Comments on: Exact Poetry http://www.pontificationadnauseam.com/2009/09/30/exact-poetry/ Mon, 06 Sep 2010 21:55:09 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: R. A. Byrd http://www.pontificationadnauseam.com/2009/09/30/exact-poetry/comment-page-1/#comment-3150 R. A. Byrd Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:26:03 +0000 http://www.pontificationadnauseam.com/?p=1194#comment-3150 *clapclapclapclap* Yay Solzhenitsyn! I liked this a lot. (: *clapclapclapclap* Yay Solzhenitsyn! I liked this a lot. (:

]]> By: E. M. Hansen http://www.pontificationadnauseam.com/2009/09/30/exact-poetry/comment-page-1/#comment-3141 E. M. Hansen Thu, 01 Oct 2009 19:13:03 +0000 http://www.pontificationadnauseam.com/?p=1194#comment-3141 An intriguing idea, but contradictory at some points. You seem not to differentiate between elaborate metaphors and unfamiliar metaphors. Although you seem to regard 'the extended metaphors of Homer' with disdain, the descriptions in epic similes were actually familiar to the audiences, and some indeed are still today. Most of us have seen colonies of ants at work; very few if any of us have seen armies of men preparing ships for a voyage. Ants are perhaps even more familiar than dentist drills, at least to those (such as myself) who have never had cavities, and their appearance in an epic simile should not alter their familiarity or effectiveness. Also, you seem not to differentiate between 'exact' language and 'simple, straightforward, and everyday' language. If a poet means to discuss what is complex and obscure -- 'as weird as all get out,' as you aptly put it -- complex and obscure words may at times be required to convey his exact meaning. Another thought: I agree that one should not 'assume [one's] audience is some high-minded group of classicists who grew up on the extended metaphors of Homer' -- after all, others besides such persons are known to read poetry. But what of those high-minded classicists? As others 'write down,' are we always to read down? Is it unfair to write some poetry particularly for us? An intriguing idea, but contradictory at some points. You seem not to differentiate between elaborate metaphors and unfamiliar metaphors. Although you seem to regard ‘the extended metaphors of Homer’ with disdain, the descriptions in epic similes were actually familiar to the audiences, and some indeed are still today. Most of us have seen colonies of ants at work; very few if any of us have seen armies of men preparing ships for a voyage. Ants are perhaps even more familiar than dentist drills, at least to those (such as myself) who have never had cavities, and their appearance in an epic simile should not alter their familiarity or effectiveness. Also, you seem not to differentiate between ‘exact’ language and ’simple, straightforward, and everyday’ language. If a poet means to discuss what is complex and obscure — ‘as weird as all get out,’ as you aptly put it — complex and obscure words may at times be required to convey his exact meaning.

Another thought: I agree that one should not ‘assume [one's] audience is some high-minded group of classicists who grew up on the extended metaphors of Homer’ — after all, others besides such persons are known to read poetry. But what of those high-minded classicists? As others ‘write down,’ are we always to read down? Is it unfair to write some poetry particularly for us?

]]>