Couldn’t resist doing this — same initial word in each stanza as in the DT.
....

Do Not Go Hasty to Give Dylan Hell

Do not go hasty to give Dylan hell —
that dithyrambic bard who died too young —
for his “Do not go gentle” villanelle.

Though not his best, those lines have cast a spell
these fifty years on readerships far-flung.
Do not go hasty to give Dylan hell.

Good critics know they should not seek to tell
that brilliant Welshman that a trope is wrong
in his “Do not go gentle” villanelle.

Wild men in flight — can we assess them well?
We, with our passion on a lower rung,
should not go hasty to give Dylan hell.

Brave captious men may pelt the citadel
of genius with eggs; still hearts are wrung
by that “Do not go gentle” villanelle.

And he, who there foretolled his father’s knell —
though now, in that good night, he can’t be stung,
do not go hasty to give Dylan hell
for his “Do not go gentle” villanelle.



[This message has been edited by Henry Quince (edited June 14, 2004).]

Having got that out of my system (all in good fun, Wiley, if you’re reading)...

For anyone interested, here’s a link to a page where you can play or download an MP3 file (750Kb) of Dylan Thomas himself reading his villanelle.
http://www.salon.com/audio/2000/10/05/thomasd/

He is more in his element in a freer mode. As for the criticism of that villanelle as overblown, I wonder how the same critics would describe some of his more rhapsodical pieces! Of course his rather histrionic style (underlined in his reading) contrasts with the cool disciplined approach of the so-called Movement Poets of the 50s and later in Britain, including Larkin, Amis and others — the Movement being partly a reaction against the DT style — but why can’t we value and appreciate both? (Larkin selected nine DT poems, including the villanelle, for his Oxford Modern Verse anthology in the 70s.)

Thomas is out of favour these days, but (as Janet has observed) many of us could learn something from the passion and imaginative language in much of his writing. Learn from, not copy! When we of lesser talent than the original try to emulate certain features of the DT style, the result is likely to be disastrous. A couple of times, I’ve attempted parodies or pastiches of Dylan Thomas, or at least of more obvious facets of his style — sheer mischief on my part, and really a form of homage. I know I can’t get anywhere near the real essence of the man.

To me — and I am not alone in this view — Thomas was one of the most original, mesmerising poets of the last century. One may try to imitate some of his surface features, but of course the genius is inimitable. In his imaginative stretching of language, his rhythms and hypnotic cadences, the transmuted emotion, he is unequalled.

It’s interesting that he tends to cut across, or show up as superficial, many of our prized dichotomies: metrical versus "free", modern versus traditional, simple versus obscure, representational versus surrealist. In some of his work the surrealist element was overdone, in my opinion, to the point of obscurity. I would instance A Grief Ago. His “play for voices,” Under Milk Wood, is close to being a masterpiece. Ah, but the 54 singing lines of Fern Hill, that rhapsody to lost youth, is a moving and eloquent testament to his genius.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/dylanthom...ern_hill.shtml

I wish that those who say, “Oh, I liked him when I was young, but I’ve outgrown him now,” or some such thing, would take this opportunity to explain themselves. Until they do, I shall assume it is their loss if they are no longer able to appreciate this unique Welsh voice.




[This message has been edited by Henry Quince (edited June 12, 2004).]

HQ, I think your villanelle is charming; in fact, I like
it rather better than DT's. (Oh--I just realized how
painfully apt his initials are.) Yes, of course one
can like both Thomas and Larkin, etc. I think very
highly of a few of Thomas' poems, including "In My
Craft or Sullen Art" (the most musical and dithyrambic
of any poem in syllabics) and "Refusal to Mourn the
Death &c" and two or three others, but most of his
work, which knocked me out when I was a teenager
(and hearing him read) now strikes me as overdone
and underthought. For me, and I might add, for many
others, there is no comparison between Thomas and Larkin---Larkin is incomparably the better poet. But
to each his own. Or as my old friend Henri Coulette
liked to say when people were arguing about the merits
of this or that poet, "Well. that's horse-racing."




[This message has been edited by robert mezey (edited June 12, 2004).]

Very well done, indeed, Henry - this piece is brilliant. I think I agree with all you say about Dylan Thomas. I remember DT once described himself as being "At the top of the second division" but perhaps he was being too modest. Larkin is great favourite of mine, but he and DT are so dissimilar that I cannot conceive of one of them being "better" than the other, any more than a pomegranate is better than a parnsip.

The critic Bernard Levin once said that if he were infinitely more talented, he could imagine himself as Beethoven, but he could never imagine himself as a Schubert, who was too individualistic to be duplicated. And where would Larkin's lugubrious glumness be without a Dylan Thomas to set it off against? Gloom and fear of death are all very well in their way, but we need to be reminded of the life-force too, and Dylan Thomas, for all his playacting and obscurity and "nogood boyo" antics, did this so well. Practising poets are, for obvious reasons, more interested in finding poets who make good models than good poets who are impossible models, and this may be one reason for DT's relatively low stock among poets.

Interestingly there are 490 books by or about Thomas on Amazon UK as opposed to 167 by or about Larkin, so DT must be popular with someone - the general public? Well, that can't be bad either.

BRAVO HENRY!!

Well said. Very well written. Thank you.
Janet

[This message has been edited by Janet Kenny (edited June 12, 2004).]

Love, love, love your poem, Quince!

But DT? I almost hate to join the naysayers, if only because I hate spoiling things for younger members who may still be infatuated with DT. For me, for sure, his was a necessary rung I had to climb. But reading him now, I just find so much hot air! And some really bad turns of phrase.

And I took his work to task, recently, on my site:

http://katebenedict.com/BadThomas.htm

A further thank you Henry for your excellent dissertation with which I entirely agree.

Robert, it is horse racing to set poets up against each other. I love Larkin but I could not love Larkin so much loved I not Dylan too.

Oliver, your Schubert example says it in a nutshell.

The reason all that "death of the author" stuff gives me the grims is because it is in the "voice" of the author that the message lies.

Janet

Kate,
I'm older than you. IMO It has nothing to do with age except perhaps with energy. We must meet him half way and that may become more difficult as one ages, but it's no comment about the writer.
Janet

Thanks for the compliments on my Dylanelle.

Robert, In My Craft Or Sullen Art was one of my favourites long before I realised there was anything syllabic about it.

I’ve just revisited that BBC page I linked to above, to find the text of that poem to paste here, but I’m afraid I got sidetracked by the tempting link on the left, Random Poem Generator. It’s not as good as my Sonnet Generator, but amusing enough. I’ll be back with In My Craft... unless someone beats me to it, but here’s the random “Dylan Thomas poem” I generated:

I spoke impatiently
By the statues of the truant boy
Sleeping star-struck on the lightgrey bones
On thoughts of street
Where kings lie lazily
And all the greenleaved nannygoats burn and rage

[This message has been edited by Henry Quince (edited June 12, 2004).]

How true!

No burn nor rage like that of a greenleaved nannygoat.

I have often thought that, but never seen it expressed so well!

;)

------------------
Mark Allinson