Hello Bob,
Thanks for your comments and observations. I, too, like the effect of a long flow followed by a short, abrupt phrase. It can lend great impact to the short phrase as well as varying the rhythm. I donīt do it here, as you noted, and Iīm not sure it would work, at least not as I imagined this poem in its present form because I wanted to get that breathless, excited voice racing on from one idea to the next. I feel the abrupt, shorter phrases might work against that. Interesting that you have also commented on the `andīs. Arthur mentioned them too. There are a lot. I like them because they run away with the voice of the poem, hurrying it on to the next thought. I agree absolutely with you that the small words can do so much to carry the rhythm of a line. I feel that sometimes poets who try to pare their work down to the minimum overlook this aspect. What are your views, Bob, on the question of keeping `redundantī(this will need some defining at some point) words in a poem rather than cutting, on the grounds that they work for the musical effect of the poem? I raised this issue in a recent posting but Iīve forgotten what I called it now. However, Arthur has already posted a thought-provoking response to it under the title `minimalismī.
Best wishes, Mike
|