Generally I deeply object (I said that elsewhere on Poetryetc)
to using the personal pronoun "we" in poetry.
Even in a marriage poem, I would avoid the horrendous "we"
as a point of prinicple.
This not because I am against marriage in an institutional sense, no.
It protects both parties.
But because I instinctively suspect the notion of "union", ad with it
the
platonic principle that man and wonam are two halves of the same
apple.
In marriage, it is much healtier dining at a long long table and
sinning
in separate beds.
erminia
On Fri, 6 Apr 2001 10:42:48 -0400, Mairead Byrne <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>I have one:
>
>EPITHALAMIUM
>
>The first two years being the
>might be all in all
>so you did
>you do
>always
>you never
>why don't you
>at least
>sometimes
>I do
>
>After that it's
>usually
>we generally
>we tend to
>and then there's
>the weekends
>we like to
>or every year
>of course
>for the holidays
>we sometimes
>we try to
>we happen to
>we
>
>
>On Fri, 6 Apr 2001, Douglas Barbour wrote:
>
>> Dear Ali
>>
>> Go back to one of the originals: Spenser's 'Epithalamion" -- why not?
Part
>> of it anyway...
>> There are also ones by Sidney, Jonson, Donne...
|