
since 2008-02-16
Posts 70 |
I agree, the revision is a much improved read. Most lines are 7 syllable but some are 6 --- I’m assuming this is not an issue? However, there’s a modulation between past tense and present tense that could be resolved one way or the other. Again, not sure this is an issue, but consistency could add to continuity. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
You may be looking for the sort of stanza that hymns and ballads are traditionally written in, Mr. Sticks. The poem as you wrote it tends to clump roughly around that the way you originally wrote it. Balladeer makes his usual insightful suggestions and points out useful possible improvements. all of which are workable. Almost everybody knows the first stanza of Amazing Grace, though, which is one of the best known hymn/ballad stanza type poems around, and serves as a great template if you're trying to get the numbers right. a MAZ / ing GRACE / how SWEET / the SOUND four feet that SAVED / a WRETCH / like ME three feet i ONCE / was LOST / but NOW / am FOUND four feet was BLIND / but NOW / i SEE. three feet The same form is used in Rhyme of The Ancient Mariner. Also in pretty much every Emily Dickinson poem. As for me, I think you're better at them that I'm likely ever to be. Nevertheless, I thought I'd take a shot. I'm as foolish as anybody else, I guess. The engineers installed robots On the new production line; The owners were delerious With the smell of dollar signs. And every hour the workers worked That much closer came Friday; That much closer came the pink slip And the open highway. Gadgets, Inc. is owned by a group Nicknamed The 40 Thieves Who steal the product of other men’s toil Yet never roll back their sleeves. When the workers gathered the widgets In the assembly cart, Not one made it through inspection. At least robots had a heart. At least I'm trying to illustrate the ballad meter, though I'm substituting a fair number of three syllable for two syllable feet. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
" There’s a modulation between tense “ Thanks Rcat, I see it now Third line first stanza: The (were)should be (are) Thanks Bob, that is real interesting about Amazing Grace. John Newton was the captain of a slave ship. I have to believe he just lucked up on his meter. I have been trying to remember the term “ Widgets ” for three days now . Had I remembered it I would have used it in place of Gadgets. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Bob, I'm afraid the syllablecount is a little too erratic. Certain variances can be permitted as long as the meter is not damaged but, although you started off on the right foot (pun intended), the last half of the poem went off on a world of it's own, I'm afraid. The engineers installed robots..............8 On the new production line...................7; The owners were delerious...................8 With the smell of dollar signs...............7 And every hour the workers worked........8 That much closer came Friday;.............7 That much closer came the pink slip.....8 And the open highway..........................6 Gadgets, Inc. is owned by a group.........8 Nicknamed The 40 Thieves....................6 Who steal the product of other men s toil...10 Yet never roll back their sleeves.............7 When the workers gathered the widgets...9 In the assembly cart,..............................6 Not one made it through inspection..........8 At least robots had a heart.....................7 Alas, I'm afraid your feet are all over the place, which they must be for such a variance of syllables. I read them like this....... -/-/-//- --/-/-/ -/-/-/-/ --/-/-/ -/-/-/-/ /-/--/- /-/---/- /-/-/- /-/-/--/ -/-/-/ -/-/--/--/- -/--/-/ --/-/--/- -/-/-/ -/--/-/- -//-/-/ At least you took a shot and there is something admirable in the effort |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Hey Chops. Been playing around with this one (I still like it). What about ... The engineers assembled robots upon the new production line. The owners watched with avarice, their eyes lit up with dollar signs. The Widgets Corp. is run and owned by a coterie of 40 thieves. They always take their monthly draws but they never roll up their sleeves. The rank and file plodded on, working long hours for little pay. Yet some would get their final check and be unemployed by Friday. [add transition] The foreman looked at all the widgets, then blurted loudly with a start, “No widgets passed the safety check: At least the robots have a heart!” I know the meter is flawed in parts, and I might have overstated the owners' greed. I switched the order of S2 and S3, but now think a new "S4" is required to form a bridge to the final stanza. At any rate, I hope some of this is helpful. Jim |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
Thanks Jim, I’ll use what I can. I did learn two new words “ Avarice “ and “ coterie “. And was reminded of my father , when he wanted to play chess he would say get out the rank and file, I never ask him why he said that. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, I don’t like my last two stanzas either, and would revise them now. As you know I’m always revising my things, but this isn’t my poem, really, and to continue working with it doesn’t seem helpful to Mr. Sticks or me. The point I was reaching for was that the poem might work better in a ballad stanza. If chopsticks agrees he can do that work on his own; if not, refining my efforts on a poem that isn’t my sort of theme simply takes me away from my own efforts. From your comments, I wasn’t clear whether you agreed with my suggestion that Chopsticks might find the ballad stanza useful or not, though you did manage to make clear you thought my attempt at ballad stanza was poorly carried out. I thought it was a pretty good first draft, myself, enough to illustrate what I was talking about. We have a difference in the scansion here. Metrical scansion of a line is not the same as putting together the accents of the words from the dictionary, as you