[New-Poetry] from the Writer's Almanac

[Judy Prince]

Yes, good points well taken, Chris.
All I ever hear with disagreers au moment are wild debates about The Right
Scan----whilst it seems obvious [I guess only to me] that the two different
scans and many others are not only 'right' but must of necessity both be
right.

To answer your reasonable final question about what difference it makes
about whether Baer's lines 2 and 6 scan to one or maybe not, my feeling's
that it's like any discussion about poetic technique:  well backgrounded
awareness of the technique variously used, can open folk more widely to its
uses.

In this particular instance, my assumptions are that 1) Poetry is music;
it's aural/oral on the page as well as when spoken; 2) Different sounds will
be heard by different reader/hearers; 3) Some of those different hearings
may yield fruitful discussion about the inevitable emphases of different
interpretations of the words', stanza's, poem's, poet's meanings; 4)  Much
or most of the poem will be scanned similarly by most folk, helpfully urging
them to consider together the power of the poem's 'music'; and, hence 5)
 The poets and readers/hearers can determine their own craft and creations
as well as their renewed understandings of others'.

As an added bonus, I may well let you know my own JUDY OL OLO Scanning
System.  But you'll have to show me that you care, Chris!

Do you care?

Best,

Judy

2009/5/3 Chris Lott <chris at chrislott.org>

> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Judy Prince
> <jbalizsprince at googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Hi, Chris,
> > I keep wondering why it's such a well hidden secret that scansion depends
> > upon the scanner for the scanner's ear and eye and brain's response
> > to/interpretation of the poet's words?
>
> It's not a secret. But it means that when person A posts a poem and
> person B says "it doesn't scan" then person B's response is rather
> meaningless, no?
>
> > Fiercesome battles have ensued about scansion and its supposed
> > only-one-way-of-reading authority.  Yes, of course I'm OTTing about it
> here,
> > and do welcome hearing others' views.  It's just that so few folk
> recognise
> > scansion's role as a wonderfully useful *variously-applied* medium.
>
> I'm still looking for the wonderfully useful part, I guess. Maybe
> lines 2 and 6 of Baer's poems scan to one or maybe they don't. What
> difference does it make?
>
> c
>
> _______________________________________________
> New-Poetry mailing list
> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/pipermail/new-poetry/attachments/20090503/df2a1c63/attachment.html