Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Shakespeare's purple prose
239 views
Skip to first unread message
book...@yahoo.com
Dec 31, 2012, 1:41:07 PM12/31/12
to
I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
consciously, or something.
(quote)
The barge she sat in, like a burnish'd throne,
Burn'd on the water: the poop was beaten gold;
Purple the sails, and so perfumed that
The winds were love-sick with them; the oars were silver,
Which to the tune of flutes kept stroke, and made
The water which they beat to follow faster,
As amorous of their strokes.
(unquote)
In the case of Tolkien, the label is somewhat serious, I understand,
because critics see his narrative style as essentially very clear and
deliberate, but too bland and "overwritten", as if purple prose
patches are added later.
Tolkien and J. K. Rowling , on the other hand, are being allowed to
use lots of purple patches, evidently because they have other features
that sustain story lines and are, anyway, consistent with other
unusual aspects in characterization, plot, and setting.
Interesting to compare Shakespeare narrative style to Tolkien and
Rowling with respect to "purple prose," since we are very used to
Shakespeare and must use him as a standard, while T and R are probably
going to suffer slings and arrows of fortune at the hands of critics,
in time. A common criticism is that the reader is inclined to glance
through dull parts patched with purple bits. bookburn
Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
consciously, or something.
(quote)
The barge she sat in, like a burnish'd throne,
Burn'd on the water: the poop was beaten gold;
Purple the sails, and so perfumed that
The winds were love-sick with them; the oars were silver,
Which to the tune of flutes kept stroke, and made
The water which they beat to follow faster,
As amorous of their strokes.
(unquote)
In the case of Tolkien, the label is somewhat serious, I understand,
because critics see his narrative style as essentially very clear and
deliberate, but too bland and "overwritten", as if purple prose
patches are added later.
Tolkien and J. K. Rowling , on the other hand, are being allowed to
use lots of purple patches, evidently because they have other features
that sustain story lines and are, anyway, consistent with other
unusual aspects in characterization, plot, and setting.
Interesting to compare Shakespeare narrative style to Tolkien and
Rowling with respect to "purple prose," since we are very used to
Shakespeare and must use him as a standard, while T and R are probably
going to suffer slings and arrows of fortune at the hands of critics,
in time. A common criticism is that the reader is inclined to glance
through dull parts patched with purple bits. bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Dec 31, 2012, 6:47:50 PM12/31/12
to
On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>
> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
>
>
> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines don't reach the right margin.
> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>
> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
>
>
> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 1, 2013, 11:50:27 AM1/1/13
to
On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>
>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
>Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines don't reach the right margin.
>
>Peter G.
It's iambic but not all pentameter, and the lines don't all break at
>On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>
>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
>Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines don't reach the right margin.
>
>Peter G.
the end, either, as far as verse goes. Not arguing that blank verse
isn't poetry, but that S's plays are both verse and prose, and purple
prose isn't restricted to prose.
I see references to "prose poetry" at
http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/5787
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prose_poetry
Cleopatra's Barge is often cited as an example of purple prose, but of
course it may be confused by the fact that it borrows from North's
prose description, as well as the general recognition that "purple
prose" refers to more than just prose, but all writing. Butwe are not
mislead by assuming that S wrote verse plays, period.
Shakespeare is mentioned by some as being the greatest at purple
prose and was good at mixing these. He is understood my some as being
the greatest English writer, not poet. bookburn
John W Kennedy
Jan 1, 2013, 12:31:30 PM1/1/13
to
On 2012-12-31 23:47:50 +0000, metri...@gmail.com said:
> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>
>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
> don't reach the right margin.
>
> Peter G.
And the other little detail that "Antony and Cleopatra", like most of
> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>
>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
> don't reach the right margin.
>
> Peter G.
Shakespeare's works, isn't narrative (although this particular speech
constitutes a very short narrative embedded in a much longer
non-narrative).
And the third little detail that we /know/ exactly what author
Shakespeare got the information from, along with much of the actual
wording, and that, in Shakespeare's time, it was as well known as
Shakespeare's works are in ours.
(And, while there were no encyclopedias in Shakespeare's time, many
works were all but specialized encyclopedias, such as Holinshed.
Indeed, in the middle ages, a reasonably long work of any sort had been
likely to stumble into encyclopediadom, viz., the "Romance of the Rose"
and the "Comedy".)
--
John W Kennedy
"...when you're trying to build a house of cards, the last thing you
should do is blow hard and wave your hands like a madman."
-- Rupert Goodwins
John W Kennedy
Jan 1, 2013, 12:46:55 PM1/1/13
to
On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>>
>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>>
>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>>
>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>>
>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>>
>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>>
>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>>
>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
>>
>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>> don't reach the right margin.
>>
>> Peter G.
>
> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
Yes it is pentameter.
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>>
>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>>
>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>>
>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>>
>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>>
>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>>
>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>>
>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
>>
>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>> don't reach the right margin.
>>
>> Peter G.
>
> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
> and the lines don't all break at
> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
break at the end, that's how you can tell they're lines.
--
John W Kennedy
"There are those who argue that everything breaks even in this old dump
of a world of ours. I suppose these ginks who argue that way hold that
because the rich man gets ice in the summer and the poor man gets it in
the winter things are breaking even for both. Maybe so, but I'll swear
I can't see it that way."
-- The last words of Bat Masterson
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 1, 2013, 2:49:43 PM1/1/13
to
On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
<jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>>>
>>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>>>
>>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>>>
>>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>>>
>>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>>>
>>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>>>
>>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>>>
>>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>>
>>>
>>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>>> don't reach the right margin.
>>>
>>> Peter G.
>>
>> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
>
>Yes it is pentameter.
The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
<jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>
>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>>>
>>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>>>
>>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>>>
>>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>>>
>>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>>>
>>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>>>
>>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>>>
>>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>>
>>>
>>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>>> don't reach the right margin.
>>>
>>> Peter G.
>>
>> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
>
>Yes it is pentameter.
pentameter?
>> and the lines don't all break at
>> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
>What in God's name are you whittering on about? Of course the lines
>break at the end, that's how you can tell they're lines.
without a "word wrap" switch on, resulting the all the double and
triple spacing. Maybe you're confused by that?
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 1, 2013, 2:53:34 PM1/1/13
to
checker, it seems.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 4:24:48 PM1/1/13
to
On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>
>
> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>
>
> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>
>
> >> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>
> >>
>
> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>
>
> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>
>
> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>
>
> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
>
>
> >
>
> >Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines don't reach the right margin.
>
> >
>
> >Peter G.
>
>
>
> It's iambic but not all pentameter, and the lines don't all break at
>
> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
Interesting: why do you find it so hard to admit that you're wrong -- or just accept the correction and move on with it? Do you realise how absurd you sound here?
> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>
>
> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>
>
> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>
>
> >> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>
> >>
>
> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>
>
> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>
>
> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>
>
> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
>
>
> >
>
> >Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines don't reach the right margin.
>
> >
>
> >Peter G.
>
>
>
> It's iambic but not all pentameter, and the lines don't all break at
>
> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
Peter G.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 4:44:02 PM1/1/13
to
On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 06:49:43 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
>
> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>
> >
>
> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>
> >>> don't reach the right margin.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Peter G.
>
> >>
>
> >> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
>
> >
>
> >Yes it is pentameter.
>
>
>
> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
>
> pentameter?
>
If you had ever read any Shakespeare you would know that his blank verse includes trimeters and occasional tetrameters. But even if this weren't the case, if you had read the play in question you might also have discovered that the line doesn't end where the quotation you found does. The Folio (there is no quarto) reads:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
>
> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>
> >
>
> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>>>
>
> >>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>
> >>
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>
> >>> don't reach the right margin.
>
> >>>
>
> >>> Peter G.
>
> >>
>
> >> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
>
> >
>
> >Yes it is pentameter.
>
>
>
> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
>
> pentameter?
>
As amorous of their strokes. For her owne person,
I'm sure *this* is a pentameter.
You really are a first-class idiot, aren't you?
Peter G.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 4:53:20 PM1/1/13
to
Peter G.
David L. Webb
Jan 1, 2013, 5:09:03 PM1/1/13
to
In article <r1f6e85g9mjd0sblf...@4ax.com>,
you quoted is not the entire line:
"The barge she sat in, like a burnish'd throne,
Burn'd on the water: the poop was beaten gold;
Purple the sails, and so perfumed that
The winds were love-sick with them; the oars were silver,
Which to the tune of flutes kept stroke, and made
The water which they beat to follow faster,
As amorous of their strokes. For her own person,
..."
"As amorous of their strokes. For her own person" is indeed a
pentameter line.
> >> and the lines don't all break at
> >> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
> >What in God's name are you whittering on about? Of course the lines
> >break at the end, that's how you can tell they're lines.
> Your line above doesn't have a break. Some of you have news readers
> without a "word wrap" switch on, resulting the all the double and
> triple spacing. Maybe you're confused by that?
No, you're the one that's confused -- to put it exceedingly
charitably. Take a look at
<http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~matty/Shakespeare/texts/tragedies/a
ntonyandcleopatra.html#xref010>;
search for the text in question and you will find the line above.
The fact that a sentence ends in the midst of a line does not alter the
number of feet in the line.
Enjambment is a bog-standard practice in verse; lines need not be
end-stopped. Shakespeare often even changes speakers in the midst of a
pentameter line.
book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> >>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> >>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> >>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> >>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> >>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> >>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> >>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
> >>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
> >>> don't reach the right margin.
> >>>
> >>> Peter G.
> >> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
> >Yes it is pentameter.
>
> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
> pentameter?
You might try reading the text. If you do so, you'll find that what
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> >>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> >>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> >>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> >>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
> >>>>
> >>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> >>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> >>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> >>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
> >>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
> >>> don't reach the right margin.
> >>>
> >>> Peter G.
> >> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
> >Yes it is pentameter.
>
> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
> pentameter?
you quoted is not the entire line:
"The barge she sat in, like a burnish'd throne,
Burn'd on the water: the poop was beaten gold;
Purple the sails, and so perfumed that
The winds were love-sick with them; the oars were silver,
Which to the tune of flutes kept stroke, and made
The water which they beat to follow faster,
..."
"As amorous of their strokes. For her own person" is indeed a
pentameter line.
> >> and the lines don't all break at
> >> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
> >What in God's name are you whittering on about? Of course the lines
> >break at the end, that's how you can tell they're lines.
> Your line above doesn't have a break. Some of you have news readers
> without a "word wrap" switch on, resulting the all the double and
> triple spacing. Maybe you're confused by that?
charitably. Take a look at
<http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~matty/Shakespeare/texts/tragedies/a
ntonyandcleopatra.html#xref010>;
search for the text in question and you will find the line above.
The fact that a sentence ends in the midst of a line does not alter the
number of feet in the line.
Enjambment is a bog-standard practice in verse; lines need not be
end-stopped. Shakespeare often even changes speakers in the midst of a
pentameter line.
David L. Webb
Jan 1, 2013, 6:02:01 PM1/1/13
to
In article <7c530454-c601-46a7...@googlegroups.com>,
One would have thought so -- but Faker never learned, Richard Kennedy
never learned, Mr. Streitz never learned, Mr. Innes hasn't learned, Mr.
Crowley hasn't learned, Art hasn't learned, Little Willie hasn't
learned, and above all Elizabeth hasn't learned, so his not having
figured that out is by no means unprecedented.
Speaking of Little Willie, his web site (Hamlet regained) seems to be
defunct -- a pity.
> Peter G.
never learned, Mr. Streitz never learned, Mr. Innes hasn't learned, Mr.
Crowley hasn't learned, Art hasn't learned, Little Willie hasn't
learned, and above all Elizabeth hasn't learned, so his not having
figured that out is by no means unprecedented.
Speaking of Little Willie, his web site (Hamlet regained) seems to be
defunct -- a pity.
> Peter G.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 6:49:24 PM1/1/13
to
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:00:05 PM1/1/13
to
and I write poetry because my lines are shortened. Something wrong
with your musicality there.
