Along the lines of the comparison Roger makes and the distinction Susanne makes, there is C S Lewis' comment on special power attributed to rhythm in the prose of the English Bible: he suggests comparing
'And after the cocktails, a soup (but the soup was not very nice), and after the soup a small, cold pie.'
and 'And out of the whirlwind, a fire (but the Lord was not in the fire), and out of the fire a still, small voice.'
Do we have here, and in Roger's line about the murder of beeves, a subtopic within parody? perhaps relics of a Common Room game?
Jon Quitslund
> A long time ago I did an article on "mimetic and aesthetic" rhythms,
> not an adequate pair of categories by a long shot, but an effort to
> distinguish between those sounds and rhythms whose patterns are
> complex and pleasing for whatever reason (usually some sort of
> repetition and surprise), "aesthetic," and those that either sought
> to reflect meaning or that we interpret as reflecting meaning,
> "mimetic." Roger's "murder..." would be aesthetic (his example, not
> the fact), while the "murmur..." would be mimetic. Language and
> sound are wonderfully fun because so much hovers between sound and
> meaning, and how we individually and as a community of readers hear
> that interchange.
>
> By the way, I think Spenser wrote one of the few great "l" lines in
> English, "Her long loose yellow locks lyke golden wyre."
>
> Susanne
>
> >In the vein of David's skepticism: who was it -- old age, you know --
> >who said that Keats's "murmur of innumerable bees" worked just as
> >well with the "murder of innumerable beeves"?
> >
> >Roger Kuin
> >
> >>At 02:31 PM 3/3/2004 -0500, Carol Kaske wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>In view of some current skepticism about onomatopoeia etc., I'm delighted
> >>to see that Frye believed in "imitative harmony . . . the sound being an
> >>echo of the sense," which is a neglected dimension of Spenser's poetry.
> >><<<<
> >>
> >>I am, in general, one of the skeptics. So, I might add, was Dr. Johnson.
> >>But that is irrelevant. They -- meaning critics in the Renaissance --
> >>believed in "imitative harmony," AND THERE'S AN END ON IT! (As the Great
> >>Cham would say.) Virgil, in particular, was famous in this period for the
> >>number and variety of his verbal sound effects. See María José Vega Ramos,
> >>El secreto artificio: Qualitas sonorum, maronolatría y tradición pontaniana
> >>en la poética del Renacimiento (Madrid, 1992).
> >>
> >>Did Virgil intend to produce the sound effects that the critics discovered?
> >>In some cases, there is no question, because the effects are so obvious
> >>(e.g., "taratantara," which is the sound that a trumpet makes in Virgil's
> >>predecessor Ennius). With more subtle effects -- and Virgil's effects,
> >>whatever they are, are more subtle -- it is hard to judge. We hear what we
> >>expect to hear. "Dover Beach" is connected with the seaside, and so of
> >>course the rhythm of the poem reminds us of the ebb and flow of the tides.
> >>But is that really what the poem sounds like? Is it the sound of the words
> >>that puts us in mind of the sea, or is it the meaning of the words?
> >>
> >>Frankly, I can't tell. With Spenser, though, I think we're on firmer
> >>ground. If you believe that Homer is writing allegory, and you want to
> >>imitate Homer, then you WILL write allegory. That's probably what Virgil
> >>did. It's the same with imitative harmony. If you think that Virgil used
> >>words to imitate sound, and you are trying to imitate Virgil, you will,
> >>probably, use words to imitate sound. And if you have any talent, it will
> >>probably work, too.
> >>
> >>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>David Wilson-Okamura http://virgil.org [log in to unmask]
> >>East Carolina University Virgil reception, discussion, documents, &c
> >>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|