Race Against the Wane
Galadial
Fear the flight of years, don't look lightly on their gain,
Silent steals the deceiving hand, secretive be her name.
Time doth cast her shadow, lancing out her lines,
Atoms tick their deadly toll, like a monstrous clock they chime.
I remember once in youth, naive you said was I,
Seeketh you experience; I reasoned not or why.
A tired and torrid journey, full circle I have met,
The shotgun trade is manifest, my dreams are sweet regret.
Don't let platitudes or fair words, calm the rage within,
Nor talk of grace or fiery might, quell the stormy din,
Bring to bear outrageous arms, meet the clarion call,
Seize each moment as the last, we know not when we fall.
The imagery in verse 1 refers to atomic clocks which tick tock based on
atomic vibration - this represents man's best attempt to capture and measure
time. Your comments especially on verses 2 and 3 would be greatly
appreciated. Thanks.
Gala
silent_cry
for the first verse of the last stanza: "Don't let platitudes or fair
words, calm the rage within," but that may just be me, since it is well-
balanced. When I transposed "fair words" and "platitudes", making it
read: "Don't let fair words or platitudes, calm the rage within," it
seemed to smooth out.
Just a suggestion. :) Truly well-written! :)
SC
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Scott Murphy
news:8pqis7$jg7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
Were it not for MEAN opinions, I wouldn't HAVE opinions. I thought it was
archaic and creaky and painted over with ersatz wisdom. The antique
usages don't feel correct, though they may be. Who the hell but a PhD
in English would know? The last person who said "doth" in conversation,
or "seeketh," has been dead since October of 1671.
"Naive you said was I" is not "truly well written." It is a syntactic
inversion wreaked on the poem to make a rhyming couplet. The
majority of commas placed mid-line are at odds with sense and breath.
"Galadial", "Silent Cry" is full of shit on this one. If you wouldn't
say it over lunch, not one word of it, there's a reasonable chance
it's not a useful poem. I wouldn't, and to me, this isn't.
-Murphy
Scott Murphy
"silent_cry" <silen...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ps899
> Not meaning to disrupt any of your well-proven Laws, I must point out
> that you nor any of us set the Laws for what is considered enjoyable to
> each individual. We are each entitled to appreciate what strikes us as
> worth appreciating. It's called "individuality".
>
> It would seem that what you say over lunch would be rather booring
> poetically, for me _personally_. Now, perhaps people hang on your
> every bold description of how the mustard tanged your tounge as the
> pastrami cause your brow to sweat with its intense flavor. But one
> of 'em ain't me, Babe.
>
> SC
It crossed my mind that "Silent Cry" was "Galadial" talking to himself. I
don't have one charitable thought in my head tonight. The poem was
not mustard and pastrami. It was cobwebs on day-old rye.
Give up on this arch, erudite pose, kiddo. While you're up, peel
me a grape.
-Murphy
Jim Standish
> > In article <39c0...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk>,
> > "Galadial" <q7p...@q7phall.screaming.net> wrote:
> > > Race against the Wane
> > >
> > > Fear the flight of years, don't look lightly on their gain,
> > > Silent steals the deceiving hand, secretive be her name.
> > > Time doth cast her shadow, lancing out her lines,
> > > Atoms tick their deadly toll, like a monstrous clock they chime.
> > >
> > > I remember once in youth, naive you said was I,
> > > Seeketh you experience; I reasoned not or why.
> > > A tired and torrid journey, full circle I have met,
> > > The shotgun trade is manifest, my dreams are sweet regret.
> > >
> > > Don't let platitudes or fair words, calm the rage within,
> > > Nor talk of grace or fiery might, quell the stormy din,
> > > Bring to bear outrageous arms, meet the clarion call,
> > > Seize each moment as the last, we know not when we fall.
> > >
> > > The imagery in verse 1 refers to atomic clocks which tick tock based
> > > on atomic vibration - this represents man's best attempt to capture
> > > and measure time. Your comments especially on verses 2 and 3 would
> > > be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
> > >
> > > Gala
>
> The antique
> usages don't feel correct, though they may be. Who the hell but a PhD
> in English would know?
