You know too much, Robin:
>
>Actually, even to +say+ Wyatt raises problems. Not, Who was he? but: What
>is a Wyatt poem? Starters is the extreme divergence over the number of
>Wyatt texts. The highest number (360+) is Reibholz, but he avoids the
>ascription issue. Basically, it comes down to Muir (Thomson simply did the
>Italian notes) vs. Joost Daalder [an Australian -- maybe Alison has come
>across him?]. Maybe 350 vs 250.
>
Etc.:
>
>Enough. MORE than enough.
but I suspect Bunting didn't worry about these large questions. What he
seems to be arguing is that the actual lute, the music these poets wrote to
and for explains the lines, demonstrates that they weren't 'experimenting'
and failing to achieve pentameter, etc., what he sees as long words, held
over a bar, etc.
What you're worrying about is fascinating, but off down another track...
Doug
Douglas Barbour
Department of English
University of Alberta
Edmonton Alberta Canada T6G 2E5
(h) [780] 436 3320 (b) [780] 492 0521
http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/dbhome.htm
Listen. If I have known beauty
let's say I came to it
asking
Phyllis Webb
|