That's okay, Mairead--put your butt on the line, by all means. BUT I think
rhetoric comes way later than the poem-thought I had in mind, some of which
is barely verbal before its shakedown to the page, verser-like: to pour, to
discharge, to shed, to slide, to spill (just to give those Spanish angsters
something amphibious by way of a leg to chew on).
Now Alison--_she's_ put paid to the rhetoric of it, whew!--Candice
on 5/20/01 6:07 PM, Mairead Byrne at [log in to unmask] wrote:
> Sorry to butt in Candice and Kent: but as thought tends to shake down to
> standard tropes don't you think poetry is a matter of rhetoric as much as
> anything else?
> Mairead
>
> On Sun, 20 May 2001, Candice Ward wrote:
>>
>> If poetry and prose equally constitute thought formalized in and as writing,
>> the features of which reflect the effort (more or less unconscious) to
>> reproduce its formal qualities as thought, then the whole question is more
>> cognitive than aesthetic. And that's how I experience the process by which a
>> poem comes about within me--as thought moving over the face of my waters,
>> then throwing itself over my edge and onto the page. The poem's lineation
>> there (like the prose text's margination) is formative--it's how the thought
>> shakes down into and as written language--for me anyway.
>>
>> Sincerely,
>>
>> Candice
|