> -Murphy
Anyone who read King James with an attentive mind would know. Herewith
some suggestions:
> > > Fear the flight of years, don't look lightly on their gain,
look not lightly. Nothing wrong with "don't" except it doesn't fit this
language.
> > > Silent steals the deceiving hand, secretive be her name.
Assuming the subject to be "the hand", it stealeth.
> > > Seeketh you experience; I reasoned not or why.
Seek thou
> > > The shotgun trade is manifest, my dreams are sweet regret.
I dunno; did they have shotguns in those days?
> > > Don't let platitudes or fair words, calm the rage within,
Let not, and lose the comma.
I agree with Murphy. But Murph, remember when we were young and just
discovering these truisms, how fresh and magnificent they seemed to us
then? Like the world's most important truths had just been revealed to
*US*! It comes with the territory; let's cut these kids a little slack.
--
Best, Jim
silent_cry
> > In article <39c0...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk>,
> > "Galadial" <q7p...@q7phall.screaming.net> wrote:
> > > Race against the Wane
> > >
> > > Fear the flight of years, don't look lightly on their gain,
> > > Silent steals the deceiving hand, secretive be her name.
> > > Time doth cast her shadow, lancing out her lines,
> > > Atoms tick their deadly toll, like a monstrous clock they chime.
> > >
> > > I remember once in youth, naive you said was I,
> > > Seeketh you experience; I reasoned not or why.
> > > A tired and torrid journey, full circle I have met,
> > > The shotgun trade is manifest, my dreams are sweet regret.
> > >
> > > Don't let platitudes or fair words, calm the rage within,
> > > Nor talk of grace or fiery might, quell the stormy din,
> > > Bring to bear outrageous arms, meet the clarion call,
> > > Seize each moment as the last, we know not when we fall.
> > >
> > > The imagery in verse 1 refers to atomic clocks which tick tock
based
> > > on atomic vibration - this represents man's best attempt to
capture
> > > and measure time. Your comments especially on verses 2 and 3
would
> > > be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
> > >
> > > Gala
> > >
> > >
except
fair
> > words, calm the rage within," but that may just be me, since it is
well-
> > balanced. When I transposed "fair words" and "platitudes", making
it
> > read: "Don't let fair words or platitudes, calm the rage within," it
> > seemed to smooth out.
> >
> > Just a suggestion. :) Truly well-written! :)
> >
> > SC
>
> Were it not for MEAN opinions, I wouldn't HAVE opinions. I thought it
was
> usages don't feel correct, though they may be. Who the hell but a PhD
conversation,
> or "seeketh," has been dead since October of 1671.
>
> "Naive you said was I" is not "truly well written." It is a syntactic
> inversion wreaked on the poem to make a rhyming couplet. The
> majority of commas placed mid-line are at odds with sense and breath.
>
> "Galadial", "Silent Cry" is full of shit on this one. If you wouldn't
> say it over lunch, not one word of it, there's a reasonable chance
> it's not a useful poem. I wouldn't, and to me, this isn't.
>
> -Murphy
>
>
that you nor any of us set the Laws for what is considered enjoyable to
each individual. We are each entitled to appreciate what strikes us as
worth appreciating. It's called "individuality".
It would seem that what you say over lunch would be rather booring
poetically, for me _personally_. Now, perhaps people hang on your
every bold description of how the mustard tanged your tounge as the
pastrami cause your brow to sweat with its intense flavor. But one
of 'em ain't me, Babe.
SC
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
silent_cry
"tongue" "causes"
Wish I'd proof before I hit Send!
silent_cry
"Scott Murphy" <murp...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> "silent_cry" <silen...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8ps899
>
> > Not meaning to disrupt any of your well-proven Laws, I must point
> > out that you nor any of us set the Laws for what is considered
> > enjoyable to each individual. We are each entitled to appreciate
> > what strikes us as worth appreciating. It's called "individuality".
> >
> > It would seem that what you say over lunch would be rather booring
> > poetically, for me _personally_. Now, perhaps people hang on your
> > pastrami causes your brow to sweat with its intense flavor. But one
> > of 'em ain't me, Babe.
> >
> > SC
>
> himself. I don't have one charitable thought in my head tonight. The
> poem was not mustard and pastrami. It was cobwebs on day-old rye.