Are you really unaware of the prose poetry genre? Take two of these
and call me in the morning.
http://www.helium.com/items/438942-comparing-shakespeares-use-of-prose-poetry-and-verse
http://cla.calpoly.edu/~dschwart/engl339/verseprose.html
bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:05:08 PM1/1/13
to
you may find reference to end-stopped lines.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:13:10 PM1/1/13
to
Peter G.
John W Kennedy
Jan 1, 2013, 8:15:28 PM1/1/13
to
On 2013-01-01 19:49:43 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>>
>>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>>>>
>>>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>>>>
>>>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>>>>
>>>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>>>>
>>>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>>>>
>>>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>>>>
>>>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>>>>
>>>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>>>> don't reach the right margin.
>>>>
>>>> Peter G.
>>>
>>> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
>>
>> Yes it is pentameter.
>
> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
> pentameter?
Sometimes, indeed, Shakespeare ends a speech with a half-line. But this
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>>
>>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>>>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>>>>
>>>>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>>>>
>>>>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>>>>
>>>>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>>>>
>>>>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>>>>
>>>>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>>>>
>>>>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>>>>
>>>>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
>>>> don't reach the right margin.
>>>>
>>>> Peter G.
>>>
>>> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
>>
>> Yes it is pentameter.
>
> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
> pentameter?
isn't an example, BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE END OF THE PASSAGE OR THE LINE.
>>> and the lines don't all break at
>>> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
>
>> What in God's name are you whittering on about? Of course the lines
>> break at the end, that's how you can tell they're lines.
>
> Your line above doesn't have a break.
therefore wholly irrelevant.
> Some of you have news readers
> without a "word wrap" switch on, resulting the all the double and
> triple spacing. Maybe you're confused by that?
passage in with line breaks or cut-and-pasted it with line breaks. At
any rate, YOUR OWN POSTING has the lines entered correctly, which is a
strong suggestion that your exemplar did, too.
--
John W Kennedy
"Only an idiot fights a war on two fronts. Only the heir to the throne
of the kingdom of idiots would fight a war on twelve fronts"
-- J. Michael Straczynski. "Babylon 5", "Ceremonies of Light and Dark"
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:16:27 PM1/1/13
to
On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:24:48 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines don't reach the right margin.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Peter G.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's iambic but not all pentameter, and the lines don't all break at
>>
>> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
>
>Interesting: why do you find it so hard to admit that you're wrong -- or just accept the correction and move on with it? Do you realise how absurd you sound here?
>
>Peter G.
I can see you're fix on a definition of poetry, i. e. blank verse,
>On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it.
>>
>>
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines don't reach the right margin.
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Peter G.
>>
>>
>>
>> It's iambic but not all pentameter, and the lines don't all break at
>>
>> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
>
>Interesting: why do you find it so hard to admit that you're wrong -- or just accept the correction and move on with it? Do you realise how absurd you sound here?
>
>Peter G.
that means my use of "prose" is mistaken, even considering the prose
source, and even considering that "purple prose" applies to poetry as
well.
You seem to have mistaken my question, Are you sure . . . , as an
incorrect understanding on my part, which of course is your fault.
Would you like a go at my suggestion that not all the lines are
pentameter?
Happy New Year, bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:18:32 PM1/1/13
to
Peter G.
John W Kennedy
Jan 1, 2013, 8:28:32 PM1/1/13
to
--
John W Kennedy
"The blind rulers of Logres
Nourished the land on a fallacy of rational virtue."
-- Charles Williams. "Taliessin through Logres: Prelude"
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:30:13 PM1/1/13
to
(quote)
Trope (literature)
A literary trope is the use of figurative language. . . . Since the
1970s, the word has also come to mean a commonly recurring literary
device or motif, a cliche.
(unquote)
I hope you will reveal 1) what you think "trope" refers to, and
2) what how you think my use in error. bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:44:39 PM1/1/13
to
On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:16:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:24:48 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
[desunt nonnulla]
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:24:48 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> I can see you're fix on a definition of poetry, i. e. blank verse,
>
> that means my use of "prose" is mistaken, even considering the prose
>
> source, and even considering that "purple prose" applies to poetry as
>
> well.
This is barely intelligible, but I'll do what I can. You are very confused: you conflate the terms 'verse' and 'poetry', which is ignorant: poetry can be written in verse or prose. Shakespeare's source here is in prose; Shakespeare has turned it into verse. It's really not that hard. I realise that you have a tin ear and so can't hear the difference, which is why I pointed out that in verse the lines don't reach the right margin, as a kind of idiot's rule-of-thumb.
>
> I can see you're fix on a definition of poetry, i. e. blank verse,
>
> that means my use of "prose" is mistaken, even considering the prose
>
> source, and even considering that "purple prose" applies to poetry as
>
> well.
>
>
>
> You seem to have mistaken my question, Are you sure . . . , as an
>
> incorrect understanding on my part, which of course is your fault.
>
> Would you like a go at my suggestion that not all the lines are
>
> pentameter?
Groves, Peter L., <Strange Music: The Metre of the English Heroic Line>, ELS Monograph Series 74 (Victoria, B.C.: University of Victoria, 1998).
Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s Pentameter and the End of Editing”, <Shakespeare> (Journal of the British Shakespeare Association), 3:2 (2007), 126-42
Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s ‘Short’ Pentameters and the Rhythms of Dramatic Verse”, in <Stylistics and Shakespeare’s Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches>, ed. Mireille Ravassat and Jonathan Culpepper (London and New York: Continuum Publishing, 2011), pp.119-138.
Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s Secret Influence: Metrical Gaps and the Jacobean Dramatists” in <Current Trends in Metrical Analysis>, ed. Christoph Küper (Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang, 2011).
Groves, Peter L., <Rhythm and Meaning in Shakespeare’s Verse: A guide for readers and actors> (Melbourne: Monash University Publishing, -- still in press, but due early 2013)
Peter G.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 1, 2013, 8:58:26 PM1/1/13
to
If you had used a dictionary rather than Wikipedia [!], you would have discovered that 'trope' means " A figure of speech which consists in the use of a word or phrase in a sense other than that which is proper to it; also, in casual use, a figure of speech; figurative language." (OED); the OED also acknowledges a modern colloquial use of it to mean "A significant or recurrent theme; a motif", clearly an ignorant confusion with 'topos'. If you think either of these definitions justifies your use of it to characterise heightened prose, you are a bigger moron than I took you for (and that's saying something).
Peter G.
David L. Webb
Jan 1, 2013, 9:26:49 PM1/1/13
to
In article <dq17e8dpq14g9d5b3...@4ax.com>,
Huh? I have no idea what point (if any) you may be trying to make,
nor any clue what you are gibbering about now. You expressed doubt that
the line (part of) which you quoted was a pentameter line; had you
looked at the text and read the *entire* line, you would have found --
or at any rate, I *hope* that you would have found -- that it is indeed
a pentameter line, exactly as John told you.
Why you are caviling about the definition of the word "verse" (which
I have no need to look up, although apparently you do) I cannot imagine,
as it is not germane to the question being discussed, except insofar as
it undermines what I take to be your position: in fact, if you will
check the first OED definition of the word, you will find:
--------------------------------
A succession of words arranged according to natural or recognized rules
of prosody and forming a COMPLETE METRICAL LINE [uppercase mine]; one of
the lines of a poem or piece of versification.
--------------------------------
Fairly obviously, "As amorous of their strokes" is not a complete
metrical line in the pertinent context in the play, but the *entire*
line reads "As amorous of their strokes. For her own person", which *is*
a complete metrical line in that context, and it *is* a pentameter line,
as John said.
Nor do I see why you insist that a discussion of verse might mention
end-stopped lines; *of course* it might! It might also mention _rime
riche_, sinalefas, caesurae, _ottava rima_, Onegin stanzas, and all
manner of other prosodic concepts that are irrelevant to the present
discussion. However, it might also mention enjambment, which *is*
relevant -- indeed, your failure to understand what the latter is
apparently led you to confuse the first few feet of a pentameter line
with the entire line, and therefore to doubt that it was pentameter.
One need scarcely add that all this makes you look exceedingly
foolish. Peter Groves is a professional expert on metrical matters, and
John Kennedy also knows what he is talking about. You would do well to
try to understand what they are telling you.
nor any clue what you are gibbering about now. You expressed doubt that
the line (part of) which you quoted was a pentameter line; had you
looked at the text and read the *entire* line, you would have found --
or at any rate, I *hope* that you would have found -- that it is indeed
a pentameter line, exactly as John told you.
Why you are caviling about the definition of the word "verse" (which
I have no need to look up, although apparently you do) I cannot imagine,
as it is not germane to the question being discussed, except insofar as
it undermines what I take to be your position: in fact, if you will
check the first OED definition of the word, you will find:
--------------------------------
A succession of words arranged according to natural or recognized rules
of prosody and forming a COMPLETE METRICAL LINE [uppercase mine]; one of
the lines of a poem or piece of versification.
--------------------------------
Fairly obviously, "As amorous of their strokes" is not a complete
metrical line in the pertinent context in the play, but the *entire*
line reads "As amorous of their strokes. For her own person", which *is*
a complete metrical line in that context, and it *is* a pentameter line,
as John said.
Nor do I see why you insist that a discussion of verse might mention
end-stopped lines; *of course* it might! It might also mention _rime
riche_, sinalefas, caesurae, _ottava rima_, Onegin stanzas, and all
manner of other prosodic concepts that are irrelevant to the present
discussion. However, it might also mention enjambment, which *is*
relevant -- indeed, your failure to understand what the latter is
apparently led you to confuse the first few feet of a pentameter line
with the entire line, and therefore to doubt that it was pentameter.
One need scarcely add that all this makes you look exceedingly
foolish. Peter Groves is a professional expert on metrical matters, and
John Kennedy also knows what he is talking about. You would do well to
try to understand what they are telling you.
Robin G.
Jan 2, 2013, 1:18:34 AM1/2/13
to
On Dec 31 2012, 10:41 am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
> consciously, or something.
>
bookburn,
> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
> consciously, or something.
>
There is nothing purple about this speech. Please provide us with the
names of people who cite it as an
example of purple. Not to split hairs, but Shakespeare borrows it
from North's translation of Plutarch.
From a performance point of view, it is a wonderful speech. In
performance, I have never heard people laughing during
or after Enobarbus delivers it.
It is one of most famous speeches in the play, or, for that matter in
Shakespeare. In the speech,
Shakespeare "paints" a vivid picture. If the actor playing Enobarbus
is skilled at speaking the
language, the audience will "see" the event. I get the sense that
Maeceans and Agrippa wonder
what has kept Antony in Egypt. The speech gives a clear reason.
I think the speech also provides the audience with a sense that
Cleopatra is a master/mistress of
state showmanship. We get a bit of characterization in the speech.
Also, in the play, Shakespeare contrasts life in Rome with life in
Egypt. After hearing the speech,
life in Rome is pretty dull.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 2:48:40 AM1/2/13
to
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 8:08:02 AM1/2/13
to
don't address my question about "prose poetry," either.
Your preoccupation/fixation on line lengths and meter may be
associated with the posting problem in this thread that causes double
and triple spacing, along with no margins. Consider shortening your
line length to a standard 70 characters. You can do this with
standard margins of 0.75 on your page set-up, no page breaks, plus the
word-wrap.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 8:38:08 AM1/2/13
to
On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:44:39 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:16:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:24:48 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>[desunt nonnulla]
>>
>>
>> I can see you're fix on a definition of poetry, i. e. blank verse,
>>
>> that means my use of "prose" is mistaken, even considering the prose
>>
>> source, and even considering that "purple prose" applies to poetry as
>>
>> well.
>
>This is barely intelligible, but I'll do what I can. You are very confused: you conflate the terms 'verse' and 'poetry', which is ignorant: poetry can be written in verse or prose. Shakespeare's source here is in prose; Shakespeare has turned it into verse. It's really not that hard. I realise that you have a tin ear and so can't hear the difference, which is why I pointed out that in verse the lines don't reach the right margin, as a kind of idiot's rule-of-thumb.