know. You have my line from stanza two scanned as THAT much CLOSer came the PINK slip (/-/---/-). Three stresses. I think you do this because you haven’t indicated for us or probably for yourself where the feet and the caesura lie. When I do so, the line scans differently: / — / — / — / — That much / clos er // came the / pink slip or four stresses in a regular trochaic tetrameter line. Strong medial caesura. You have also scanned lines one and three in my fourth stanza as having three feet when they have four. When the WORKers GATHered the WIGgets (--/-/--/-). My scansion tries to take account of the actual feet in the line and the way the line divides up, and tries to locate the medial caesura, which shows the overall balance of the line, and how it breaks. / — / — / — — / — When the / work ers // gath ered the / wid gets Four accents, four feet of which three are trochees. Strong medial caesura. You scan the third line of my fourth stanza in this fashion: Not ONE made it THROUGH inSPECtion (-/--/-/-) with three stresses. I’m not sure how you arrived at this. My scansion of my line / — / — / — / — Not one / made it // through in/ spec tion Or another line of trochaic tetrameter, very boring and a common variation on the iambic tetrameter. Strong medial caesura once again to anchor the line on the middle. Had I more time, I would probably be working on changing this. You scan the last line of the poem as having four stresses At LEAST RObots HAD a HEART (-//-/-/). My scansion differs. I have difficulty, here, in placing a medial caesura. I believe the caesurae are two secondary weaker ones. I confess confusion on the issue. — — / — / — / At least ro // bots had // a heart . The quality of my work in the poem is not good, and I won’t claim it to be. I will and do disagree with your analysis of my metrics. I have all respect for your competence as a writer of formal verse, but I do feel competent in this matter. I only wish I were asserting my competence on verse that was material for which I had requested feedback. BobK. |
||
|
chopsticks Senior Member
since 2007-10-02
Posts 888The US, |
Bob, feel free to revise my poem all you want too, I may learn something. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I wasn t clear whether you agreed with my suggestion that Chopsticks might find the ballad stanza useful or not, though you did manage to make clear you thought my attempt at ballad stanza was poorly carried out. I thought it was a pretty good first draft, myself, enough to illustrate what I was talking about. Bob, you appear to seem a little miffed that I went over your revision of the poem. I assure you there was no attempt to offend whatsoever. I simply stated the results of what was there with no personal feelings involved. We have a difference in the scansion here. Metrical scansion of a line is not the same as putting together the accents of the words from the dictionary, as you know. Yes, Bob, I'm aware of that and we are entitled to have differences. I will stand by mine. I will and do disagree with your analysis of my metrics. I have all respect for your competence as a writer of formal verse, but I do feel competent in this matter. I only wish I were asserting my competence on verse that was material for which I had requested feedback. It's your right to disagree if you like,concerning metrics and scancion. It is, however, hard to disagree over syllable counts. Ballads do not work well when every line of the stanza has a different count. Ballads rely on the sing-song effect of similar cpunts to maintain their rythm. It is very difficult to maintain the flow that a ballad requires without it. I understand that you did not specifically request feedback but you posted it for public consuption....in public. Everyone in the threads, including you, uses comments from others in the thread as a reference to their own view of such comments. Perhaps, in the future, you may state that you do not wish comments concerning your responses and I will be sure to honor that. Would Chopsticks find the ballad stanza a good method for his poem? Definitely. I simply felt your example of the ballad stanza fell short of being a good example and I gave my reasons with no rancor, insults or personal feelings involved. I'm simply try to help chopsticks find the proper path, as i'm sure you are, also. If this offended you, then you have my apology. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Not ONE made it THROUGH inSPECtion (-/--/-/-) with three stresses. I m not sure how you arrived at this. I WILL answer this one since you seem to be confused at my interpretation of this line. What is the most important word in that line? What is the word that gives the biggest impact to the reader? Answer...ONE. Not ONE passed inspection. That is the point of the line. That word must have the accent. The way you read it suggests that NOT carries the weight. Can't happen. If I ask you how much money you have and you reply., "Not one dollar", where is the strength? Are you saying NOT one DOLlar or are you going to say not ONE dollar? The tough part of thyming poetry when referring to feet and accents is for the author to know how the reader is going to read it, not the poet. The professional poet has ways to MAKE the reader read it the way it is intended to be read. You cannot read Amazing Grace, for example, any way other than the way it is supposed to be read. Chopsticks wants the reader to know that not even one part made it through the inspection....ONE has to be the foot. If you follow that line of thought through some of the other examples you disagree with, you may better understand what I meant. Peace.... |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, You still have the three stresses. Even if you want to apply stress to the word "one" (not to my ear, but yours is different here), you still have the rest of the line to deal with. / — / — / — / — Not one / made it // through in/ spec tion If I understand the point you were making in your last post, you're confusing