>
> Give up on this arch, erudite pose, kiddo. While you're up, peel
> me a grape.
>
> -Murphy
>
>
enjoy a similar style of verse? Hate to inform you, but there are
thousands of us! (EEK! EEK! Run Spot, RUN!)
hmmm... seems a rather screaming case of deep-seated insecurity when
you want to commandeer the whole menu to prove your own superiority to
yourself.
If you don't like it, that's mucho okay, but DON'T tell me what I have
to like. Let's make a deal, we can each dine from whatever strikes our
fancies, and worry about satisfying our _own_ appetites. If you prefer
cold cuts, really-really-REAL and damn the sensibilities, and everyday
grime, then every trashcan you find is your dream come true. Have AT!
I won't stop you... more to the point, I won't find _fault_ with you
for your tastes, even if I don't share them. Just don't force them on
me!
In other words: You are just one guy, fella, and no more entitled to
run the restaurant than anyone else with an appetite. So, get your
fingers out of my filet mignon and go back to your pastrami.
Pax
"Jim Standish" <j...@percheron.softix.com> wrote in message
news:1egz1be.10h182t17zzo02N%j...@percheron.softix.com...
Scott Murphy <murp...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> > In article <39c0...@news.server.worldonline.co.uk>,
> > "Galadial" <q7p...@q7phall.screaming.net> wrote:
> > > Race against the Wane
> > >
> > > Fear the flight of years, don't look lightly on their gain,
> > > Silent steals the deceiving hand, secretive be her name.
> > > Time doth cast her shadow, lancing out her lines,
> > > Atoms tick their deadly toll, like a monstrous clock they chime.
> > >
> > > I remember once in youth, naive you said was I,
> > > Seeketh you experience; I reasoned not or why.
> > > A tired and torrid journey, full circle I have met,
> > > The shotgun trade is manifest, my dreams are sweet regret.
> > >
> > > Don't let platitudes or fair words, calm the rage within,
> > > Nor talk of grace or fiery might, quell the stormy din,
> > > Bring to bear outrageous arms, meet the clarion call,
> > > Seize each moment as the last, we know not when we fall.
> > >
> > > The imagery in verse 1 refers to atomic clocks which tick tock based
> > > on atomic vibration - this represents man's best attempt to capture
> > > and measure time. Your comments especially on verses 2 and 3 would
> > > be greatly appreciated. Thanks.
> > >
> > > Gala
>
> The antique
> usages don't feel correct, though they may be. Who the hell but a PhD
> in English would know?
> -Murphy
Anyone who read King James with an attentive mind would know. Herewith some
suggestions:
> > > Fear the flight of years, don't look lightly on their gain,
look not lightly. Nothing wrong with "don't" except it doesn't fit this
language.
> > > Silent steals the deceiving hand, secretive be her name.
Assuming the subject to be "the hand", it stealeth.
> > > Seeketh you experience; I reasoned not or why.
Seek thou
> > > The shotgun trade is manifest, my dreams are sweet regret.
I dunno; did they have shotguns in those days?
> > > Don't let platitudes or fair words, calm the rage within,
Let not, and lose the comma.
I agree with Murphy. But Murph, remember when we were young and just
discovering these truisms, how fresh and magnificent they seemed to us then?
Like the world's most important truths had just been revealed to *US*! It comes
with the territory; let's cut these kids a little slack.
--
Best, Jim
http://jambo.workhorse-akers.com
Thanks for the "kids". :) I will _attempt_ to explain why I like Galadial's
poem:
It has not only a syllabically pleasing flow when read aloud, but an equally
pleasing flow of thought. You're right concerning the "strictness" not being
observed consistently throughout the poem. However, I wasn't reading it in that
light. The archaic tone lent a wistful quality, a finality, rather like the
past talking through the present to the future.
A few things I would've done differently are very close to what you suggested...
(losing the contractions, for instance, "look not" instead of "don't look" and
"Let not" instead of "Don't let")... but I was commenting on the over-all _feel_
of the poem, which I find very soothing.
