Worth a lot more than tuppence, i think
BW
Christine
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sally James [SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: 14 November 2002 08:46
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: Re Bang - Christine (I mean Mike)
>
> I was always being told off for using "poetry words" on a course I was on
> and maybe they were right but but.....I also like the musical quality and
> sounds that words have like sparkle and tinkle and flowing and short sharp
>
> words like ice and bang and shot. Words are words with sounds as well as
> meaning and fashion comes and goes and if we like the word and it fits the
>
> piece that we are writing then let it be is my tuppence worth. Sally j
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >From: Bob Cooper <[log in to unmask]>
> >Reply-To: The Pennine Poetry Works <[log in to unmask]>
> >To: [log in to unmask]
> >Subject: Re: Re Bang - Christine (I mean Mike)
> >Date: Thu, 14 Nov 2002 02:30:32 +0000
> >
> >Hi Mike (and all...)
> >You write, Mike:
> >Is it justifiable to use a redundant word purely for its musical quality?
> I
> >would be interested in hearing any opinions on this point.
> >
> >I'm tempted to say an emphatic no! But I'm not sure what you mean? Could
> >you give an example?
> >Bob
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>From: arthur seeley <[log in to unmask]>
> >>Reply-To: The Pennine Poetry Works <[log in to unmask]>
> >>To: [log in to unmask]
> >>Subject: Re: Re Bang - Christine
> >>Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2002 18:38:58 -0000
> >>
> >>Hear,hear! Arthur.
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "grasshopper" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>To: <[log in to unmask]>
> >>Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 6:19 PM
> >>Subject: Re: Re Bang - Christine
> >>
> >>
> >>Dear Mike,
> >> I haven't seen the crit concerned here, so my comments do not refer to
> >>that, but, in general, I would say there is definitely a fad these days
> >>for
> >>clipping words until a poem reads like telegraphese. Quite simply, it's
> >>silly -often a little word (O, those articles!) is needed for the flow
> of
> >>the line. I sometimes wonder if the clippers read the lines aloud, or if
> >>they do, if they really listen.
> >>I get the impression sometimes that some revisers think you are charged
> by
> >>the word. Poetry is not about expressing something in the fewest
> possible
> >>words.
> >>Kind regards,
> >> grasshopper
> >>----- Original Message -----
> >>From: "Mike Horwood" <[log in to unmask]>
> >>Sent: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 9:27 AM
> >>Subject: Re Bang - Christine
> >>
> >>
> >>Hello Christine,
> >> Thanks for your comments and suggestions. Other
> >>people have made similar comments about other poems and I begin to
> realise
> >>that my style is definitely a lot more wordy than many people write in
> >>themselves, or even like to read. Conversely, I sometimes feel when I
> read
> >>work posted on the list or in magazines that it has been cut back so far
> >>that thereīs not much more than a list of images. In the end I guess
> this
> >>just comes down to individual taste and preferences. Some of the cuts
> you
> >>suggest here, especially in the first stanza, feel to me as if they
> would
> >>break up the rhythm and flow. I was aiming at a rather excited,
> breathless
> >>speaking voice. But perhaps more interesting than the virtues of
> specific
> >>cuts in this poem is the general question of just how bare/ minimalist/
> >>precise a poem needs to be. I donīt want to be misunderstood as
> advocating
> >>pointless repetition or strings of adjectives, but I would like to ask
> >>this;
> >>can words be used purely to carry the rhythm of the line and for the
> >>pleasure of the sound their letters make in combination with other
> words?
> >>Is
> >>it justifiable to use a redundant word purely for its musical quality? I
> >>would be interested in hearing any opinions on this point.
> >>
> >>
> >>Best wishes, Mike
> >
> >
> >_________________________________________________________________
> >Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
> >http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
|
