[New-Poetry] from the Writer's Almanac

[Judy Prince]

Hi, Jim, I don't get your first point re imaginative power vs scansion, and
I think we'd agree to disagree about your using 'craft' to mean unsuccessful
'art'.  Explain, please!
Best,

Judy

2009/5/3 James Cervantes <cervantes.james at gmail.com>

> A world of difference, no?  There's no "imaginative power" vs. scansion.
>  More like art vs. craft, I'd say.  "Art" uses the same devices/elements as
> "craft," though "craft" doesn't make the leap into "art."
> - Jim
>
>
> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 5:53 PM, Judy Prince <jbalizsprince at googlemail.com>wrote:
>
>> Yes, you've noted what at least one of our resident metrics experts has
>> noted, Mole.
>> Baer's poem's initially cute, but hasn't the imaginative power to deliver
>> an um imaginative vehicle for it.  And we guess that since he'd chosen an
>> 'old' 'strict' form [sonnet], he might've strengthened his poem's satire
>> with the 'old' iambic pentameter scheme.  He didn't, and it's clunky and
>> bumpy.
>> A friend notes that Sylvia Plath, tho, succeeded rather well at something
>> akin to it:
>>
>> An Applicant by Sylvia Plath
>>
>> First, are you our sort of a person?
>> Do you wear
>> A glass eye, false teeth or a crutch,
>> A brace or a hook,
>> Rubber breasts or a rubber crotch,
>>
>> Stitches to show something's missing? No, no? Then
>> How can we give you a thing?
>> Stop crying.
>> Open your hand.
>> Empty? Empty. Here is a hand
>>
>> To fill it and willing
>> To bring teacups and roll away headaches
>> And do whatever you tell it.
>> Will you marry it?
>> It is guaranteed
>>
>> To thumb shut your eyes at the end
>> And dissolve of sorrow.
>> We make new stock from the salt.
>> I notice you are stark naked.
>> How about this suit----
>>
>> Black and stiff, but not a bad fit.
>> Will you marry it?
>> It is waterproof, shatterproof, proof
>> Against fire and bombs through the roof.
>> Believe me, they'll bury you in it.
>>
>> Now your head, excuse me, is empty.
>> I have the ticket for that.
>> Come here, sweetie, out of the closet.
>> Well, what do you think of that ?
>> Naked as paper to start
>>
>> But in twenty-five years she'll be silver,
>> In fifty, gold.
>> A living doll, everywhere you look.
>> It can sew, it can cook,
>> It can talk, talk , talk.
>>
>> It works, there is nothing wrong with it.
>> You have a hole, it's a poultice.
>> You have an eye, it's an image.
>> My boy, it's your last resort.
>> Will you marry it, marry it, marry it.
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> 2009/5/3 TheOldMole <Opus40-01 at opus40.org>
>>
>>> Well, I claim a back seat to no one when it comes to worthlessness, but
>>> these are the lines that clunk on my ear a bit:
>>>
>>> without qualm, scruple, or further delay
>>>
>>> I can scan it as a 4-stress line easily enough:
>>>
>>> withOUT// qualm, SCRU//ple, or FUR//ther deLAY
>>>
>>> but when I try to get 5 stresses out of it, it comes out more like
>>>
>>> withOUT// qualm, SCRU//ple, OR//furTHER// deLAY
>>>
>>> And line 6 hits me as
>>>
>>> >too MA//ny HOURS //of UN//needED //durESS,
>>>
>>> -- I don't have any problem making "hours" a one-syllable word -- I
>>> remember we recently talked about an issue like this in regard to the
>>> question of whole rhyme,
>>>
>>> I can scan
>>>
>>> uncertain working conditions, and endless stress.
>>>
>>> but it feels clunky two me, with extra unstressed syllables in the middle
>>> that take up too much room.
>>>
>>> As I said, I'm no authority here. But if I'd written the poem (if I had
>>> the wit -- I do like most of the poem), I would have tried to rework those
>>> lines to make them sound better to my ear.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Chris Lott wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, May 3, 2009 at 10:29 AM, TheOldMole <Opus40-01 at opus40.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Speaking as the worthless guy, it makes no difference if the lines
>>>>> don't get
>>>>> in the way of your appreciation of the poem, some difference if they
>>>>> do.
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder, though -- are there any elements of craft that are worth
>>>>> discussing, or is scansion the only worthless one?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Worthless might be putting it too harshly (about elements of craft, it
>>>> is CERTAINLY not applicable to you)... but in practical terms the fact
>>>> that scansion is so personalized makes it rather less valuable, or at
>>>> least moves it into a different-- and honestly more interesting-- area
>>>> of interest.
>>>>
>>>> More importantly, I wasn't as interested in an argument as I was (and
>>>> still am) in simply seeing how different people scan the lines in
>>>> question. I mean, since it was explicitly brought up... If that could
>>>> be done without arguing about right and wrong (that's the worthless
>>>> part), it would be very interesting. Anyone care to share their
>>>> interpretation?
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I think all elements of craft are worth discussing, even
>>>> if sometimes particular claims might be of dubious value.
>>>>
>>>> c
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> New-Poetry mailing list
>>>> New-Poetry at wiz.cath.vt.edu
>>>> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/new-poetry
>>>>
>>>>
>>> --
>>> Tad Richards
>>> Read my NY Writing Careers Examiner column today!
>>> http://www.examiner.com/x-2862-NY-Writing-Careers-Examiner
>>>
>>> http://www.opus40.org/tadrichards/
>>> http://opusforty.blogspot.com/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20090503/28648c5b/attachment.html