I put a "hard return" on your line, hope you don't object. I seem to
>On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:16:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:24:48 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>[desunt nonnulla]
>>
>>
>> I can see you're fix on a definition of poetry, i. e. blank verse,
>>
>> that means my use of "prose" is mistaken, even considering the prose
>>
>> source, and even considering that "purple prose" applies to poetry as
>>
>> well.
>
>This is barely intelligible, but I'll do what I can. You are very confused: you conflate the terms 'verse' and 'poetry', which is ignorant: poetry can be written in verse or prose. Shakespeare's source here is in prose; Shakespeare has turned it into verse. It's really not that hard. I realise that you have a tin ear and so can't hear the difference, which is why I pointed out that in verse the lines don't reach the right margin, as a kind of idiot's rule-of-thumb.
be repeating the criticism that you ivory tower maestros are
mismanaging stage directions in your play. You shouldn't have poetic
freedom to do this, because language needs proper structure. The
effort to restore poetic freedom to language is an amateur's movement.
You sum up a definition of poetry with respect to verse and prose, but
don't forget that my working definition of "Shakespeare's purple
prose" is not contradicted by you yet. Obfuscation on this point
noted. bookburn
>>
>>
>>
>> You seem to have mistaken my question, Are you sure . . . , as an
>>
>> incorrect understanding on my part, which of course is your fault.
>
>It's my fault that you didn't check where the line ended, and so made a fool of yourself? Interesting.
>
>>
>> Would you like a go at my suggestion that not all the lines are
>>
>> pentameter?
>
>I tell you what: if you'd really like to discuss this with me you should probably begin by reading at least one of the following (I'm sure you have libraries in Alaska). Unlike the shonky websites you rely on, these publications are all peer-reviewed:
>
>Groves, Peter L., <Strange Music: The Metre of the English Heroic Line>, ELS Monograph Series 74 (Victoria, B.C.: University of Victoria, 1998).
>
>Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s Pentameter and the End of Editing”, <Shakespeare> (Journal of the British Shakespeare Association), 3:2 (2007), 126-42
>
>Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s ‘Short’ Pentameters and the Rhythms of Dramatic Verse”, in <Stylistics and Shakespeare’s Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches>, ed. Mireille Ravassat and Jonathan Culpepper (London and New York: Continuum Publishing, 2011), pp.119-138.
>
>Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s Secret Influence: Metrical Gaps and the Jacobean Dramatists” in <Current Trends in Metrical Analysis>, ed. Christoph Küper (Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang, 2011).
>
>Groves, Peter L., <Rhythm and Meaning in Shakespeare’s Verse: A guide for readers and actors> (Melbourne: Monash University Publishing, -- still in press, but due early 2013)
>
>Peter G.
your demonstrated knowledge in the field and published, especially
Shakespeare studies, particularly Shakespeare's poetry; know that.
Fact is that "Shakespeare's purple prose" is so widely accepted,
including Cleopatra's Barge description, that I wonder if you have
used this term, yourself? It's already the title of numerous
articles, so your version could object to that. bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 8:59:51 AM1/2/13
to
On Thursday, 3 January 2013 00:08:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:13:10 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:00:05 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:44:02 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 06:49:43 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
>
> >> >> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>
> >> >> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Your "simple points" are well shot, but the target is mistaken. You
>
> don't address my question about "prose poetry," either.
>
And what question would that be (I don't recall one)? Does it exist? (yes). In Shakespeare? (yes). Did you have any other questions about it? How is it relevant to Enobarbus' barge speech?
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:13:10 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:00:05 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:44:02 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 06:49:43 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
>
> >> >> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
> >> >> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>
> >> >> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Your "simple points" are well shot, but the target is mistaken. You
>
> don't address my question about "prose poetry," either.
>
>
>
> Your preoccupation/fixation on line lengths and meter may be
>
> associated with the posting problem in this thread that causes double
>
> and triple spacing, along with no margins.
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:12:17 AM1/2/13
to
rambling. This affects whatever pretence of coherence you may have,
so I would not hazard an attempt to "discover what 'trope' means in
your reckoning. Purple prose as "A prose trope of Shakespeare's
narrative style" may not be unassailable in your dictionary
understanding, but I maintain it's understandable.
I also maintain the sentence of mine you label "ungrammatical" is not.
Regards, bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:16:01 AM1/2/13
to
On Thursday, 3 January 2013 00:38:08 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:44:39 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:16:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:24:48 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >[desunt nonnulla]
>
>
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:44:39 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:16:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:24:48 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 03:50:27 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >[desunt nonnulla]
>
>
> I put a "hard return" on your line, hope you don't object. I seem to
>
> be repeating the criticism that you ivory tower maestros are
>
> mismanaging stage directions in your play. You shouldn't have poetic
>
> freedom to do this, because language needs proper structure.
Was that sentence supposed to mean anything?
>
> be repeating the criticism that you ivory tower maestros are
>
> mismanaging stage directions in your play. You shouldn't have poetic
>
> freedom to do this, because language needs proper structure.
The
>
> effort to restore poetic freedom to language is an amateur's movement.
>
>
>
> You sum up a definition of poetry with respect to verse and prose, but
>
> don't forget that my working definition of "Shakespeare's purple
>
> prose" is not contradicted by you yet.
> Obfuscation on this point
Now *that's* funny!
>
> noted. bookburn
>
>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> You seem to have mistaken my question, Are you sure . . . , as an
>
> >>
>
> >> incorrect understanding on my part, which of course is your fault.
>
> >
>
> >It's my fault that you didn't check where the line ended, and so made a fool of yourself? Interesting.
>
> >
>
> >>
>
> >> Would you like a go at my suggestion that not all the lines are
>
> >>
>
> >> pentameter?
>
> >
>
> >I tell you what: if you'd really like to discuss this with me you should probably begin by reading at least one of the following (I'm sure you have libraries in Alaska). Unlike the shonky websites you rely on, these publications are all peer-reviewed:
>
> >
>
> >Groves, Peter L., <Strange Music: The Metre of the English Heroic Line>, ELS Monograph Series 74 (Victoria, B.C.: University of Victoria, 1998).
>
> >
>
> >Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s Pentameter and the End of Editing”, <Shakespeare> (Journal of the British Shakespeare Association), 3:2 (2007), 126-42
>
> >
>
> >Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s ‘Short’ Pentameters and the Rhythms of Dramatic Verse”, in <Stylistics and Shakespeare’s Language: Transdisciplinary Approaches>, ed. Mireille Ravassat and Jonathan Culpepper (London and New York: Continuum Publishing, 2011), pp.119-138.
>
> >
>
> >Groves, Peter L., “Shakespeare’s Secret Influence: Metrical Gaps and the Jacobean Dramatists” in <Current Trends in Metrical Analysis>, ed. Christoph Küper (Frankfurt-am-Main: Peter Lang, 2011).
>
> >
>
> >Groves, Peter L., <Rhythm and Meaning in Shakespeare’s Verse: A guide for readers and actors> (Melbourne: Monash University Publishing, -- still in press, but due early 2013)
>
> >
>
> >Peter G.
>
>
>
> I'm impressed by not only your credentials as a real professor, but by
>
> your demonstrated knowledge in the field and published, especially
>
> Shakespeare studies, particularly Shakespeare's poetry; know that.
>
>
>
> Fact is that "Shakespeare's purple prose" is so widely accepted,
Discussions - humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare | Google Groups
groups.google.com/group/humanities.lit.authors.shakespeare/topicsShakespeare's purple prose. I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as ...
Uncategorized « Newt In A Tea Cup
newtinateacup.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/He's actually very clever, did English at university but didn't like Shakespeare's purple prose, preferred modern classics (like me) and is good at design.
Young Love... (FB) - Imgur
www.lolicon.nl/gallery/2XpEcI hold the same levels of hatred for Shakespeare's purple prose as I do for Stephanie Meyer's twit-lit. +. dudeiamtoohightousername 2 points : 2 months ago reply ...
>
> including Cleopatra's Barge description, that I wonder if you have
>
> used this term, yourself?
>It's already the title of numerous
>
> articles,
I won't hold my breath: it'll be like waiting for Crowley's 50 puns on 'William Shakespeare', Elizabeth's sources, Art's actual message, --- the list goes on.
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:19:10 AM1/2/13
to
better now. bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:27:07 AM1/2/13
to
On Thursday, 3 January 2013 01:12:17 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:58:26 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
[multa desunt]
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:58:26 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> >Here is the ugly (and ungrammatical) sentence in question: "I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or something."
>
> >
>
> >If you had used a dictionary rather than Wikipedia [!], you would have discovered that 'trope' means " A figure of speech which consists in the use of a word or phrase in a sense other than that which is proper to it; also, in casual use, a figure of speech; figurative language." (OED); the OED also acknowledges a modern colloquial use of it to mean "A significant or recurrent theme; a motif", clearly an ignorant confusion with 'topos'. If you think either of these definitions justifies your use of it to characterise heightened prose, you are a bigger moron than I took you for (and that's saying something).
>
> >
>
> >Peter G.
>
>
>
> You are simply off the page with this latest exercise of pedantic
>
> rambling. This affects whatever pretence of coherence you may have,
>
> so I would not hazard an attempt to "discover what 'trope' means in
>
> your reckoning.
Good lord no, those dictionary definitions are so vague and 'rambling'. Much better to pull it out of your arse.
> >Here is the ugly (and ungrammatical) sentence in question: "I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or something."
>
> >
>
> >If you had used a dictionary rather than Wikipedia [!], you would have discovered that 'trope' means " A figure of speech which consists in the use of a word or phrase in a sense other than that which is proper to it; also, in casual use, a figure of speech; figurative language." (OED); the OED also acknowledges a modern colloquial use of it to mean "A significant or recurrent theme; a motif", clearly an ignorant confusion with 'topos'. If you think either of these definitions justifies your use of it to characterise heightened prose, you are a bigger moron than I took you for (and that's saying something).
>
> >
>
> >Peter G.
>
>
>
> You are simply off the page with this latest exercise of pedantic
>
> rambling. This affects whatever pretence of coherence you may have,
>
> so I would not hazard an attempt to "discover what 'trope' means in
>
> your reckoning.
> Purple prose as "A prose trope of Shakespeare's
>
> narrative style" may not be unassailable in your dictionary
>
> understanding, but I maintain it's understandable.
>
>
>
> I also maintain the sentence of mine you label "ungrammatical" is not.
Peter G.
>
> Regards, bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:42:09 AM1/2/13
to
On Tue, 01 Jan 2013 21:26:49 -0500, "David L. Webb"
No, I quoted the line referenced above; as such, it's not pentameter.
Your post is coherent and readable, not off the page as others are, so
no need to huff and puff. By answering my question of whether it's
pentameter, you did fine.
About "end-stopped lines," I have from the American Heritage
Dictionary:
(quote)
Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary
(end'stopt')
adj.
Ending in a syntactic and rhythmic pause. Used of a line of verse or a
couplet.
(unquote)
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/end-stopped#ixzz2GpQehdG9
> Why you are caviling about the definition of the word "verse" (which
>I have no need to look up, although apparently you do) I cannot imagine,
>as it is not germane to the question being discussed, except insofar as
>it undermines what I take to be your position: in fact, if you will
>check the first OED definition of the word, you will find:
>--------------------------------
>A succession of words arranged according to natural or recognized rules
>of prosody and forming a COMPLETE METRICAL LINE [uppercase mine]; one of
>the lines of a poem or piece of versification.
>--------------------------------
>
>Fairly obviously, "As amorous of their strokes" is not a complete
>metrical line in the pertinent context in the play, but the *entire*
>line reads "As amorous of their strokes. For her own person", which *is*
>a complete metrical line in that context, and it *is* a pentameter line,
>as John said.
