[New-Poetry] Grammatical

[JforJames at aol.com]

I think what Chris says is close to my thinking re grammar and poetry, if  I'm
not misreading him. Grammar doesn't seem important when it comes to  what 
makes a poem. 
 
Here's a more philosophical question: Do we think in tense?
 
Finnegan
 
In a message dated 9/2/2006 3:59:25 AM Eastern Standard Time,  
cstroffo at earthlink.net writes:

like  your point, but one question that keeps coming back to me is the 
"irregular"  punctuation of Shakespeare's sonnets and Dickinson's poems for instance 
(just  to mention some famous canonical short poems, I could mention Blake's 
longer  works as well). It's not that Shakesprare and Dickinson aren't highly  
structured and formalist in other ways, but that the question of "grammar"  
doesn't seem to be as central as "the line" etc...  




On Sep 1, 2006, at 4:39 PM, steve moore wrote:


It seems to me that after modernism and  postmodernism (popomo?) the problem 
with not adhering to basic  grammatical rules is that when you do deviate, it 
has no effect.  Essentially, a poet who casts standard grammatical structures 
aside is  casting away a very important tool, the ability to deviate when 
necessary.  Loose grammar was shocking in the same way free verse was shocking 
(talking  in loose generalities of course), now it's  traditional.





 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/pipermail/new-poetry/attachments/20060902/7e93abe1/attachment.html