Perhaps I read so much questionable prose in the guise of unrhyming poetry that
I get a bit effusive when a beautiful bit of flowing, rhythmic, rhyming verse
falls under my gaze. There's a lot more _right_ with this poem than there is
wrong with it. The rest is up to the obviously talented author to fine-tune as
best suites his unique outlook regarding his work.
Well, my "kid" husband of thirty years is due home from work, so better go.
SC
(Sherri F White)
o~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~o
As Pogo said: "We has met thu enuhmy 'n' he is US!"
Scott Murphy
"Jim Standish" <j...@percheron.softix.com> wrote
> But Murph, remember when we were young and just
> discovering these truisms, how fresh and magnificent they seemed to us
> then? Like the world's most important truths had just been revealed to
> *US*! It comes with the territory; let's cut these kids a little slack.
> --
> Best, Jim
>
> http://jambo.workhorse-akers.com
Point taken. It was an unkind cut at the subject matter. You've done
more to help with the KJVisms than I could.
-Murphy
Scott Murphy
"silent_cry" <silen...@my-deja.com>
> Is it so horrible a thought that there might be TWO of us who happen to
> enjoy a similar style of verse? Hate to inform you, but there are
> thousands of us! (EEK! EEK! Run Spot, RUN!)
>
> hmmm... seems a rather screaming case of deep-seated insecurity when
> you want to commandeer the whole menu to prove your own superiority to
> yourself.
>
> If you don't like it, that's mucho okay, but DON'T tell me what I have
> to like. Let's make a deal, we can each dine from whatever strikes our
> fancies, and worry about satisfying our _own_ appetites. If you prefer
> cold cuts, really-really-REAL and damn the sensibilities, and everyday
> grime, then every trashcan you find is your dream come true. Have AT!
> I won't stop you... more to the point, I won't find _fault_ with you
> for your tastes, even if I don't share them. Just don't force them on
> me!
>
> In other words: You are just one guy, fella, and no more entitled to
> run the restaurant than anyone else with an appetite. So, get your
> fingers out of my filet mignon and go back to your pastrami.
>
> SC
I am one guy who does his best to write in a direct and prescriptive
fashion.
I think it makes more interesting reading that way. It may even have some
persuasive power, as you've gone on for paragraphs now, countering my
view. Surely you'd not have bothered had I hidden my opinion under a mound
of pillows.
I don't think "Galadial" is a talentless hack. If s/he wants to say "gather
ye
rosebuds while ye may," *I* would find it soothing to hear it in
contemporary
idiom. The subject is fair game. I've walked that walk:
http://www.melicreview.com/cgibin/poe_archive.cgi?iss04.scottmurphy.02
I'm glad to learn that "Silent Cry" and "Pax" are also Sherri F. White,
though
it took Mr. Standish's gentle manner to make it seem safe to sign that way.
-Murphy
Sherri F White
"Scott Murphy" <murp...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
> I am one guy who does his best to write in a direct and prescriptive
> fashion. I think it makes more interesting reading that way. It may
> even have some persuasive power, as you've gone on for paragraphs
> now, countering my view. Surely you'd not have bothered had I hidden
> my opinion under a mound of pillows.
Who knows? I might have. :) I'm a bit "windy" when defending the
(IMHO) rare poets who dare to stand up and rhyme a song in word,
rhythm, and manner of thought expression. For me, such style shows the
heart of the author and touches mine.
Not that I don't appreciate realism, but life is gritty enough, and
down-'n'-dirty real is anywhere and everywhere you choose to look.
There's something worth defending in gentility, no matter how stilted
it might appear to many. The past is the rock we stand on, I can and
do greatly appreciate its fine points, even though my mind is focused
on the future.
> I don't think "Galadial" is a talentless hack. If s/he wants to
> say "gather ye rosebuds while ye may," *I* would find it soothing to
> hear it in contemporary idiom. The subject is fair game. I've walked
> that walk:
> http://www.melicreview.com/cgibin/poe_archive.cgi?iss04.scottmurphy.02
I've walked pretty much ALL the walks at one time or another with my
poetry. Why must one form be denigrated and discarded in order to
appreciate another? Aren't they _all_ of value? If they aren't _why_
aren't they? If one assumes such a stance, aren't they admitting a
lack in themselves?