>
> Nor do I see why you insist that a discussion of verse might mention
>end-stopped lines; *of course* it might!
See the definition I quote above identifying verse as a use of
end-stopped lines.
> It might also mention _rime
>riche_, sinalefas, caesurae, _ottava rima_, Onegin stanzas, and all
>manner of other prosodic concepts that are irrelevant to the present
>discussion. However, it might also mention enjambment, which *is*
>relevant -- indeed, your failure to understand what the latter is
>apparently led you to confuse the first few feet of a pentameter line
>with the entire line, and therefore to doubt that it was pentameter.
>
> One need scarcely add that all this makes you look exceedingly
>foolish. Peter Groves is a professional expert on metrical matters, and
>John Kennedy also knows what he is talking about. You would do well to
>try to understand what they are telling you.
Professional expert, indeed. I'm a fool in the h.l.a.s. circus, and
you are a rube looking for the Punch and Judy Show.
Regards, bookburn
Your post is coherent and readable, not off the page as others are, so
no need to huff and puff. By answering my question of whether it's
pentameter, you did fine.
About "end-stopped lines," I have from the American Heritage
Dictionary:
(quote)
Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary
(end'stopt')
adj.
Ending in a syntactic and rhythmic pause. Used of a line of verse or a
couplet.
(unquote)
Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/end-stopped#ixzz2GpQehdG9
> Why you are caviling about the definition of the word "verse" (which
>I have no need to look up, although apparently you do) I cannot imagine,
>as it is not germane to the question being discussed, except insofar as
>it undermines what I take to be your position: in fact, if you will
>check the first OED definition of the word, you will find:
>--------------------------------
>A succession of words arranged according to natural or recognized rules
>of prosody and forming a COMPLETE METRICAL LINE [uppercase mine]; one of
>the lines of a poem or piece of versification.
>--------------------------------
>
>Fairly obviously, "As amorous of their strokes" is not a complete
>metrical line in the pertinent context in the play, but the *entire*
>line reads "As amorous of their strokes. For her own person", which *is*
>a complete metrical line in that context, and it *is* a pentameter line,
>as John said.
>
> Nor do I see why you insist that a discussion of verse might mention
>end-stopped lines; *of course* it might!
end-stopped lines.
> It might also mention _rime
>riche_, sinalefas, caesurae, _ottava rima_, Onegin stanzas, and all
>manner of other prosodic concepts that are irrelevant to the present
>discussion. However, it might also mention enjambment, which *is*
>relevant -- indeed, your failure to understand what the latter is
>apparently led you to confuse the first few feet of a pentameter line
>with the entire line, and therefore to doubt that it was pentameter.
>
> One need scarcely add that all this makes you look exceedingly
>foolish. Peter Groves is a professional expert on metrical matters, and
>John Kennedy also knows what he is talking about. You would do well to
>try to understand what they are telling you.
you are a rube looking for the Punch and Judy Show.
Regards, bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:56:02 AM1/2/13
to
On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
<doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>On Dec 31 2012, 10:41 am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
>> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
>> consciously, or something.
>bookburn,
>
>There is nothing purple about this speech. Please provide us with the
>names of people who cite it as an
>example of purple. Not to split hairs, but Shakespeare borrows it
>from North's translation of Plutarch.
>From a performance point of view, it is a wonderful speech. In
>performance, I have never heard people laughing during
>or after Enobarbus delivers it.
No, but you can search for "Shakespeare purple prose" as I did.
<doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>On Dec 31 2012, 10:41 am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
>> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
>> consciously, or something.
>bookburn,
>
>There is nothing purple about this speech. Please provide us with the
>names of people who cite it as an
>example of purple. Not to split hairs, but Shakespeare borrows it
>from North's translation of Plutarch.
>From a performance point of view, it is a wonderful speech. In
>performance, I have never heard people laughing during
>or after Enobarbus delivers it.
>It is one of most famous speeches in the play, or, for that matter in
>Shakespeare. In the speech,
>Shakespeare "paints" a vivid picture. If the actor playing Enobarbus
>is skilled at speaking the
>language, the audience will "see" the event. I get the sense that
>Maeceans and Agrippa wonder
>what has kept Antony in Egypt. The speech gives a clear reason.
>
>I think the speech also provides the audience with a sense that
>Cleopatra is a master/mistress of
>state showmanship. We get a bit of characterization in the speech.
>
>Also, in the play, Shakespeare contrasts life in Rome with life in
>Egypt. After hearing the speech,
>life in Rome is pretty dull.
"purple prose"?
>
>
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:59:14 AM1/2/13
to
his blank verse, sonnets, and narrative poems?, or is it all too
wonderful and literate for that?
David L. Webb
Jan 2, 2013, 10:09:17 AM1/2/13
to
In article <k8i8e8t8ku5qmkr21...@4ax.com>,
will no doubt find all manner of nonsense, some of it from people who
have never read Shakespeare and wouldn't know what purple prose is if it
bit them.
You can also Google "alien abduction", or "New Chronology", or
"intelligent design", and you'll find much more information. While
Google may be an invaluable tool, the mere fact that you can Google
"Shakespeare purple prose" does not mean that the passage you quoted
qualifies as such, any more than the fact that you can Google "flat
earth" means that what you find will be reliable.
As several people have already pointed out to you, the passage that
you quote is *verse*, not prose; fairly obviously, it is not what is
meant by the phrase "purple prose". Moreover, as Robin rightly points
out, even if it *were* prose, it would scarcely be *purple* prose.
> >It is one of most famous speeches in the play, or, for that matter in
> >Shakespeare. In the speech,
> >Shakespeare "paints" a vivid picture. If the actor playing Enobarbus
> >is skilled at speaking the
> >language, the audience will "see" the event. I get the sense that
> >Maeceans and Agrippa wonder
> >what has kept Antony in Egypt. The speech gives a clear reason.
> >
> >I think the speech also provides the audience with a sense that
> >Cleopatra is a master/mistress of
> >state showmanship. We get a bit of characterization in the speech.
> >
> >Also, in the play, Shakespeare contrasts life in Rome with life in
> >Egypt. After hearing the speech,
> >life in Rome is pretty dull.
> I agree with that. Stilll, do you think it could be an example of
> "purple prose"?
No. (1) It is not prose. (2) It is not "purple".
book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41 am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> >> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
> >>
> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
> >> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
> >> consciously, or something.
> >bookburn,
> >
> >There is nothing purple about this speech. Please provide us with the
> >names of people who cite it as an
> >example of purple. Not to split hairs, but Shakespeare borrows it
> >from North's translation of Plutarch.
> >From a performance point of view, it is a wonderful speech. In
> >performance, I have never heard people laughing during
> >or after Enobarbus delivers it.
> No, but you can search for "Shakespeare purple prose" as I did.
You can search for "Shakespeare purple prose" if you like, and you
> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>
> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41 am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> >> something. If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
> >>
> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. He probably has
> >> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
> >> consciously, or something.
> >bookburn,
> >
> >There is nothing purple about this speech. Please provide us with the
> >names of people who cite it as an
> >example of purple. Not to split hairs, but Shakespeare borrows it
> >from North's translation of Plutarch.
> >From a performance point of view, it is a wonderful speech. In
> >performance, I have never heard people laughing during
> >or after Enobarbus delivers it.
> No, but you can search for "Shakespeare purple prose" as I did.
will no doubt find all manner of nonsense, some of it from people who
have never read Shakespeare and wouldn't know what purple prose is if it
bit them.
You can also Google "alien abduction", or "New Chronology", or
"intelligent design", and you'll find much more information. While
Google may be an invaluable tool, the mere fact that you can Google
"Shakespeare purple prose" does not mean that the passage you quoted
qualifies as such, any more than the fact that you can Google "flat
earth" means that what you find will be reliable.
As several people have already pointed out to you, the passage that
you quote is *verse*, not prose; fairly obviously, it is not what is
meant by the phrase "purple prose". Moreover, as Robin rightly points
out, even if it *were* prose, it would scarcely be *purple* prose.
> >It is one of most famous speeches in the play, or, for that matter in
> >Shakespeare. In the speech,
> >Shakespeare "paints" a vivid picture. If the actor playing Enobarbus
> >is skilled at speaking the
> >language, the audience will "see" the event. I get the sense that
> >Maeceans and Agrippa wonder
> >what has kept Antony in Egypt. The speech gives a clear reason.
> >
> >I think the speech also provides the audience with a sense that
> >Cleopatra is a master/mistress of
> >state showmanship. We get a bit of characterization in the speech.
> >
> >Also, in the play, Shakespeare contrasts life in Rome with life in
> >Egypt. After hearing the speech,
> >life in Rome is pretty dull.
> I agree with that. Stilll, do you think it could be an example of
> "purple prose"?
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 2:39:34 PM1/2/13
to
bookburn
>Peter G.
>
>>
>> Regards, bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 2:47:18 PM1/2/13
to
point. Will you state categorically that Shakespeare never uses
"purple prose" in his blank verse, sonnets, and narrative poems?, or
is it all too wonderful and literate for that?
bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 4:18:43 PM1/2/13
to
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 4:22:07 PM1/2/13
to
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 4:22:53 PM1/2/13
to
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 05:59:51 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Thursday, 3 January 2013 00:08:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:13:10 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:00:05 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:44:02 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 06:49:43 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
>>
>> >> >> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>>
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Your "simple points" are well shot, but the target is mistaken. You
>>
>> don't address my question about "prose poetry," either.
>>
>
>And what question would that be (I don't recall one)? Does it exist? (yes). In Shakespeare? (yes). Did you have any other questions about it? How is it relevant to Enobarbus' barge speech?
>
>>
>>
>> Your preoccupation/fixation on line lengths and meter may be
>>
>> associated with the posting problem in this thread that causes double
>>
>> and triple spacing, along with no margins.
>
>I'm afraid that (as usual) you're not making any kind of sense here. Do you suppose Shakespeare posted his verse to Usenet? Or what? Incidentally, if you read through the thread you'll notice that you don't make any sense to anyone else, either (notice the free use of terms like 'wittering', 'gibbering', 'imbecile'.
>
>Peter G.
Really difficult to "read" the thread after your garbled ministrations
>On Thursday, 3 January 2013 00:08:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 17:13:10 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 12:00:05 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 13:44:02 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 06:49:43 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 12:46:55 -0500, John W Kennedy
>>
>> >> >> <jwk...@attglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >On 2013-01-01 16:50:27 +0000, book...@yahoo.com said:
>>
>> >> >> >> On Mon, 31 Dec 2012 15:47:50 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >>> On Tuesday, 1 January 2013 05:41:07 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>
>> Your "simple points" are well shot, but the target is mistaken. You
>>
>> don't address my question about "prose poetry," either.
>>
>
>And what question would that be (I don't recall one)? Does it exist? (yes). In Shakespeare? (yes). Did you have any other questions about it? How is it relevant to Enobarbus' barge speech?
>
>>
>>
>> Your preoccupation/fixation on line lengths and meter may be
>>
>> associated with the posting problem in this thread that causes double
>>
>> and triple spacing, along with no margins.
>
>I'm afraid that (as usual) you're not making any kind of sense here. Do you suppose Shakespeare posted his verse to Usenet? Or what? Incidentally, if you read through the thread you'll notice that you don't make any sense to anyone else, either (notice the free use of terms like 'wittering', 'gibbering', 'imbecile'.
>
>Peter G.
and wilful misunderstandings. You may be unable to recognize where
you're at in a cracked mirror like that.
How about a straight answer on whether Shakespeare is recognized as
using purple prose and if the Barge Speech is an example of it?
bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 4:25:03 PM1/2/13
to
Peter G.
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 4:28:07 PM1/2/13
to
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 6:11:26 PM1/2/13
to
premise that "purple prose" isn't limited to prose. Probably purple
prose as a trope is more than you will even acknowledge.