the prose reading of the line, which is indeed as you say it is, and the formal scansion of the line. I return to one of my all time favorite lines ever, from King Lear, which shows how widely the two can diverge. Lear is carrying Cordelia's body in his arms and is screaming or perhaps simply speaking this into the storm. "Howl! Howl! Howl! Howl! O Ye are men of stones" The actual spoken accents in all of the performances I have seen, and I've seen a few, fall on the four Howls, and then the MEN and finally the STONES. If one were to scan that the way it were spoken, as you suggest, there would be at least six stresses and perhaps seven, if you include the YE, which certainly might be stressed, don't you think? While Shakespeare did do experimentation, this line is probably, however, iambic pentameter because it would have helped the actors to memorize it, and that was one of the big purposes of the metrics at that point in the theater. There was a lot of memory work to be done fast, and the playwright had to help the best way he could by writing as regularly as he could, no screwing around. When the playwright was part of the company, he had to do the memory work too. Most likely, for those reasons,Shakespeare meant it to scan like this: — / — / — / — / — / "Howl! Howl! / Howl! Howl! // O Ye are men / of stones" You can't scan Shakespeare's line by your method, and you can't scan the other resplendently inferior line I was using. You can only indicate rhetorical emphasis, which you did well. You also seemed to mark for rhetorical emphasis and prose meaning, which is probably why you neglected to feel the need to scan for feet and caesuras, which mark out how the stresses are distributed and grouped in the reading of the line. This, I believe accounts for the difference in our readings here. The rhetorical reading is always played off against the deeper metrical foundation, which accounts for much of the tension in the formal line, and which is why such lines as the line from Shakespeare can provide such unusual pleasure, the play of form and content and rhetoric is musical in its intensity. Peace also, but I believe we are talking about two different things here, not one, and the clarification I'm trying to make may be helpful. Yours truly, BobK. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Very interesting, Bob. I am enjoying this exchange of thoughts and ideas. Poetry is like many other things. The smoother it is to read, the more work went into making it that way. As far as the Shakespeare example is concerned, I would have read it as Howl! Howl! Howl! Howl! Oh, ye are men of stones.....perfect iambic after the four perceeding interjections.However, much depends on how the line was set up by preceeding lines and which path the reader's mind is trodding on. In prose, it's easy to view MEN and STONES as the two stressed words. (disregarding the howls, of course). If I see you on the street and compliment you by saying you are a man of courage, I will say "you are a MAN of COUrage", not "you ARE a MAN of COUrage". It is appropriate the Shakespearian actors treated that line the same way. It's prose. There will always be these differences, even in structured work and even from the greatest writers in history. If I were performing a play of the Raven (assuming one existed), how would I deliver the second line, the one following "Once upon a midnight dreary" ? Would I recite it as.. "AS i PONdered, WEAK and WEAry"....perfect iambic, in keeping with the rythm of the predeeding line, or would I say it as "as i PONdered,WEAK and WEARY"? Is there a right way or a wrong way here? Not really. The rhetorical emphasis rules, which is normally the case. How the author sets it up and how the author guides the eyes and mind of the reader is the key. As far as " not one made it through...", it appears chopsticks was smarter than both of us. He used "none", which avoided that confusion altogether |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
As far as scansion goes my reading is the same as Mike’s but I have to admit that I normally avoid scansion like the plague so you shouldn’t read too much into that. Scansion, as far as I’m concerned, is a notational description after the fact and open to so much interpretation as to render arguments one way or the other a moot point. I mostly rely on my ear and in this case I hear what Deer hears. |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear Balladeer, There are a few points I'm trying to get at here that I'm probably not articulating well. I don't know whether you go along with them or not or find them useful or not. You decide your own practice. Nobody but you can or should push your pen; and you really do a good job of it anyway, so what the heck. About the line from Lear, I chose it for an example for discussion because it illustrates a place where you have difficulty in your normal way of scanning lines. Your normal way, if I understand you correctly, is: 1) to look for the places where the stresses fall in normal conversation; 2) to mark them down and not make note of places where they separate into feet or where the line breaks for the major caesura. Or, in this case, quote: After your usual custom, I'd indicate the line as, ////—/—/—/ , but in this case I'd be giving less credit than you'd deserve. If I look closely at your description of how you read the line, I see an indication that you may be hinting at the caesura. I welcome this. The hint is your use of the word "after" and the fact that you describe the two parts of the line separately, as they well deserve to be. Your description of this line goes beyond your usual practice and in addition to hinting at the caesura, also identifies the last three feet of the line as iambic. The rhetorical stresses of the first fours syllables and the weight they carry in terms of formal scansion can be said to differ, however. Rhetorically, they are as written above, as four strong stresses. Formally, we can probably assume that Shakespeare did not want them