Elizabethan-style is still highly in favor; if you take the movie fare
this last decade, extremely so, in fact. (Mel Gibson's Hamlet was the
most wonderful enactment of the play I've ever seen, he truly made it
come alive.)
> I'm glad to learn that "Silent Cry" and "Pax" are also Sherri F.
> White, though it took Mr. Standish's gentle manner to make it seem
> safe to sign that way.
>
> -Murphy
I wasn't hiding for any insidious purpose. I don't usually go by my
real name because, when I first started on the Web almost six years
ago, I didn't appreciate the treatment I received at times when I
revealed my gender. The male/female balance was hugely skewed to the
male at that time. Think that's a thing of the past now; either that,
or I've discovered where _not_ to go.
Prefer "Pax", but someone else was using that name (and seemed to have
muddied it somewhat) on these poetry newsgroups long before I
discovered them a few weeks ago. So, dilemma. "Silent Cry". Don't
like it, even though it was inspired _by_ these poetry newsgroups (if
I'd been totally descriptive, it would've been "Crazed Scream").
I came to these newsgroups expecting to find an eclectically pleasing
mixture of poetic forms. Instead I find prepubescent mobs, proverbial
torches waving angrily, apparently trying to totally eradicate all the
forms I most dearly love of an art I have been devoted to since I was
ten years old (and _that_ is one helluva long time)!
Be well - Pax
o~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~o
As Pogo said: "We has met thu enuhmy 'n' he is US!"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
peter stewart richards
> forms I most dearly love of an art I have been devoted to since I was
> ten years old (and _that_ is one helluva long time)!
>
>
> Be well - Pax
>
me.htm
http://pub4.ezboard.com/bthesonnetboardhttp://pub4.ezboard.com/bthesonnetboa
rd
http://www.alsopreview.com/discus/
Now, nobody's promising anything. Even virtual people are people.
p
Pax
"peter stewart richards" <pric...@chello.no>
wrote in message news:ULrw5.652$jH1....@news01.chello.no...
>>
>> all the forms I most dearly love of an art I have been
>> devoted to since I was ten years old (and _that_ is one
>> helluva long time)!
>>
>
>
> http://pub4.ezboard.com/bthesonnetboard
>
> http://www.alsopreview.com/discus/
>
> Now, nobody's promising anything. Even virtual people
> are people.
>
> p
Thanks, Peter. :) Will check them out.
Be well - Pax
PS - Cleaned up your links, they were doubled.
Jim Standish
> Elizabethan-style is still highly in favor; if you take the movie fare
> this last decade, extremely so, in fact. (Mel Gibson's Hamlet was the
> most wonderful enactment of the play I've ever seen, he truly made it
> come alive.)
Elizabethan-style was contemporary English when Hamlet was written.
Note that Shakespeare did not try to sound like Chaucer, nor did Chaucer
try to sound like the Pearl Poet.
Please understand that no one (at least not I, and I'm sure not Murph
though of course I can't speak for him) is trying to _tell_ you how you
may or may not write. USA & UK are still relatively free countries, and
RAP is a very free country.
But part of that freedom is we get to say our opinions about what's
written. And we get to tell writers how we think their writings could
be more efective. Of course, the writers get to agree or not, and say
their thoughts about _that_. It's all part of the mix.
I submit that just about all (and I say "just about" only to cover my
ass) really good art--poetry or other--comes from folk who have absorbed
the influences of the past and are firmly planted in their own times.
In the case of writing, this means using one's own (native or adopted)
language.
And if one wants to write well in another language, including an archaic
form of one's native language, one should _learn_ that language well
enough to make it at least _sound_ like one's native tongue and not some
affectation.
All the above is, of course, just my not-so-humble opinion. You know
that, and now you know that I know it.
Sherri F White
j...@percheron.softix.com (Jim Standish) wrote:
> Sherri F White <pa...@whitesweb.com> wrote:
>
> > Elizabethan-style is still highly in favor; if you take the movie
> > fare this last decade, extremely so, in fact. (Mel Gibson's Hamlet
> > was the most wonderful enactment of the play I've ever seen, he
> > truly made it come alive.)
>
> Elizabethan-style was contemporary English when Hamlet was written.
