This seems rather a slight poem for Hardy (whom I love), though charming and accomplished.
I'd agree this is basically anapestic (iambic substitutions, particularly at ends of lines, seem to be fairly common in such a meter--takes some of the sing-songy edge off without losing the swing). Hardy is, of course, both a very skilled and very adventurous metrist. "Sees" doesn't bother me much, coming late as it does, after the rhythm is firmly established. (Perhaps we are too used to running across contemporaries' headless iambic lines that try to start on monosyllables.) While I appreciate Alan's sobering point, I'd have to say I tend to disagree with the suggestion that we might be somehow more metrically limited in what we can pull off than Hardy by the lack of sophistication of our readers.
Much of Hardy's verse IS "clumsy"--but deliberately so, not through accidental ineptitude. Hardy disliked too much smoothness and polish (a fault, he felt, of much well-turned but aetiolated Victorian verse), and strove for the appearance of a certain spontanaity. He talks about leaving the rough edges on. (Who else could get away with "powerfuller"?) I'm a bit curious, Caleb, about your reaction to Hardy. I'd have thought from other discussions you'd be quite sympathetic to such a stance.
Thanks very much for posting this enjoyable piece.
Alicia
|