All good points, but then one must start to ask the question of what is truly "right" and acceptable in literature. Is it a predetermined set of rules established by a high school grammar book, is it compared by the current standards of what mainstream popular art is, or is it purely phenomenological and what matters is how the person perceives it?
In music, by all accounts and definitions, Jazz harmony is considered "incorrect" by definition of Classical harmony. Still, Jazz harmony allows deeper and more unexpected twists in the melodies and forms. The music is much less diatonic, which allows the performer to venture out into more abstract (even sometimes downright dissonant) territory.
I had an advanced theory instructed who had a very unique approach to harmony and melody. It was all about using rules to understand how sounds are created, not using rules just for the sake of using rules because they are "right". It really got me thinking outside of the box in terms of music. I was taught that any scale could be played over any chord as long as I had a certain context in mind.
I do the same when I write. I've used a little bit of my poetic license to break certain rules. I remember one instance I used an adverb as an adjective on purpose, just because it helped convey something I had written. I think that breaking the rules occasionaly is a good thing, but doing it constantly can be passe. If I used the adverb and an adjective once in a while for artistic merit, it shows that I'm creatively breaking the rules for arts sake. If a guitarist plays a tritone over a major triad once in a while, it could very well what he's trying to convey. If I constatantly misuse adjectives and adverbs, it's going to appear that I don't know squat about grammar; likewise a guitarist who constantly plays tritones, probaly doesn't understand music enough to play in key.
[This message has been edited by LiquidMidnight (09-25-2003 08:10 PM).]