Be encouraged, though, by the example of Dennis Abrams, in his lecture
on "A. C. Bradley and His Introduction to Hamlet," at
http://theplaystheblog.wordpress.com/, where he dwells lengthily on a
comparison of Shakespeare's version of Cleopatra's Barge to his
source. Doesn't Abrams come close to describing "purple prose"?
bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 6:52:59 PM1/2/13
to
On Thursday, 3 January 2013 10:11:26 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:18:43 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 01:56:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
>
> >>
>
> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>
>
> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>
>
> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>
>
> >> >> something. �If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:18:43 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 01:56:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
>
> >>
>
> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>
>
> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>
>
> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>
>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>
>
> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>
>
> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>
>
> >> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. �He probably has
> >>
>
> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>
>
> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>
>
> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>
>
Peter G.
ignoto
Jan 2, 2013, 6:58:05 PM1/2/13
to
Inceptis grauibus plerumque et magna professis
purpureus, late qui splendeat, unus et alter
adsuitur pannus, cum lucus et ara Dianae
et properantis aquae per amoenos ambitus agros
aut flumen Rhenum aut pluuius describitur arcus;
sed nunc non erat his locus. Et fortasse cupressum
scis simulare; quid hoc, si fractis enatat exspes
nauibus, aere dato qui pingitur?
Your opening shows great promise, and yet flashy
purple patches; as when describing
a sacred grove, or the altar of Diana,
or a stream meandering through fields,
or the river Rhine, or a rainbow;
but this was not the place for them. If you can realistically render
a cypress tree, would you include one when commissioned to paint
a sailor in the midst of a shipwreck?"
See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_prose
Ign.
>
>
Dominic Hughes
Jan 2, 2013, 7:51:40 PM1/2/13
to
On Jan 2, 6:11 pm, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> on "A. C. Bradley and His Introduction to Hamlet," athttp://theplaystheblog.wordpress.com/, where he dwells lengthily on a
close to describing that particular verse as purple or prose or purple
prose..or even to describing purple prose.
In addition, there is no lecture by Abrams on A.C. Bradley's
'Introduction to Hamlet', and Abrams' examination of the passage from
Cleopatra and the North original (what ever happened to Dennis?)
occurs in a completely different post.
> comparison of Shakespeare's version of Cleopatra's Barge to his
> source. Doesn't Abrams come close to describing "purple prose"?
No. The language is not purple and Abram's does not come anywhere
> source. Doesn't Abrams come close to describing "purple prose"?
close to describing that particular verse as purple or prose or purple
prose..or even to describing purple prose.
In addition, there is no lecture by Abrams on A.C. Bradley's
'Introduction to Hamlet', and Abrams' examination of the passage from
Cleopatra and the North original (what ever happened to Dennis?)
occurs in a completely different post.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 8:15:47 PM1/2/13
to
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 15:52:59 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Thursday, 3 January 2013 10:11:26 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:18:43 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 01:56:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> something. �If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
>On Thursday, 3 January 2013 10:11:26 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:18:43 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 01:56:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>>
>> >>
>>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. �He probably has
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >>
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>>
>> >>
>>
above citation.
(quoting Abrams)
It is here one can�t help, no matter how one distrusts
biographical opportunism, to stop and wonder at what
the moment of writing this passage was like for Shakespeare.
The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
language, in the attempt to embody the power of
Cleopatra�s spell, in the way it bewitches the winds
and waves around her. It is no accident that, when
Samuel Johnson sought to find words to condemn
Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns
and wordplay, he called them Shakespeare�s �fatal
Cleopatra,� the embodiment of pleasure taken to illicit
excess, pleasure as self-destructive seductiveness.�
(unquote)
"The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
language" is probably shorthand for "purple prose", IMO.
bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 8:31:45 PM1/2/13
to
behind the "purple prose" salient in my righteous fight for modern
language standards; which, however, are not those of Horace. What
would Shakespeare say? What's in a name?
Maybe now I should advance my victorious troops to march on academe
with the next Shakespeare trope: euphuism. bookburn
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 2, 2013, 8:47:40 PM1/2/13
to
>> comparison of Shakespeare's version of Cleopatra's Barge to his
>> source. Doesn't Abrams come close to describing "purple prose"?
>
>No. The language is not purple and Abram's does not come anywhere
>close to describing that particular verse as purple or prose or purple
>prose..or even to describing purple prose.
>
>In addition, there is no lecture by Abrams on A.C. Bradley's
>'Introduction to Hamlet', and Abrams' examination of the passage from
>Cleopatra and the North original (what ever happened to Dennis?)
>occurs in a completely different post.
You willfully misunderstand and are shipwrecked and lost in the fens
>> source. Doesn't Abrams come close to describing "purple prose"?
>
>No. The language is not purple and Abram's does not come anywhere
>close to describing that particular verse as purple or prose or purple
>prose..or even to describing purple prose.
>
>In addition, there is no lecture by Abrams on A.C. Bradley's
>'Introduction to Hamlet', and Abrams' examination of the passage from
>Cleopatra and the North original (what ever happened to Dennis?)
>occurs in a completely different post.
of Bermuda. To see the Abrams' reading, you need only double click on
the address I provide above. To see his description of what I'm
calling purple prose-like, I'll quote it for you, a I did for Peter G.
(quote)
It is here one can’t help, no matter how one distrusts biographical
opportunism, to stop and wonder at what the moment of writing this
passage was like for Shakespeare. The decision to give himself up to
pleasurable excess in language, in the attempt to embody the power of
Cleopatra’s spell, in the way it bewitches the winds and waves around
her. It is no accident that, when Samuel Johnson sought to find words
to condemn Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns and
wordplay, he called them Shakespeare’s ‘fatal Cleopatra,’ the
embodiment of pleasure taken to illicit excess, pleasure as
self-destructive seductiveness.”
(unquote)
If you have trouble breathing after this, I'll pump your lungs for
opportunism, to stop and wonder at what the moment of writing this
passage was like for Shakespeare. The decision to give himself up to
pleasurable excess in language, in the attempt to embody the power of
Cleopatra’s spell, in the way it bewitches the winds and waves around
her. It is no accident that, when Samuel Johnson sought to find words
to condemn Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns and
wordplay, he called them Shakespeare’s ‘fatal Cleopatra,’ the
embodiment of pleasure taken to illicit excess, pleasure as
self-destructive seductiveness.”
(unquote)
you(:->) bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 8:58:58 PM1/2/13
to
On Thursday, 3 January 2013 12:15:47 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 15:52:59 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 10:11:26 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:18:43 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 01:56:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> something. �If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 15:52:59 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 10:11:26 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 13:18:43 -0800 (PST), metri...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >On Thursday, 3 January 2013 01:56:02 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. �He probably has
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
> >> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
>
> >>
>
> >> >>
>
> >>
>
>
> >
>
> >Peter G.
>
>
>
> Grasp this, if you can, and see what purple prose can do. From the
>
> above citation.
>
>
>
> (quoting Abrams)
>
> It is here one can�t help, no matter how one distrusts
> >
>
> >Peter G.
>
>
>
> Grasp this, if you can, and see what purple prose can do. From the
>
> above citation.
>
>
>
> (quoting Abrams)
>
>
> biographical opportunism, to stop and wonder at what
>
> the moment of writing this passage was like for Shakespeare.
>
> The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
>
> language, in the attempt to embody the power of
>
> Cleopatra�s spell, in the way it bewitches the winds
> biographical opportunism, to stop and wonder at what
>
> the moment of writing this passage was like for Shakespeare.
>
> The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
>
> language, in the attempt to embody the power of
>
>
> and waves around her. It is no accident that, when
>
> Samuel Johnson sought to find words to condemn
>
> Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns
>
> and wordplay, he called them Shakespeare�s �fatal
> and waves around her. It is no accident that, when
>
> Samuel Johnson sought to find words to condemn
>
> Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns
>
>
> Cleopatra,� the embodiment of pleasure taken to illicit
>
> excess, pleasure as self-destructive seductiveness.�
>
> (unquote)
>
>
>
> "The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
>
> language" is probably shorthand for "purple prose", IMO.
>
> bookburn
This is called 'reading by hallucination'. So, in your opinion, A C Bradley couldn't tell verse from prose? I don't envisage many people seeking your opinion on anything.
> (unquote)
>
>
>
> "The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
>
> language" is probably shorthand for "purple prose", IMO.
>
> bookburn
Peter G
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 2, 2013, 9:02:25 PM1/2/13
to
>No. The language is not purple and Abram's does not come anywhere
>close to describing that particular verse as purple or prose or purple
>prose..or even to describing purple prose.
Peter G.
ignoto
Jan 2, 2013, 9:45:10 PM1/2/13
to
On 3/01/13 12:15 PM, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> "The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
> language" is probably shorthand for "purple prose", IMO.
> bookburn
Much the same way that "noun" is shorthand for "adjective" and "beaver"
> "The decision to give himself up to pleasurable excess in
> language" is probably shorthand for "purple prose", IMO.
> bookburn
is for "tank" (so much for Wittgenstein's inveighing about the
existence of private languages).
Ign.
Robin G.
Jan 2, 2013, 10:15:39 PM1/2/13
to
On Jan 2, 6:02 pm, metrical...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, 3 January 2013 12:47:40 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:51:40 -0800 (PST), Dominic Hughes
>
>
> On Thursday, 3 January 2013 12:47:40 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> > On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:51:40 -0800 (PST), Dominic Hughes
>
>
> > >> Let it be written that you still don't understand or agree with the
>
> > >> premise that "purple prose" isn't limited to prose. Probably purple
>
> > >> prose as a trope is more than you will even acknowledge.
>
> > >> Be encouraged, though, by the example of Dennis Abrams, in his lecture
>
> > >> on "A. C. Bradley and His Introduction to Hamlet," athttp://theplaystheblog.wordpress.com/, where he dwells lengthily on a
>
> > >> premise that "purple prose" isn't limited to prose. Probably purple
>
> > >> prose as a trope is more than you will even acknowledge.
>
> > >> Be encouraged, though, by the example of Dennis Abrams, in his lecture
>
>
> > >> comparison of Shakespeare's version of Cleopatra's Barge to his
>
> > >> source. Doesn't Abrams come close to describing "purple prose"?
>
> > >No. The language is not purple and Abram's does not come anywhere
>
> > >close to describing that particular verse as purple or prose or purple
> > >> comparison of Shakespeare's version of Cleopatra's Barge to his
>
> > >> source. Doesn't Abrams come close to describing "purple prose"?
>
> > >No. The language is not purple and Abram's does not come anywhere
>
> > >close to describing that particular verse as purple or prose or purple
> > (quote)
>
> > It is here one can’t help, no matter how one distrusts biographical
>
> > opportunism, to stop and wonder at what the moment of writing this
>
> > passage was like for Shakespeare. The decision to give himself up to
>
> > pleasurable excess in language, in the attempt to embody the power of
>
> > Cleopatra’s spell, in the way it bewitches the winds and waves around
>
> > her. It is no accident that, when Samuel Johnson sought to find words
>
> > to condemn Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns and
>
> > wordplay, he called them Shakespeare’s ‘fatal Cleopatra,’ the
>
> > embodiment of pleasure taken to illicit excess, pleasure as
>
> > self-destructive seductiveness.”
>
> > (unquote)
Bookburn,
>
> > It is here one can’t help, no matter how one distrusts biographical
>
> > opportunism, to stop and wonder at what the moment of writing this
>
> > passage was like for Shakespeare. The decision to give himself up to
>
> > pleasurable excess in language, in the attempt to embody the power of
>
> > Cleopatra’s spell, in the way it bewitches the winds and waves around
>
> > her. It is no accident that, when Samuel Johnson sought to find words
>
> > to condemn Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns and
>
> > wordplay, he called them Shakespeare’s ‘fatal Cleopatra,’ the
>
> > embodiment of pleasure taken to illicit excess, pleasure as
>
> > self-destructive seductiveness.”
>
> > (unquote)
With each post, you provide clear evidence you are way over your
head. You don't
understand what you are reading. I doubt you have read Samuel
Johnson.
