|
Notices |
It's been a while, Unregistered -- Welcome back to Eratosphere! |
|
|
12-31-2011, 02:45 PM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Savannah, GA 31405
Posts: 4,055
|
|
Ruining a Great Poem
Here's an interesting bit: ruining a great poem. I'll post a poem, then post rewrites (from W.D.Snodgrass De/Compositions). Sphereans can comment or not. The first piece is from Robert Herrick and the focus is on metrics and music.
Upon Julia's Clothes
Whenas in silks my Julia goes,
Then, then, methinks, how sweetly flows
That liquefaction of her clothes.
Next, when I cast mine eyes, and see
That brave vibration, each way free,
O, how that glittering taketh me!
Upon Julia's Garments
(composed from Herrick into strict regularity)
When dressed in silk my Julia goes
I always think it sweetly flows
While fluid motion sways her clothes.
When next I look at her and see
That splendid movement, loose and free,
Its gleam completely captures me!
What say you?
|
12-31-2011, 03:02 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 14,175
|
|
I say that you have chosen a good title for this thread.
|
12-31-2011, 03:31 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Breaux Bridge, LA, USA
Posts: 3,487
|
|
Just goes to show the power of the individual word. Poetry, I've always said, is just choosing one right word after another.
Incidentally, I once parodied Herrick in a couplet, as follows:
Whenas in silks my Julia goes,
They cling unto her pantyhose.
|
12-31-2011, 03:35 PM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Savannah, GA 31405
Posts: 4,055
|
|
Janice
This is Snodgrass's doings, not mine. I'm not skilled enough to make even a bad poem, but I thought looking at the music and meter of this one--compared with the rewrite--might be instructive.
Gail
Had Julia worn pantyhose, I can only imagine what Herrick would have written.
|
12-31-2011, 05:21 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 14,175
|
|
Oh, I know that Lance. I'm not shooting in your direction. I think this thread is a really good idea.
|
12-31-2011, 05:40 PM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Savannah, GA 31405
Posts: 4,055
|
|
Janice
I know you're not. I though some of the newbies and oldies might profit from this. For example:
Some on the metric threads encourage elimination of substitutions (you know who you are). In this piece the rewrite does just that. It's perfect IP, but "Then, then, methinks" is lost and that passage gives a pause, a wondering. Not to mention the loss of "liquefaction." Great word.
What's happened here is the Marlow-Gorbuduc scenario all over.
The rewrite is perfect IP, but all the sentence stresses fall on the foot accents with an equal force. The iambic stomp, I believe Tim Murphy calls it.
|
12-31-2011, 08:38 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Saint Paul, MN
Posts: 9,655
|
|
Good observations about the too-regular meter in the rewrite, Lance. Let's count further the ways Snodgrass has shown us the poem's virtues by taking them away:
As you point out, there's enormous power in single, big, attention-grabbing words. (Think about how Stallings uses "adumbrated" in her "Ultrasound.") "Liquefaction" alludes to so many sexy things.
Some people object to the features of older forms of English on the grounds that they're unfamiliar, and it's true that we'd be hesitant about using them ourselves. But if they're removed from the poems they belong in, the removal drains color and texture. "Whenas" and "methinks" and "mine eyes" do things their replacements don't.
The replacements have built-in weaknesses. "Always"? A lot wimpier than the emphatic repetition "then, then." If you're going to use an adverb--and we're often told to avoid them as needless--it had better have some punch.
We've lost the alliteration and assonance of "brave vibration" for the sonically bland "splendid movement." "Each way free" has the visual element of directionality; "loose and free" just says the same thing twice. The interjected "O" and the syntax of exclamation and, smack at the high point of the line, "glittering" all get replaced--again--with an unhelpful adverb "completely". Yes, we've got a new assonance in "gleam completely." But it doesn't offset the losses. "Glittering" is a LOT of light-play; "gleam" is just one bit of it, much less impressive.
I've got a copy of De/Compositions around somewhere--I should dig it out and study further.
Last edited by Maryann Corbett; 12-31-2011 at 11:59 PM.
|
12-31-2011, 09:21 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: usa
Posts: 7,645
|
|
There's nothing un-strict about the meter in this poem, if you take elisions and accents into account:
Upon Julia's Clothes
WhenAS in SILKS my JUL-ia goes,
Then, THEN, meTHINKS, how SWEET-ly FLOWS
That LIQ-uefi-CA-tion OF her CLOTHES.
Next, WHEN I CAST mine EYES, and SEE
That BRAVE vi-BRA-tion, EACH way FREE,
o, HOW that GLITT-ering TAKeth ME!
|
12-31-2011, 09:28 PM
|
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 14,175
|
|
Maryann, what an excellent dissection. Thank you.
|
12-31-2011, 10:59 PM
|
Member
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Savannah, GA 31405
Posts: 4,055
|
|
Mary
There's nothing un-strict about the meter in this poem, if you take elisions and accents into account:
Upon Julia's Clothes
WhenAS in SILKS my JUL-ia goes,
Then, THEN, meTHINKS, how SWEET-ly FLOWS
That LIQ-ue-fac-tion OF her CLOTHES.
Next, WHEN I CAST mine EYES, and SEE
That BRAVE vi-BRA-tion, EACH way FREE,
o, HOW that GLITT-ering TAKeth ME!
Edit/Delete Message
Mary,
You're right. The IP is there in the Herrick, but, in the rewrite each iambic foot receives an equal sentence stress. Look at S1L3. The first sentence stress comes with the "CA" in "liquefi-ca-tion". He achieves the same effect in the next stanza with "O, how that glittering..." To put it another way: even though the "liquefication" line is IP, it moves a lot faster because of the long Latinate word. In the rewrite, the lines plod. There's little alteration of speed because the stress in each foot receives an equal weight. The iambic stomp.
|
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Member Login
Forum Statistics:
Forum Members: 8,399
Total Threads: 21,839
Total Posts: 270,787
There are 2909 users
currently browsing forums.
Forum Sponsor:
|
|
|
|
|
|