> Note that Shakespeare did not try to sound like Chaucer, nor did
> Chaucer try to sound like the Pearl Poet.
Artists (at least most the best ones) have _always_ emulated other
artists in the quest to perfect their art. This is not saying they
consider their work in a style not truly their own uniquely theirs as a
result, but it's a valuable learning tool which broadens their
abilities as it hones them for the time when they do finally strike out
on their own.
> Please understand that no one (at least not I, and I'm sure not Murph
> though of course I can't speak for him) is trying to _tell_ you how
> you may or may not write. USA & UK are still relatively free
> countries, and RAP is a very free country.
Thanks. Wouldn't do any more good than telling similar to Van Gogh in
his time, in any event.
> But part of that freedom is we get to say our opinions about what's
> written. And we get to tell writers how we think their writings could
> be more effective. Of course, the writers get to agree or not, and
say
> their thoughts about _that_. It's all part of the mix.
Agreed. But, when one offers their opinion, it would be wise to
remember that the critics being wrong is pretty much cliché where
creativity is concerned.
> I submit that just about all (and I say "just about" only to cover my
> ass) really good art--poetry or other--comes from folk who have
> absorbed the influences of the past and are firmly planted in their
> own times. In the case of writing, this means using one's own (native
> or adopted) language.
Rather limiting. There are many assets to be had in the nuances of
each poetic form, a lot can be said without words merely by the chosen
form the artist employs. The form a poet chooses is a medium, just as
important as the medium a painter or sculptor employs to express their
art. Wouldn't it be sad if all paintings had to be in oils and all
sculpture had to be in marble?
> And if one wants to write well in another language, including an
> archaic form of one's native language, one should _learn_ that
> language well enough to make it at least _sound_ like one's native
> tongue and not some affectation.
Agreed.
> All the above is, of course, just my not-so-humble opinion. You know
> that, and now you know that I know it.
Took you to be old enough to know a bit about yourself. :)
> --
> Best, Jim
>
> http://jambo.workhorse-akers.com
>
Playing in/with form:
(in primarily female-preferred and rhyming themes -- gird your loins --
puke-bags upon request)
Starlight
When light e'er shine o'er times,
I pulse in rhyme with thee;
My heart on starlight chimes
That thou doest lovest me.
Far o'er our fallen kind,
Yet call we wand'ring souls,
To each the other find;
Two halves to make two wholes.
Then raining sweet regale,
We twain are fading light,
As dawn the stars doth pale,
We die 'til fall of night;
When, on the stars reborn,
Two, perchance begun,
We 'twine, 'til break of morn,
In starfilled night as one.
SFWhite
Is this my "style"? No. I don't really have one, per se (past a
preference for those that rhyme). I use whatever style best suites the
(subliminal) atmosphere I want to set up to express (I hope) a flow of
meaning within meaning through my poem.
Horror of horrors, I _also_ mix styles, primarily when I want to convey
a change of attitude (mind-set) or atmosphere.
Love's Dark Side
Love is a pit for your soul to fall into;
Love is a trap, and there is no escape;
Love is a Truth that wells up within you;
Love is a changeling, with many a shape.
Love takes your heart, and rends it asunder;
Love takes your life, and tears it apart;
Love takes your mind, by storm and by thunder;
Love takes your soul... claiming all from the start.
Love I do hate thee,
For thou doest betray me,
Thy glimmer and shine beckon reckless away;
Love I despise thee,
Depart, e'er I claim thee,
For demons dance, waiting, if to thee I stray.
The mountains may crumble, and the oceans may dry,
The air that surrounds us may vanish away,
The stars in the heavens may fade from the sky,
But love will remain to exact its just pay.
And so, count it lost then,
The heart that takes love in,
And harbors its secrets beneath a warm breast;
For love's a hard master,
That leads to disaster...
It will rip your heart, bleeding, from out your dead chest.
SFWhite
My opinion's not "humble" either, but neither is it "puffed up". It's
simply pragmatic, a "live and let live" proposition. I use it in my
other art as well. Carved Lincoln's bust in cedar, for instance, the
subject warranted it; used watercolor on wood for my nymphs; modeling
paste and both oils and watercolors for bas relief; oils for portraits,
both Old World and Modern Realist; colored pencil, pen-and-ink, oil
pastels, egg tempera, charcoal; stippling, line-drawing, fill-sans-
lines, cartooning, photographic, collage, computer graphics; landscape,
still-life, cubist; etc., etc., etc.
If someone told me only a certain one of those mediums or styles was
acceptable, I'd allow them their opinion and, otherwise, ignore them,
realizing that they were operating under some grande personal delusion
that had very little real applicability as far as helping me better
express my art, and I think most of my students would agree.
How is what writers and poets do with words any different from what
visual artists do in their mediums? Why should the written word be
limited? How can it be a truly viable art form if it is?
Be well - Pax
o~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~oo~O~o
As Pogo said: "We has met thu enuhmy 'n' he is US!"
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Jim Standish
> Artists (at least most the best ones) have _always_ emulated other
> artists in the quest to perfect their art. This is not saying they
> consider their work in a style not truly their own uniquely theirs as a
> result, but it's a valuable learning tool which broadens their
> abilities as it hones them for the time when they do finally strike out
> on their own.
Point well taken.
Jim Standish
I think we'vbe both about said what we have to say on this topic, but
I'd like to clear up one thing. It seems to me that you are conflating
the two issues of form and language. Rhyme and archaic language are not
inseparable, nor are free verse and contemporary language. A lot of
good rhyming verse gets written in modern English. I even do it on
occasion.
My objection is not to your poetic form, but to your so-obviously phony
"Elizabethan". But heck, if it makes you feel good, I guess that's what
matters.
E Selow
> ... A lot of
> good rhyming verse gets written in modern English. I even do it on
> occasion.
Indeed! An example, Jim, por favor?
Elvira
Sherri F White
j...@percheron.softix.com (Jim Standish) wrote:
> Hi, Sherri F White,
>
> I think we'vbe both about said what we have to say on this topic, but
> I'd like to clear up one thing. It seems to me that you are
> conflating the two issues of form and language. Rhyme and archaic
> language are not inseparable, nor are free verse and contemporary
> English. I even do it on occasion.
Why on Earth would you get the idea I might think rhyme and archaic or
any other type of language are inseparable (especially considering the
excrutiating detail I went into in the post containing my poems to
argue my position _against_ any such thing)? The majority of my poetry
is _not_ in archaic language. In fact, I have only four poems I can
think of out of the hundreds I've written that are Elizabethan-style.
> My objection is not to your poetic form, but to your so-obviously
> phony "Elizabethan". But heck, if it makes you feel good, I guess
> that's what matters.
Could you tell me where on this planet Elizabethan-style speech is not
considered "obviously phony"? When that fact is considered, your
remark comes across more as petulant than instructive.
I'll state my position one last time, since it seems not to have gotten
through: to limit the form, language, content, etc. of poetry is to
cripple it as an art form. Therefore, I try to appreciate ALL poetry,
however it might be presented, and judge it on how artfully the poet
has presented their subject, no matter the poetic form they've chosen.
I have my natural preferences, as we all do, but it has never crossed
my mind that others are not entitled to their own preferences, no
matter how different from my personal choices they might be, since
their preferences, if exhibiting their personal idea of "well done",
must enhance the messages of the works for them and, therefore, give
them pleasure.
> Best, Jim
>
> http://jambo.workhorse-akers.com
Regards - Pax
Jim Standish
> Why on Earth would you get the idea I might think rhyme and archaic or
> any other type of language are inseparable
Because all I ever objected to in your poem was the pseudo-archaic
language, but you kept hammering away about the validity of form.
And I wouldn't even bother to object to your archaic language, if it
*were* archaic, and not some latter-day travesty. I was resisting the
urge to mention this, but now I can resist no longer: when I got to
"doest lovest" in your poem, I just cracked up and could read no further
for laughing. I suspect that, for the rest of my life, whenever I need a
good laugh, I will just say to myself, "doest lovest"!
> Could you tell me where on this planet Elizabethan-style speech is not
> considered "obviously phony"? When that fact is considered, your
> remark comes across more as petulant than instructive.