His introduction to The Plays of William Shakespeare (1765). It is
one of the
hallmarks of 18th Century criticism. I would suggest you read it, but
you wouldn't understand
it. It's way over your head.
It goes without saying, this caught your eye and it caused your heart
to full with joy.
It is no accident that, when Samuel Johnson sought to find words
>
> > to condemn Shakespeare for taking too much pleasure in puns and
>
> > wordplay, he called them Shakespeare’s ‘fatal Cleopatra,’ the
>
> > embodiment of pleasure taken to illicit excess, pleasure as
>
> > self-destructive seductiveness.”
AFTER
SHAKESPEARE'S DEATH.
What you fail to understand, in the late 18th century, styles in drama
had changed
from Shakespeare's day to Johnson's. Read Shakespeare and then read
Oliver
Goldsmith or Richard Brinsley Sheridan and most people will see the
styles
are different. I was going to say even you would see the difference,
but thinking
about it, I have my doubts.
You mention modern language standards, but I have no idea what you
mean.
To you, the speech from Antony and Cleopatra is an example of purple
prose.
David, Peter, Dom and I have said to us, it is not purple. We have
also pointed
out to you it is not prose, IT IS POETRY.
What you fail to understand, at the time the play was written and
performed, the
speech probably was not considered purple. As a theatre historian, I
understand that
styles change over time. I doubt you could ever grasp this fact.
To you and to some contemporary copy editor, the speech is purple. I
doubt a similar
speech would survive a copy editor's red pen. On the other hand,
Shakespeare
wasn't writing for a 20th or 21st century copy editor or some boob
from Alaska.
Also, Shakespeare wrote this play and all his other plays to be
performed aloud.
There are times when looks difficult on the page becomes clear when
spoken
by an actor who knows his or her way around Shakespeare's language.
Let me end with an example from a contemporary American playwright,
August
Wilson. In all in his plays, Wilson writes long speech. Last month,
I saw one of them.
It had been a long time since I had read it, so I decided to read it
before seeing it.
There were some speeches that didn't work for me, but when I saw the
production with
actors who knew their way around Wilson's language, all the speeches
came alive.
Did Shakespeare over write? In some plays, yes. Are there some
passages in his
plays where the meaning isn't clear? Yes. On the other hand, it may
take awhile for
the meaning to become clear. It is the job of directors and actors,
to find clarity and to share
that with the audience.
Is Shakespeare hard? Yes! I have been reading and seeing his plays
for many years.
I've even directed a few. The effort is always worthwhile.
Dominic Hughes
Jan 2, 2013, 10:18:09 PM1/2/13
to
even "pleasureable excess in language," are not purple prose. You
ought to just admit to your error and move on, but, instead, it
appears that you would rather hold your breath until you turn purple.
Do yourself, and everyone else, a big favor and actually look up a
definition of purple prose. Once you have done so, apply that
definition to the lines in question and explain how the language
qualifies as "purple". Your attempt at an appeal to authority did
nothing to support your claim...are you unable to muster any argument
of your own?
As it stands now I don't see how you breathe and type at the same
time.
Dom
Robin G.
Jan 2, 2013, 10:21:10 PM1/2/13
to
By the way, bookburn, here is how to speech appears in the 1623
Folio. It's poetry.
Eno. I will tell you,
The Barge she sat in, like a burnisht Throne
Burnt on the water: the Poope was beaten Gold,
Purple the Sailes: and so perfumed that
905The Windes were Loue-sicke.
With them the Owers were Siluer,
Which to the tune of Flutes kept stroke, and made
The water which they beate, to follow faster;
As amorous of their strokes. For her owne person,
910It beggerd all discription, she did lye
In her Pauillion, cloth of Gold, of Tissue,
O're-picturing that Venns, where we see
The fancie out-worke Nature. On each side her,
Stood pretty Dimpled Boyes, like smiling Cupids,
915With diuers coulour'd Fannes whose winde did seeme,
To gloue the delicate cheekes which they did coole,
And what they vndid did.
Agrip. Oh rare for Anthony.
Eno. Her Gentlewoman, like the Nereides,
920So many Mer-maides tended her i'th'eyes,
And made their bends adornings. At the Helme.
A seeming Mer-maide steeres: The Silken Tackle,
Swell with the touches of those Flower-soft hands,
That yarely frame the office. From the Barge
925A strange inuisible perfume hits the sense
Of the adiacent Wharfes. The Citty cast
Her people out vpon her: and Anthony
Enthron'd i'th'Market-place, did sit alone,
Whisling to'th'ayre: which but for vacancie,
930Had gone to gaze on Cleopater too,
And made a gap in Nature.
Agri. Rare Egiptian.
Eno. Vpon her landing, Anthony sent to her,
Inuited her to Supper: she replyed,
935It should be better, he became her guest:
Which she entreated, our Courteous Anthony,
Whom nere the word of no woman hard speake,
Being barber'd ten times o're, goes to the Feast;
And for his ordinary, paies his heart,
940For what his eyes eate onely.
Folio. It's poetry.
Eno. I will tell you,
The Barge she sat in, like a burnisht Throne
Burnt on the water: the Poope was beaten Gold,
Purple the Sailes: and so perfumed that
905The Windes were Loue-sicke.
With them the Owers were Siluer,
Which to the tune of Flutes kept stroke, and made
The water which they beate, to follow faster;
As amorous of their strokes. For her owne person,
910It beggerd all discription, she did lye
In her Pauillion, cloth of Gold, of Tissue,
O're-picturing that Venns, where we see
The fancie out-worke Nature. On each side her,
Stood pretty Dimpled Boyes, like smiling Cupids,
915With diuers coulour'd Fannes whose winde did seeme,
To gloue the delicate cheekes which they did coole,
And what they vndid did.
Agrip. Oh rare for Anthony.
Eno. Her Gentlewoman, like the Nereides,
920So many Mer-maides tended her i'th'eyes,
And made their bends adornings. At the Helme.
A seeming Mer-maide steeres: The Silken Tackle,
Swell with the touches of those Flower-soft hands,
That yarely frame the office. From the Barge
925A strange inuisible perfume hits the sense
Of the adiacent Wharfes. The Citty cast
Her people out vpon her: and Anthony
Enthron'd i'th'Market-place, did sit alone,
Whisling to'th'ayre: which but for vacancie,
930Had gone to gaze on Cleopater too,
And made a gap in Nature.
Agri. Rare Egiptian.
Eno. Vpon her landing, Anthony sent to her,
Inuited her to Supper: she replyed,
935It should be better, he became her guest:
Which she entreated, our Courteous Anthony,
Whom nere the word of no woman hard speake,
Being barber'd ten times o're, goes to the Feast;
And for his ordinary, paies his heart,
940For what his eyes eate onely.
Dominic Hughes
Jan 2, 2013, 10:47:51 PM1/2/13
to
prose is, by definition, prose which is "so extravagant, ornate, or
flowery AS TO BREAK THE FLOW AND DRAW EXCESSIVE ATTENTION TO ITSELF."
It is language that is "sensually evocative BEYOND THE REQUIREMENTS OF
ITS CONTEXT." The beautiful passage from A & C does not break the
flow and is contextually elegant. If you think otherwise please do
something to support your opinion. I doubt you will be able to do so.
Dom
Dominic Hughes
Jan 2, 2013, 10:51:48 PM1/2/13
to
On Jan 2, 8:31 pm, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:58:05 +1100, ignoto <ign...@tarpit.blah> wrote:
> >On 3/01/13 10:11 AM, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 10:58:05 +1100, ignoto <ign...@tarpit.blah> wrote:
purple grape.
Dom
John W Kennedy
Jan 2, 2013, 11:11:03 PM1/2/13
to
--
John W Kennedy
"...if you had to fall in love with someone who was evil, I can see why
it was her."
-- "Alias"
John W Kennedy
Jan 2, 2013, 11:17:24 PM1/2/13
to
have here a case of confusion between William Shakespeare and Reginald
Bunthorne?
--
John W Kennedy
"Give up vows and dogmas, and fixed things, and you may grow like That.
...you may come to think a blow bad, because it hurts, and not because
it humiliates. You may come to think murder wrong, because it is
violent, and not because it is unjust."
-- G. K. Chesterton. "The Ball and the Cross"
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 3, 2013, 12:11:47 AM1/3/13
to
On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 19:47:51 -0800 (PST), Dominic Hughes
>> >> on "A. C. Bradley and His Introduction to Hamlet," at http://theplaystheblog.wordpress.com/, where he dwells lengthily on a
Already been there; done that. Unfortunately, you're behind the
learning curve. Regards, bookburn
learning curve. Regards, bookburn
Dominic Hughes
Jan 3, 2013, 12:20:51 AM1/3/13
to
thread. You've gone round the bend.
Dom
John W Kennedy
Jan 3, 2013, 9:30:59 AM1/3/13
to
(The allusion is to a patch of expensive purple cloth used to decorate a
garment.) Horace's complaint here is about digressions that, however
lovely, distract from the work-as-a-whole.
David L. Webb
Jan 5, 2013, 5:40:40 PM1/5/13
to
In article <gd39e8t190hgvpcai...@4ax.com>,
matter? I have never claimed that there are no "purple patches" in
Shakespeare, nor to my knowledge has Peter ever said anything of the
kind. Are you having trouble reading?
Rather, the point as issue was the *particular text* that you quoted.
Many people, among them Peter and John Kennedy, have pointed out to you
that the passage that you quoted scarcely qualifies as "purple prose"
for the very simple reasons that (1) it is not prose, and (2) it is not
purple.
What is it about these very rudimentary points that you have so much
trouble understanding?
> in his blank verse, sonnets, and narrative poems?, or
> is it all too wonderful and literate for that?
>
> bookburn
book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:09:17 -0500, "David L. Webb"
> <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> >In article <k8i8e8t8ku5qmkr21...@4ax.com>,
> On Wed, 02 Jan 2013 10:09:17 -0500, "David L. Webb"
> <david....@dartmouth.edu> wrote:
>
> >In article <k8i8e8t8ku5qmkr21...@4ax.com>,
> > book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> >> >> something. �If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
> >> >>
> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> >> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. �He probably has
> >> >> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
> >> >> consciously, or something.
> >
> >> >bookburn,
> >> >
> >> >There is nothing purple about this speech. Please provide us with the
> >> >names of people who cite it as an
> >> >example of purple. Not to split hairs, but Shakespeare borrows it
> >> >from North's translation of Plutarch.
> >> >From a performance point of view, it is a wonderful speech. In
> >> >performance, I have never heard people laughing during
> >> >or after Enobarbus delivers it.
> >> No, but you can search for "Shakespeare purple prose" as I did.
> >
> >> On Tue, 1 Jan 2013 22:18:34 -0800 (PST), "Robin G."
> >> <doc...@proaxis.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Dec 31 2012, 10:41�am, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
> >> >> I notice many instances of labeling a certain prose trope of
> >> >> Shakespeare's narrative style as "purple prose," but then excused as
> >> >> irony, in the case of a characterization meant to be a parody, or
> >> >> something. �If he is sometimes excessively gaudy and ornamental in
> >> >> expressions, he is allowed to have poetic latitude for that.
> >> >>
> >> >> Best example of purple prose Shakespeare uses deliberately, and that
> >> >> also shows some encyclopedic knowledge about it (I know Elizabethans
> >> >> didn't have encyclopedias) seems to be in describing Cleopatra decked
> >> >> out in purple and perfume, without parody of it. �He probably has
> >> >> integrated tropes like purple prose and Euphueism in his style
> >> >> consciously, or something.
> >
> >> >bookburn,
> >> >
> >> >There is nothing purple about this speech. Please provide us with the
> >> >names of people who cite it as an
> >> >example of purple. Not to split hairs, but Shakespeare borrows it
> >> >from North's translation of Plutarch.
> >> >From a performance point of view, it is a wonderful speech. In
> >> >performance, I have never heard people laughing during
> >> >or after Enobarbus delivers it.
