> Hello Grasshopper,
Many thanks for your further thoughts here, and maybe this whole issue is slowly becoming clearer in my mind. I can certainly take your point that there is a difference between the poet drawing attention to unwanted aspects of a metaphor and the reader creating them for him/herself. If Elizabeth Bishop had compared her fireflies to bubbles of champagne IN A GLASS she might have committed the mistake that I did. It is the actual mentioning of unwanted aspects that may draw the reader´s attention towards the unwanted comparison. But if they make the unwanted comparison independently then they do so on their own resposnibility, so to speak.
Best wishes, Mike
> Lähettäjä: grasshopper <[log in to unmask]>
> Päiväys: 2003/11/24 ma PM 03:59:49 GMT+02:00
> Vastaanottaja: [log in to unmask]
> Aihe: Re: the appropriate metaphor
>
> Dear Mike,
> Personally I think it's a waste of time, unless it gives you pleasure, to
> seek out x examples of this or that type of extracted metaphor.
> The thing that matters is: does the metaphor in question work in its
> particular poem?
> My take on it is that to compare something to teeth is one thing, but to
> compare something to teeth in a jaw is another, because you have then raised
> the question of what precisely the jaw is.
> My original point was that if you mention teeth, the jaw is implied -unless
> we routinely expect to come across a line of snow leopards' loose teeth.
> The trick of using simile, and other metaphor, in a poem is to use it so the
> required points of comparisons are stressed, and not the unwanted ones. This
> isn't to say that other points of comparisons won't be possible, but that
> the reader's mind focusses on the 'correct' ones in terms of the poem. If a
> metaphor is over-extended to the point when inappropriate connections are at
> the fore, everything tumbles down.
> Kind regards,
> grasshopper
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mike Horwood" <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003 1:00 PM
> Subject: [THE-WORKS] the appropriate metaphor
>
>
> The topic for today is the appropriate metaphor....or really, how to
> identify the inappropriate one. The subject came up last week in the
> discussion over my sub Dent du midi. Helen mentioned that the image of teeth
> in a jaw to describe peaks in a mountain rangedidn´t work for her since
> peaks don´t join mountain ranges in the same way as teeth fix into a jaw and
> also since one wouldn´t see blue sky behind teeth in a jaw. This led me to
> start wondering how far we need to condsider characteristics of images
> beyond the specific characteristic that we are drawing on for our image. I
> should also add that Helen´s second comment would apply equally to the teeth
> for peaks, regardless of the jaw, since teeth do not have blue sky behind
> them On this reckoning, teeth as an image for mountain peaks would not be
> appropriate.
> My lucubrations over the weekend have led me to the point where I would
> question such a rigorous application of tests of suitability. That is not to
> say that secondary implications of an image are irrelevant. The example of
> Corporal Trim´s comment (The King deserves his crown as a thief deserves
> hanging) is a clear case. But if we avoid such obvious blunders I think we
> do enough. The definition of `obvious blunder´ remains open, but I think I
> would argue for a more lenient approach than Helen proposed.
> I looked into several books over the weekend and found examples of images
> that could be argued with in every one. Here is a small selection:
> 1. The old South Boston Aquarium stands/ in a Sahara of snow
> Robert Lowell in For the Union Dead
> This really does test the definition of `obvious blunder´I think.
>
> 2. Hills covered with pine trees described as `an irregular, nervous
> saw-teeth edge´
> Elizabeth Bishop in Cape Breton. Saw teeth, of course are regular, but I
> don´t feel that that destroys the image for me
>
> 3. Fireflies described as moving up, then down `exactly like the bubbles in
> champagne´
> Bishop again in A Cold Spring. Champagne bubbles, of course, don´t go down.
>
> There are plenty of other examples, but time is running....I actually have
> to do some work, dammit. So, does anyone have any comments, anything to add,
> your own examples?
> Best wishes, Mike
>
|