Real Elizabethan-style speech is not obviously phony.. *Your*
pseudo-Elizabethan is. Well, it suddenly occurs to me that I have on
previous occasions exhibited a woeful irony-impairment. Perhaps you
meant it as satire, and I've been too dense to realize it.
Jim Standish
Well, I fear I expressed myself a little carelessly there. I meant I
occasionally commit rhymed verse, just for fun, plus I think a
free-verse poet's chances of producing *good* free verse are better if
one *can* write formal verse correctly, since it takes a developed ear
for the sounds and rhythms of language to get the form right. Much as a
good abstract impressionist painter *can* make realistic pictures.
For *good* rhymed verse, check out Robert Frost or rap's own Rob Evans,
for just a couple examples. Ask Rob for his sonnet about a beloved dog.
Sherri F White
> > or any other type of language are inseparable
>
> Because all I ever objected to in your poem was the pseudo-archaic
> language, but you kept hammering away about the validity of form.
Kept hammering where?
> And I wouldn't even bother to object to your archaic language, if it
> *were* archaic, and not some latter-day travesty. I was resisting the
> urge to mention this, but now I can resist no longer: when I got to
> "doest lovest" in your poem, I just cracked up and could read no
> further for laughing. I suspect that, for the rest of my life,
> whenever I need a good laugh, I will just say to myself, "doest
> lovest"!
Glad I could amuse you so much with so little. :) :)
> > Could you tell me where on this planet Elizabethan-style speech is
> > not considered "obviously phony"? When that fact is considered,
> > your remark comes across more as petulant than instructive.
>
> Real Elizabethan-style speech is not obviously phony.. *Your*
> pseudo-Elizabethan is. Well, it suddenly occurs to me that I have on
> previous occasions exhibited a woeful irony-impairment. Perhaps you
> meant it as satire, and I've been too dense to realize it.
Jim, I _don't_ write much in Elizabethan for the very reason that I'm
not comfortable with it. I know exactly what you mean, I've read some
modern Elizabethan (not mine) that flows beautifully and sounds very
natural. I've tried going straight from reading Shakespeare to writing
verse to try and improve... not much help... so I stay pretty well away
from it except on rare occasions. :) :)
The one thing I learned a _long_ time ago is that life isn't that
serious, and art is to be enjoyed, both by the artist and those viewing
the artist's work.
I respect your right to your opinion simply because you're you, not
because you're any big deal, just as I don't consider myself a big
deal... but DAMN! man! Take a pill or something! Your aches and pains
are starting to infect _me_, and I've got enough already, thank you
very much!
> Best, Jim
>
> http://jambo.workhorse-akers.com
>
Seriously, lighten UP! - Pax
Sherri F White
Hi, Jim, :)
Does this flow any better?
Starlight
As heaven's eyes shine o'er our times,
I pulse in soft rhyme, love, with thee;
My heart borne on starlight's bright chimes
Rings out true that thou lovest me.
The fallen fill planes of our kind,
Yet calling still, we seeking souls,
In hopes each the other to find;
We two halves to make us two wholes.
Then raining sweet passion's regale,
We twain are each one fading light.
As dawn the stars' dancing doth pale,
We die until next fall of night;
When we are on starlight reborn,
Perchance we as two are begun,
We 'twine, until bright break of morn,
Alive, in the stars' night, as one.
SFWhite
Elizabethan's a bigger pain for me to work with than pointillism!
SHEESH!!
Regards - Pax
Jim Standish
> Hi, Jim, :)
>
> Does this flow any better?
Hmmm...I thought you were done with me. Yes, it flows better.
Sherri F White
> >
> > Does this flow any better?
>
> Hmmm...I thought you were done with me. Yes, it flows better.
Thanks, Jim, :)
I'm not angry with you for your previous comments. I agreed with you.
Didn't you read my other post? I'm in this for pleasure, and my skin
is fairly thick. Peace? :) :)
Jim Standish
> I'm not angry with you for your previous comments. I agreed with you.
Dang! I missed that part.
> Didn't you read my other post?
I thought I did, but maybe not carefully enough.
> I'm in this for pleasure, and my skin is fairly thick.
Good thing, on this here playground.
> Peace? :) :)
Definitely.