Quote:
Originally posted by VictoriaGaile:
Isn't there a difference between "loose iambics" and "iambics with substition"? I thought most good IP used substitutions to add interest; otherwise you get a thudding drumbeat instead of music with a steady pulse.
My impression was that "loose iambics" meant that the pulse itself was more irregular. A heavier use of caesurae, for instance, or more than one substitution per line.
|
My impression was that loose iambics meant the addition of unstressed syllables into a line of IP, which can of course throw the pulse off course a little, although the line is still identifiable as basically iambic. That’s why I reckon the Hecht piece is loose. Many of the lines are IP with the commonly accepted substitutions, but other lines have additional unstressed syllables.
However, I could be completely wrong in that impression.
Substitution is different. An IP line with two feet substituted, as far as I am concerned, is simply IP, not loose at all. Certainly I use a lot of substitutions in my own writing, but have tended to stay within the accepted substitutions rather than opting for looser lines.
But perhaps different people use the term “loose iambics” in different ways – that wouldn’t surprise me. What you are saying about caesurae is interesting. I don’t know whether it’s important in determining the looseness of a line or not, but I’d like to know more about this.