[New-Poetry] For the WEPD experiment: Houseman's Poem

[TheOldMole]

Take from twenty moles a score,
That leaves -- come to think of it -- not much more.


John Jeffrey wrote:
>
> Bob,
>
> I do agree that your reading is as reasonable as mine.  And yes, the 
> poem talks about cherry trees/ in bloom/--but if you're going to be 
> that literal (not cherry trees, but cherry trees in bloom) then I 
> would think that you'd stumble with "About the woodlands I will go / 
> To see the cherry hung with snow."  He doesn't say, "/looking/ as if 
> they are hung with snow."  He specifically says "hung with snow."  So 
> if you're following a literal reading, then you've got a bit of a snow 
> problem.  But if you're going to say that the snow is metaphoric, or 
> symbolic, or even just an image for blooms, then that would open the 
> door for a less-literal reading of the rest of the poem.
>
> And if the Mole is worth 20 of me, then he's...  let me think...  20 
> times... carry the 4...  hmmm.    Ah, who cares.  Math is stupit.
>
> JohnJ
>
>
>
> --- On *Tue, 2/3/09, Bob Grumman /<bobgrumman at nut-n-but.net>/* wrote:
>
>     From: Bob Grumman <bobgrumman at nut-n-but.net>
>     Subject: Re: [New-Poetry] For the WEPD experiment: Houseman's Poem
>     To: "NewPoetry: Contemporary Poetry News & Views"
>     <new-poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu>
>     Date: Tuesday, February 3, 2009, 9:52 AM
>
>     John Jeffrey wrote:
>>     Right: he has little time to look at things in bloom; therefore
>>     he must go out even when they're not in bloom and see the beauty
>>     of them when they are hung with snow.  Just the way I've read it
>>     for my two score years and ten.
>>
>>     JohnJ
>>
>     Sorry, John, but you seem to me to be arguing that Housman is saying:
>
>         And since to look at things in bloom
>         Fifty springs are little room,
>         About the woodlands I will go
>
>         To do something other than look at cherry trees in bloom.
>
>     If he'd been talking about the beauty of cherry trees, that would
>     make more sense, but he hasn't been: he's been talking about the
>     beauty of cherry trees/ in bloom/ (and, implicitly, about the
>     beauty of spring).
>
>     Do you not agree that my reading is at least as reasonable as
>     yours?  I've seen it that way for probably close to 50 years, but
>     that's irrelevant; I have definitely been mistaken about some
>     poems for longer than that.
>
>     Note to Judy: The Mole is on my side, and he's worth twenty Johns
>     and 19.5 Michaels, so phooey on you.  I would add that if you only
>     can't appreciate a poem whose most overt message is "boring," you
>     won't be able to appreciate many of the best poems in the
>     language.  It's not a poem's message that counts, but how the poem
>     expresses it.
>
>     --Hohenprofessor Bob
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     New-Poetry mailing list
>     New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
>     http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>               
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> New-Poetry mailing list
> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>   

-- 
Tad Richards
http://www.opus40.org/tadrichards/
http://opusforty.blogspot.com/

Don't forget to order your copy of FILM NOIR!
http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=2712239