to be scanned that way. The writer was there to give his feedback to the actors if they needed it for any correction. He was likely right there on the stage, quite literally playing the fool just a few scenes before. Mostly likely his intention was to help everybody keep the rhythm going and keep their memories functioning at top speed. These folks were presenting several plays a week. Remember the conditions. Howl! Howl! Howl! Howl! was probably intended to be iambic as well, and the line was probably intended to be regular. Rhetorical reading goes direction A; formal scansion goes direction B. What look like strong equal stresses get changed for the formal scansion into two successive feet of strong and stronger stresses that are read as iambic. Iambic, like all the other classic feet, wasn't even supposed to be originally a measure of stress at all, but of duration of vowels. Rhetorical readings and formal scansion are different. There is tension between them. The formal scansion is the skeleton against which the muscles of the rhetoric are stretched. If we pretend the muscles are the bones we end up with something that feels like a hallmark card store run riot. I enjoy Poe as well, but the lines you quoted are not iambic tetrameter, they are trochaic, which accounts for the unusual sound they have, being half a beat off expectation. Your ear knows it. Look at the words you accented, beginning with the first in each line /—; and not —/. Good back and forth. My concern isn't whether you agree with me here, though lord knows, that's always a treat, but whether I'm being clear enough to be understood. I don't want to be confusing or sound muddled. Being wrong happens all the time, being unclear I hope I can control. Best to you, Mike. BobK. Dear Grinch, If you view scansion as something to invoke after the fact, it's going to give you extra heaping portions of headache. Myself, I see no problem with this as a free verse strategy, and use it myself that way; but if you're trying to produce something specific, like blank verse of a specific type, and you want to use the advantages that blank verse offers, such as a reliable set of expectations to play variations with, as Milton did so beautifully in Paradise Lost, then you've given away your home field advantage. Yes, it's something to do, but I'm uncertain that it actually does anything for the poem or the reader and, from your account, it basically mystifies the writer. Clearly, when you describe this sort of metrical practice, there really isn't much point to it. Why not stop? You might try either free verse, which has its own headaches, or writing metrical verse where you're trying to use the metrics to your advantage. People who can do either well are really impressive. Folks these days don't talk much about Anthony Hecht, be I admire him enormously among the 20th century American greats. Maybe I can find a link to his poem "More Light! More Light!" which blows the top of my head off every time I even think of it. The poem is not only terrific as a poem in itself, but also for the way it makes its metrics work for it and how the diction fits into the overall rock and roll of the poem. It's got an ending that will literally blow your head off, a pun that's only understandable if you read the poem. My best, BobK. http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/more-light-more-light/ |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Bob, I have little time to go into great detail here but I have a few brief thoughts. Your explanations are, I'm sure, to the point and, if there are some I do not grasp well, the shortcoming is mine, I have no doubt. I don't pretend to have any great education the the art of poetry writing...I just write it. I'm familiar with the basics and feel I know meter fairly well and I like to think I know how readers read. That's normally been enough to get me through. As far as The raven being written with trochaic lines, of course it is in places but what is a trochaic line but an iambic line beginning with an accented syllable and ending with a short one? Scansions? I'm afraid I have to agree with Grinch. Aside from them being heaped on meat for flavor, I;ve never really been that interested in them, assuredly a shortcoming of mine but one I;ve been able to live with.I consider a poem to be like a meal in a restaurant. The diners want it to taste good. True, a lot of work goes into making it tasty, tricks of the chefs, ingredients, special methods of preparation...but, to the diner, the taste is what matters. When a poem tastes good to the reader, it is a good poem. what makes it taste good? The message or understanding they get from it, for one thing. The ease with which it can be read, for another. In one of the examples we discussed involving "not ONE" or "NOT one", I find it natural (to my way of thinking), that an average person would read "not ONE.." and also that "not ONE.." would deliver the punch the author would hope the reader would get from the line. Whether or not this interferes with scansions or anything else, the bottom line is that it tasted better like that. An author can't say "Well, this is the way I read it and, if they don't, that's their problem". No, it's not. it's the author's problem because he has not delivered the message in the correct manner, much like the cook who would leave lumps in the mashed potatoes because HE likes them that way. It's late and I'm rushed and rambling, for sure, but I hope you can understand my viewpoint a little. Strong mechanics of poetry writing DO matter but only if they produce a finished product palatable to the reader. If not, the mechanics didn't matter at all. I read your linked poem and I agree. It is brilliant. See you when I have more time..... |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
A pleasure and a privilege, as always, Mike. We have more in common than not. Best from the wooly and wild LA, and the mammoths in the tar pits on La Brea. Bob. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