> >> No, but you can search for "Shakespeare purple prose" as I did.
> > You can search for "Shakespeare purple prose" if you like, and you
> >will no doubt find all manner of nonsense, some of it from people who
> >have never read Shakespeare and wouldn't know what purple prose is if it
> >bit them.
> > You can also Google "alien abduction", or "New Chronology", or
> >"intelligent design", and you'll find much more information. While
> >Google may be an invaluable tool, the mere fact that you can Google
> >"Shakespeare purple prose" does not mean that the passage you quoted
> >qualifies as such, any more than the fact that you can Google "flat
> >earth" means that what you find will be reliable.
> >
> > As several people have already pointed out to you, the passage that
> >you quote is *verse*, not prose; fairly obviously, it is not what is
> >meant by the phrase "purple prose". Moreover, as Robin rightly points
> >out, even if it *were* prose, it would scarcely be *purple* prose.
> >
> >will no doubt find all manner of nonsense, some of it from people who
> >have never read Shakespeare and wouldn't know what purple prose is if it
> >bit them.
> > You can also Google "alien abduction", or "New Chronology", or
> >"intelligent design", and you'll find much more information. While
> >Google may be an invaluable tool, the mere fact that you can Google
> >"Shakespeare purple prose" does not mean that the passage you quoted
> >qualifies as such, any more than the fact that you can Google "flat
> >earth" means that what you find will be reliable.
> >
> > As several people have already pointed out to you, the passage that
> >you quote is *verse*, not prose; fairly obviously, it is not what is
> >meant by the phrase "purple prose". Moreover, as Robin rightly points
> >out, even if it *were* prose, it would scarcely be *purple* prose.
> >
> >> >It is one of most famous speeches in the play, or, for that matter in
> >> >Shakespeare. In the speech,
> >> >Shakespeare "paints" a vivid picture. If the actor playing Enobarbus
> >> >is skilled at speaking the
> >> >language, the audience will "see" the event. I get the sense that
> >> >Maeceans and Agrippa wonder
> >> >what has kept Antony in Egypt. The speech gives a clear reason.
> >> >
> >> >I think the speech also provides the audience with a sense that
> >> >Cleopatra is a master/mistress of
> >> >state showmanship. We get a bit of characterization in the speech.
> >> >
> >> >Also, in the play, Shakespeare contrasts life in Rome with life in
> >> >Egypt. After hearing the speech,
> >> >life in Rome is pretty dull.
> >> I agree with that. Stilll, do you think it could be an example of
> >> "purple prose"?
> >> >Shakespeare. In the speech,
> >> >Shakespeare "paints" a vivid picture. If the actor playing Enobarbus
> >> >is skilled at speaking the
> >> >language, the audience will "see" the event. I get the sense that
> >> >Maeceans and Agrippa wonder
> >> >what has kept Antony in Egypt. The speech gives a clear reason.
> >> >
> >> >I think the speech also provides the audience with a sense that
> >> >Cleopatra is a master/mistress of
> >> >state showmanship. We get a bit of characterization in the speech.
> >> >
> >> >Also, in the play, Shakespeare contrasts life in Rome with life in
> >> >Egypt. After hearing the speech,
> >> >life in Rome is pretty dull.
> >> I agree with that. Stilll, do you think it could be an example of
> >> "purple prose"?
> > No. (1) It is not prose. (2) It is not "purple".
>
> I'm surprise [sic] that both you and Peter G. have arrived at this seminal
>
> point. Will you state categorically that Shakespeare never uses
> "purple prose"
Huh?! Why on earth should I do that? Or Peter either, for that
> "purple prose"
matter? I have never claimed that there are no "purple patches" in
Shakespeare, nor to my knowledge has Peter ever said anything of the
kind. Are you having trouble reading?
Rather, the point as issue was the *particular text* that you quoted.
Many people, among them Peter and John Kennedy, have pointed out to you
that the passage that you quoted scarcely qualifies as "purple prose"
for the very simple reasons that (1) it is not prose, and (2) it is not
purple.
What is it about these very rudimentary points that you have so much
trouble understanding?
> in his blank verse, sonnets, and narrative poems?, or
> is it all too wonderful and literate for that?
>
marc hanson
Jan 5, 2013, 6:37:40 PM1/5/13
to
a little off topic, but I had to...
Beard, your orange-tawny beard, your purple-in-grain A Midsummer Night's Dream: I, ii
With purple fountains issuing from your veins, Romeo and Juliet: I, i
Of crow-flowers, nettles, daisies, and long purples Hamlet: IV, vii
Now, whilst your purpled hands do reek and smoke, Julius Caesar: III, i
The purple violets, and marigolds, Pericles, Prince of Tyre: IV, i
With purple grapes, green figs, and mulberries; A Midsummer Night's Dream: III, i
The purple testament of bleeding war; King Richard II: III, iii
The one his purple blood right well resembles; King Henry VI, part III: II, v
Our lusty english, all with purpled hands, King John: II, i
In emerald tufts, flowers purple, blue and white; Merry Wives of Windsor: V, v
With purple falchion, painted to the hilt King Henry VI, part III: I, iv
The purple sap from her sweet brother's body King Richard III: IV, iv
O, may such purple tears be alway shed King Henry VI, part III: V, vi
None of these mad mustachio purple-hued malt-worms; King Henry IV, part I: II, i
If not from my love's breath? the purple pride Sonnets: XCIX
Flower of this purple dye, A Midsummer Night's Dream: III, ii
Before milk-white, now purple with love's wound, A Midsummer Night's Dream: II, i
purple the sails, and so perfumed that Antony and Cleopatra: II, ii
Dives that lived in purple; for there he is in his King Henry IV, part I: III, iii
marc
Beard, your orange-tawny beard, your purple-in-grain A Midsummer Night's Dream: I, ii
With purple fountains issuing from your veins, Romeo and Juliet: I, i
Of crow-flowers, nettles, daisies, and long purples Hamlet: IV, vii
Now, whilst your purpled hands do reek and smoke, Julius Caesar: III, i
The purple violets, and marigolds, Pericles, Prince of Tyre: IV, i
With purple grapes, green figs, and mulberries; A Midsummer Night's Dream: III, i
The purple testament of bleeding war; King Richard II: III, iii
The one his purple blood right well resembles; King Henry VI, part III: II, v
Our lusty english, all with purpled hands, King John: II, i
In emerald tufts, flowers purple, blue and white; Merry Wives of Windsor: V, v
With purple falchion, painted to the hilt King Henry VI, part III: I, iv
The purple sap from her sweet brother's body King Richard III: IV, iv
O, may such purple tears be alway shed King Henry VI, part III: V, vi
None of these mad mustachio purple-hued malt-worms; King Henry IV, part I: II, i
If not from my love's breath? the purple pride Sonnets: XCIX
Flower of this purple dye, A Midsummer Night's Dream: III, ii
Before milk-white, now purple with love's wound, A Midsummer Night's Dream: II, i
purple the sails, and so perfumed that Antony and Cleopatra: II, ii
Dives that lived in purple; for there he is in his King Henry IV, part I: III, iii
marc
neonpr...@gmail.com
Jan 5, 2013, 7:18:46 PM1/5/13
to
On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 5:47:40 PM UTC-8, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:51:40 -0800 (PST), Dominic Hughes
>
> <mah...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Jan 2, 6:11 pm, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
> Hey bookburn! Did you feel the 7.7 last night? I was
> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:51:40 -0800 (PST), Dominic Hughes
>
> <mah...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Jan 2, 6:11 pm, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>
> worried about you.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 6, 2013, 9:30:28 PM1/6/13
to
http://www.nytimes.com/1985/12/15/books/in-defense-of-purple-prose.html?pagewanted=all
IN DEFENSE OF PURPLE PROSE
By Paul West; Paul West received an Award in Literature this year (?)
from the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters.
West goes all out in defense of "purple prose," even approaching at
times the same tendencies in poetry, mentioning briefly Dylan Thomas
and Wallace Stevens. What he's talking about transcends lots of
boundaries. bookburn
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 6, 2013, 9:35:59 PM1/6/13
to
On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 16:18:46 -0800 (PST), neonpr...@gmail.com wrote:
>On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 5:47:40 PM UTC-8, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:51:40 -0800 (PST), Dominic Hughes
>>
>> <mah...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Jan 2, 6:11 pm, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> Hey bookburn! Did you feel the 7.7 last night? I was
>>
>> worried about you.
Distance Anchorage to Juneau is 567 miles, so I missed it. The whole
>On Wednesday, January 2, 2013 5:47:40 PM UTC-8, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
>> On Wed, 2 Jan 2013 16:51:40 -0800 (PST), Dominic Hughes
>>
>> <mah...@aol.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Jan 2, 6:11 pm, bookb...@yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> Hey bookburn! Did you feel the 7.7 last night? I was
>>
>> worried about you.
Alaska Peninsula running past Anchorage all the way to Adak is alive
with volcanos, so we get used to at least the tremors.
David L. Webb
Jan 6, 2013, 10:29:58 PM1/6/13
to
In article <u2h8e89pgf423s30l...@4ax.com>,
book...@yahoo.com wrote:
[...]
> >> >> >>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
> >> >> >>> don't reach the right margin.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Peter G.
> >> >> >> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
> >> >> >Yes it is pentameter.
> >> >> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
> >> >> pentameter?
> >> > You might try reading the text. If you do so, you'll find that what
> >> >you quoted is not the entire line:
> >> >
> >> > "The barge she sat in, like a burnish'd throne,
> >> > Burn'd on the water: the poop was beaten gold;
> >> > Purple the sails, and so perfumed that
> >> > The winds were love-sick with them; the oars were silver,
> >> > Which to the tune of flutes kept stroke, and made
> >> > The water which they beat to follow faster,
> >> > As amorous of their strokes. For her own person,
> >> > ..."
> >> >
> >> >"As amorous of their strokes. For her own person" is indeed a
> >> >pentameter line.
> >> >> >> and the lines don't all break at
> >> >> >> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
> >> >> >What in God's name are you whittering on about? Of course the lines
> >> >> >break at the end, that's how you can tell they're lines.
> >> >> Your line above doesn't have a break. Some of you have news readers
> >> >> without a "word wrap" switch on, resulting the all the double and
> >> >> triple spacing. Maybe you're confused by that?
> >> > No, you're the one that's confused -- to put it exceedingly
> >> >charitably. Take a look at
> >> >
> >> ><http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~matty/Shakespeare/texts/tragedies/a
> >> >ntonyandcleopatra.html#xref010>;
> >> >
> >> >search for the text in question and you will find the line above.
> >> >
> >> >The fact that a sentence ends in the midst of a line does not alter the
> >> >number of feet in the line.
> >> >
> >> > Enjambment is a bog-standard practice in verse; lines need not be
> >> >end-stopped. Shakespeare often even changes speakers in the midst of a
> >> >pentameter line.
> >> If you look up a definition of "verse," which is what I referred to,
> >> you may find reference to end-stopped lines.
> > Huh? I have no idea what point (if any) you may be trying to make,
> >nor any clue what you are gibbering about now. You expressed doubt that
> >the line (part of) which you quoted was a pentameter line; had you
> >looked at the text and read the *entire* line, you would have found --
> >or at any rate, I *hope* that you would have found -- that it is indeed
> >a pentameter line, exactly as John told you.
> No, I quoted the line referenced above; as such, it's not pentameter.
Once again, the *entire* line is
"As amorous of their strokes. For her own person,"
which *is* an iambic pentameter line, just like the lines that precede
and follow it. The line in its entirety is *not* "As amorous of their
strokes" because of a very common phenomenon in versification called
*enjambment*. I cannot imagine why you are having so much trouble
understanding this.
> Your post is coherent and readable, not off the page as others are, so
> no need to huff and puff. By answering my question of whether it's
> pentameter, you did fine.
>
> About "end-stopped lines," I have from the American Heritage
> Dictionary:
>
> (quote)
> Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary
> (end'stopt')
> adj.
