And, yes, David, I would dearly love to read that.
Andrew
----- Original Message -----
From: "Joanna Boulter" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, October 07, 2005 6:58 AM
Subject: Re: snap
> Yes please, Richard, If and when you can lay your hands on it I'd find a
> copy most interesting and instructive.
>
> joanna
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Richard Jeffrey Newman" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2005 10:33 PM
> Subject: Re: snap
>
>
> >>>I wonder if anyone has ever done some sort of study or
> > theory-construction around this, namely the extent to which the *I* in a
> > poem can be identified with the author<<
> >
> > I have always liked Sam Hammill's definition of the "I" in a poem, which
I
> > am paraphrasing here, since I am not where I can lay my hands on the
book
> > in
> > which he did it: The "I" in a poem is the first person impersonal (or
> > something like that). In other words, it is a first person speaker, but
it
> > is not autobiographical and, as such, is an invitation to someone other
> > than
> > the author to enter the poem and experience it as his or her own.
Hammill
> > goes on to say a good deal about the author's responsibility to and in
> > that
> > first person impersonal, but that I will not paraphrase. If someone is
> > interested, though, I think I have somewhere, but not on this computer,
a
> > pdf of the essay in which he talks about this and I'll be happy to send
> > it.
> >
> > Richard
|