I am guessing that my debate with Robert Mezey in the other thread prompted Carol to post this.
It wasn't too long ago that I posted a poem by Frost to prove one of my points, and then was shocked when people started questioning the Frost poem. Question Frost? Never!
Tom makes a good point that artists move through stages in their careers, and that an artist's technique does not spring forth fully developed -- thus, an artist's early work is fair game for criticism.
However, there is another way to approach this entire issue. Instead of questioning, "Should we ... ?", perhaps we should just accept the reality of the situation. In other words, different people pronounce lines in different ways, that's just a fact. What good does it do to say that a person "should" say a line in this or that way? Of course, we can always debate how the author intended it to be said (or said it himself), but even then, that doesn't mean that every reader will, or should, say it the same way.
I think I mentioned this before, but I'll say it again:
Judson Jerome, whom I loved, gave a long explanation as to why the reader must pronounce the last line of Hopkins' "Pied Beauty" as "praise HIM". The only problem was, I pronounced it as "PRAISE him", and still do! Even Jerome, whom I admired so much, can't make me change the way I want to say that line. And that's a good thing. Why should I not read my own interpretation into it, as long as my interpretation is not totally far-fetched? That I can bring something of myself into a poem makes it all the more special.
|