> Ending in a syntactic and rhythmic pause. Used of a line of verse or a
> couplet.
> (unquote)
That fact that the term "end-stopped" is *used* of a line of verse
does not mean that *all* lines of verse are end-stopped. The term
"Rottweiler" is used of dogs, but that fact does not make every dog a
Rottweiler. Neither does the fact that "end-stopped" is used to refer
to lines of verse mean that every line of verse is end-stopped. This is
a very rudimentary logical fallacy -- either that or your really don't
understand what the word "verse" means.
> Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/end-stopped#ixzz2GpQehdG9
>
> > Why you are caviling about the definition of the word "verse" (which
> >I have no need to look up, although apparently you do) I cannot imagine,
> >as it is not germane to the question being discussed, except insofar as
> >it undermines what I take to be your position: in fact, if you will
> >check the first OED definition of the word, you will find:
> >--------------------------------
> >A succession of words arranged according to natural or recognized rules
> >of prosody and forming a COMPLETE METRICAL LINE [uppercase mine]; one of
> >the lines of a poem or piece of versification.
> >--------------------------------
> >
> >Fairly obviously, "As amorous of their strokes" is not a complete
> >metrical line in the pertinent context in the play, but the *entire*
> >line reads "As amorous of their strokes. For her own person", which *is*
> >a complete metrical line in that context, and it *is* a pentameter line,
> >as John said.
> >
> > Nor do I see why you insist that a discussion of verse might mention
> >end-stopped lines; *of course* it might!
> See the definition I quote above identifying verse as a use of
> end-stopped lines.
The definition that you quoted above was *not* a definition of verse;
rather, it was a definition of the term "end-stopped"!
I suggest that you get an authoritative reference (_The Princeton
Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics_ is good) and look up both "verse" (a
term that it has become crystal clear that you do not even begin to
understand) and the term "end-stopped"; you might also look up
"enjambment". You will learn (at least, I *hope* that you will learn,
although this thread is beginning to make me wonder) that "end-stopped"
is a term used to refer to lines of verse (as "Rottweiler" is a term
applied to dogs), but that not every line of verse is end-stopped (just
as not every dog is a Rottweiler).
The fact that continue to parade your ignorance in the face of an
expert on the subject like Peter Groves is truly remarkable.
> > It might also mention _rime
> >riche_, sinalefas, caesurae, _ottava rima_, Onegin stanzas, and all
> >manner of other prosodic concepts that are irrelevant to the present
> >discussion. However, it might also mention enjambment, which *is*
> >relevant -- indeed, your failure to understand what the latter is
> >apparently led you to confuse the first few feet of a pentameter line
> >with the entire line, and therefore to doubt that it was pentameter.
> >
> > One need scarcely add that all this makes you look exceedingly
> >foolish. Peter Groves is a professional expert on metrical matters, and
> >John Kennedy also knows what he is talking about. You would do well to
> >try to understand what they are telling you.
> Professional expert, indeed.
You can look up Peter's credentials online, as well as his published
books and articles on the subject, if you're really curious. Where are
yours?
Here is a hint: words in English, particularly words in specialized
disciplines, have precise meanings agreed upon by the community of
speakers of the tongue. If you insist upon calling a goat an armchair,
you are of course free to do so, but you should not pretend that your
meaning is the one in use by the community of speakers of English, and
you should not be surprised if your assertion is challenged.
> I'm a fool in the h.l.a.s. circus,
You're not the *only* one, but in this thread, you seem to have no
notion what a colossal ass you're making of yourself.
> and
> you are a rube looking for the Punch and Judy Show.
>
> Regards, bookburn
book...@yahoo.com wrote:
[...]
> >> >> >>> Except for the little detail that it isn't prose. Hint: the lines
> >> >> >>> don't reach the right margin.
> >> >> >>>
> >> >> >>> Peter G.
> >> >> >> It's iambic but not all pentameter,
> >> >> >Yes it is pentameter.
> >> >> The last line is "As amorous of their strokes." Are you sure this is
> >> >> pentameter?
> >> > You might try reading the text. If you do so, you'll find that what
> >> >you quoted is not the entire line:
> >> >
> >> > "The barge she sat in, like a burnish'd throne,
> >> > Burn'd on the water: the poop was beaten gold;
> >> > Purple the sails, and so perfumed that
> >> > The winds were love-sick with them; the oars were silver,
> >> > Which to the tune of flutes kept stroke, and made
> >> > The water which they beat to follow faster,
> >> > As amorous of their strokes. For her own person,
> >> > ..."
> >> >
> >> >"As amorous of their strokes. For her own person" is indeed a
> >> >pentameter line.
> >> >> >> and the lines don't all break at
> >> >> >> the end, either, as far as verse goes.
> >> >> >What in God's name are you whittering on about? Of course the lines
> >> >> >break at the end, that's how you can tell they're lines.
> >> >> Your line above doesn't have a break. Some of you have news readers
> >> >> without a "word wrap" switch on, resulting the all the double and
> >> >> triple spacing. Maybe you're confused by that?
> >> > No, you're the one that's confused -- to put it exceedingly
> >> >charitably. Take a look at
> >> >
> >> ><http://sydney.edu.au/engineering/it/~matty/Shakespeare/texts/tragedies/a
> >> >ntonyandcleopatra.html#xref010>;
> >> >
> >> >search for the text in question and you will find the line above.
> >> >
> >> >The fact that a sentence ends in the midst of a line does not alter the
> >> >number of feet in the line.
> >> >
> >> > Enjambment is a bog-standard practice in verse; lines need not be
> >> >end-stopped. Shakespeare often even changes speakers in the midst of a
> >> >pentameter line.
> >> If you look up a definition of "verse," which is what I referred to,
> >> you may find reference to end-stopped lines.
> > Huh? I have no idea what point (if any) you may be trying to make,
> >nor any clue what you are gibbering about now. You expressed doubt that
> >the line (part of) which you quoted was a pentameter line; had you
> >looked at the text and read the *entire* line, you would have found --
> >or at any rate, I *hope* that you would have found -- that it is indeed
> >a pentameter line, exactly as John told you.
> No, I quoted the line referenced above; as such, it's not pentameter.
Once again, the *entire* line is
"As amorous of their strokes. For her own person,"
which *is* an iambic pentameter line, just like the lines that precede
and follow it. The line in its entirety is *not* "As amorous of their
strokes" because of a very common phenomenon in versification called
*enjambment*. I cannot imagine why you are having so much trouble
understanding this.
> Your post is coherent and readable, not off the page as others are, so
> no need to huff and puff. By answering my question of whether it's
> pentameter, you did fine.
>
> About "end-stopped lines," I have from the American Heritage
> Dictionary:
>
> (quote)
> Library > Literature & Language > Dictionary
> (end'stopt')
> adj.
> Ending in a syntactic and rhythmic pause. Used of a line of verse or a
> couplet.
> (unquote)
That fact that the term "end-stopped" is *used* of a line of verse
does not mean that *all* lines of verse are end-stopped. The term
"Rottweiler" is used of dogs, but that fact does not make every dog a
Rottweiler. Neither does the fact that "end-stopped" is used to refer
to lines of verse mean that every line of verse is end-stopped. This is
a very rudimentary logical fallacy -- either that or your really don't
understand what the word "verse" means.
> Read more: http://www.answers.com/topic/end-stopped#ixzz2GpQehdG9
>
> > Why you are caviling about the definition of the word "verse" (which
> >I have no need to look up, although apparently you do) I cannot imagine,
> >as it is not germane to the question being discussed, except insofar as
> >it undermines what I take to be your position: in fact, if you will
> >check the first OED definition of the word, you will find:
> >--------------------------------
> >A succession of words arranged according to natural or recognized rules
> >of prosody and forming a COMPLETE METRICAL LINE [uppercase mine]; one of
> >the lines of a poem or piece of versification.
> >--------------------------------
> >
> >Fairly obviously, "As amorous of their strokes" is not a complete
> >metrical line in the pertinent context in the play, but the *entire*
> >line reads "As amorous of their strokes. For her own person", which *is*
> >a complete metrical line in that context, and it *is* a pentameter line,
> >as John said.
> >
> > Nor do I see why you insist that a discussion of verse might mention
> >end-stopped lines; *of course* it might!
> See the definition I quote above identifying verse as a use of
> end-stopped lines.
The definition that you quoted above was *not* a definition of verse;
rather, it was a definition of the term "end-stopped"!
I suggest that you get an authoritative reference (_The Princeton
Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics_ is good) and look up both "verse" (a
term that it has become crystal clear that you do not even begin to
understand) and the term "end-stopped"; you might also look up
"enjambment". You will learn (at least, I *hope* that you will learn,
although this thread is beginning to make me wonder) that "end-stopped"
is a term used to refer to lines of verse (as "Rottweiler" is a term
applied to dogs), but that not every line of verse is end-stopped (just
as not every dog is a Rottweiler).
The fact that continue to parade your ignorance in the face of an
expert on the subject like Peter Groves is truly remarkable.
> > It might also mention _rime
> >riche_, sinalefas, caesurae, _ottava rima_, Onegin stanzas, and all
> >manner of other prosodic concepts that are irrelevant to the present
> >discussion. However, it might also mention enjambment, which *is*
> >relevant -- indeed, your failure to understand what the latter is
> >apparently led you to confuse the first few feet of a pentameter line
> >with the entire line, and therefore to doubt that it was pentameter.
> >
> > One need scarcely add that all this makes you look exceedingly
> >foolish. Peter Groves is a professional expert on metrical matters, and
> >John Kennedy also knows what he is talking about. You would do well to
> >try to understand what they are telling you.
> Professional expert, indeed.
You can look up Peter's credentials online, as well as his published
books and articles on the subject, if you're really curious. Where are
yours?
Here is a hint: words in English, particularly words in specialized
disciplines, have precise meanings agreed upon by the community of
speakers of the tongue. If you insist upon calling a goat an armchair,
you are of course free to do so, but you should not pretend that your
meaning is the one in use by the community of speakers of English, and
you should not be surprised if your assertion is challenged.
> I'm a fool in the h.l.a.s. circus,
You're not the *only* one, but in this thread, you seem to have no
notion what a colossal ass you're making of yourself.
> and
> you are a rube looking for the Punch and Judy Show.
>
> Regards, bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 7, 2013, 1:17:54 AM1/7/13
to
On Monday, 7 January 2013 13:30:28 UTC+11, book...@yahoo.com wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 15:37:40 -0800 (PST), marc hanson
>
> <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
[desunt nonnulla]
> On Sat, 5 Jan 2013 15:37:40 -0800 (PST), marc hanson
>
> <mark...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> IN DEFENSE OF PURPLE PROSE
>
> By Paul West; Paul West received an Award in Literature this year (?)
>
> from the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters.
>
>
>
> West goes all out in defense of "purple prose," even approaching at
>
> times the same tendencies in poetry,
Whatever that is supposed to mean.
> IN DEFENSE OF PURPLE PROSE
>
> By Paul West; Paul West received an Award in Literature this year (?)
>
> from the American Academy and Institute of Arts and Letters.
>
>
>
> West goes all out in defense of "purple prose," even approaching at
>
> times the same tendencies in poetry,
> mentioning briefly Dylan Thomas
Weaselly prevarication: what he mentions is "Dylan Thomas's prose - letters and broadcasts and stories"
>
> and Wallace Stevens.
More weaselly prevarication: he calls him one of the "masters of purple", not of any kind of prose.
> What he's talking about transcends lots of
>
> boundaries. bookburn
Peter G.
book...@yahoo.com
Jan 7, 2013, 3:12:29 AM1/7/13
to
deliberately wrecking havoc on posts you use, trashing the whole
thread, it seems, so you can have your snide remark. Glad to hear
your description of the problem, if that will help. bookburn
metri...@gmail.com
Jan 7, 2013, 3:19:46 AM1/7/13
to
Peter G.
0 new messages