Frank wrote
" In my work I get away with it probably because standards aren't great
- readers do not look closely at punctuation unless it interferes with
comprehension of the written word."
Frank, I am totally bewildered by this, as the whole point of punctuation is
to make what is written MORE comprehensible. That is why the convention has
lasted so long, - it works!
I must agree with what Arthur has suggested that a long poem without
punctuation resembles stream-of-consciousness, and I find long pieces of
text with no punctuation much more difficult to read. Punctuation simply
tells the reader were to pause, and the value of the pause, just like
musical notation.
 Also I think it's hard to convey,say, the possessive case without
punctuation--
 if you write grandfathers instead of grandfather's, it is less clear, and,
frankly, can appear plumb ignorant. And what about I don't, I can't,
becoming I dont, I cant?
 I think you can get away with no punctuation in short pieces,-it can give a
certain feeling to a poem,- but in long pieces, I don't think punctuation
should be dumped, otherwise the text can seem like a long ramble.
Kind regards,
 grasshopper

----- Original Message -----
From: "Frank Faust" <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, July 28, 2002 11:53 AM
Subject: Re: To Frank re : Punctuation


Hi Arthur,

No tonguw in cheek in my initial reply, not intended anyway.

Since I first dropped puncutation and use of caps it has become the way I
most naturally write - a preferred default style (for good or for ill in
terms of the verse produced).

I use punctuation in my work, producing reports and such, but not much in my
verse. In my work I get away with it probably because standards aren't great
- readers do not look closely at punctuation unless it interferes with
comprehension of the written word.

I'm not a 'clever' poet and don't work much with artifice. I try to be an
effective teller of small stories and if there turns out to be an edge or a
double edge in the way a piece can be read that it to the good, but is
generally unplanned.

The business of eschewing is probably back to front in my case. I don't
choose not ot use punctuation for a given piece, raher, I have to decide to
use it occasionally because I don't believe I can make the piece read well
without it - a pretty rare occurrence.

I think I disagree that communication will suffer if we don't improve
knowledge of language and use of its grammatical forms. I believe
communication is improved by concentrating on words and use of breaks
without other devices. teaches me, at least, to make the words work better
as an aid to ensuring communication with the reader.

Cheers,

Frank

>
>Frank, I was a little disappointed by your reply to my request for criteria
>you use when eschewing the use of punctuation. I suppose not knowing how to
>punctuate is as good a reason as any and perhaps the best. I imagine, also,
>it was offered a little with your tongue in your cheek.
>
>You refer also to grammar, the rules of which we all, perhaps, wittingly or
>unwittingly, breach at some time, as much out of ignorance, I imagine, as
>intent.
>
>If we allow our lack of education in these things to go unimproved then we
>are in danger of two things.
>
>First, language will degenerate to 'mobilese'  ( R U  redi 4 this? )
>because spelling punctuation and grammar make text messages  too long. This
>is 'doubleplusungood', IMO. The chat rooms and mobiles do us all a
>disservice in this respect. As does 'Gotcha' headlines and 'Drinka pinta
>milka day' or 'Beanz means Heinz' advertising.
>
>I do recognise that my use of 'degenerate' is a value judgement on my part
>and may not be seen as a valid comment by others.
>
>The second point, and perhaps the most important, although the first
>terrifies me frankly, is that communication will suffer.
>
>Poetry can be written for ourselves, an indulgent and onanistic pastime, or
>to share with others i.e. communicate, either read quietly or listened to.
>
>Grammar, punctuation and, to a lesser degree, perhaps, spelling are
>conventions developed over hundreds of years to allow accurate
>communication to take place.
>
>Language, in particular the English language, is organic. Those conventions
>can and do change but they change slowly. They do to a great extent reflect
>their time and it is right and proper that they do so. As poets we should
>and do reflect those changes and their times, it is perhaps part of our
>task to foster, promulgate and even initiate those changes but it is also
>our responsibility to do it thoughtfully and with intent and purpose.
>
>John's Rengas( or whatever they are called ) lose punctuation with
>intention although they carry natural pausing.
>
>If I eschew punctuation, and I do occasionally, I do so with purpose. I do
>it to render the 'voice' slightly garbled and incoherent, reflecting a
>state of mind, or to provide a smooth stream of conscious linking one word
>with the next, overriding grammatical convention and  punctuation to obtain
>hopefully an added dimension to the poem but this always requires close
>attention to the retention of sense and communication.
>
>This does not suggest that your poems lack communication at all but since
>this is one of my criteria for losing punctuation you can see how it might
>colour my reading of a poem that eschews punctuation.
>
>You may call me the pedantic old bugger I undoubtedly am but I would
>welcome your response in the interests of improving our poetry, as I would
>anyone else willing to get involved. Regards Arthur.
>




The Tales of Faust poetry page can be found at:
http://www.hotkey.net.au/~flp/F_index.htm


_________________________________________________________________
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx