Ha! I don't know about falling foul; but I do know of his preferences.
L
On 13 November 2013 21:46, Bill Wootton <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> If you want to fall foul of Doug, L, you'll is, you'll are. Can be
> liberating, eventually, but it didn't come naturally to me either.
>
> B
>
> > On 14 Nov 2013, at 5:03 am, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >
> > well i didnt mean too have anyone there but if you feel his her presence
> > they may be there
> >
> > i'll have a look - thanks for that
> >
> > i almost certainly need my isses and ares!
> >
> > Thanks, Doug
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 13 November 2013 17:59, Douglas Barbour <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> I just felt it did, as if it became an address to someone in the final
> >> stanza, an apostrophe, & had not been that before.
> >>
> >> And I wondered if you needed all the 'is's & 'are's in st 1...
> >>
> >> Doug
> >> On Nov 13, 2013, at 10:53 AM, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> I'll certainly think on that. I agree there's a change but I am not
> sure
> >>> what you mean by the shift from one to you; so I am not sure what it is
> >> I'd
> >>> be editing out. (I'd be quite capable at that point of writing "looking
> >>> closer, one sees..." & it's nufffin to do with her maj. you know
> >>>
> >>> anyway, i shall look again at it. i found it in my domestics file this
> >>> morning where it slipped when i wrote it some months ago and has evaded
> >>> attention
> >>>
> >>> best
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 13 November 2013 17:40, Douglas Barbour <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> I like it, perhaps because it too seems so formal(ized)?
> >>>>
> >>>> But the address seems different in the final stanza, Lawrence, a shift
> >>>> from 'one' to 'you' implied, but I'm not sure how or why. There's a
> >> stasis
> >>>> of the 'is' in the first 2, & I wonder if you can edit a bit of that
> >> out?
> >>>>
> >>>> Doug
> >>>> On Nov 13, 2013, at 5:09 AM, Lawrence Upton <[log in to unmask]>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Facets of this river are boxed away
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and rarely seen but as humdrum imagery.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> It is decoration that is wanted,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> released as what is seen as cool;
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and so one stands near the fountain, to stare
> >>>>>
> >>>>> over a field of pools, in profusion,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> quietly wondering why it has been set here,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> pleased nevertheless for certain calm.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Yet, now look closer and regard them well:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> watch how lines are drawn momentarily
> >>>>>
> >>>>> by and into water itself, a mode of dance,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> constructing space and edges within it,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> without ever stacking what it collects
> >>>>>
> >>>>> to distort or divert the visible meaning.
> >>>>
> >>>> Douglas Barbour
> >>>> [log in to unmask]
> >>>>
> >>>> http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
> >>>> http://eclecticruckus.wordpress.com/
> >>>>
> >>>> Latest books:
> >>>> Continuations & Continuations 2 (with Sheila E Murphy)
> >>>> http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=962
> >>>> Recording Dates
> >>>> (Rubicon Press)
> >>>>
> >>>> Art is always the replacing of indifference by attention.
> >>>>
> >>>> Guy Davenport
> >>
> >> Douglas Barbour
> >> [log in to unmask]
> >>
> >> http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
> >> http://eclecticruckus.wordpress.com/
> >>
> >> Latest books:
> >> Continuations & Continuations 2 (with Sheila E Murphy)
> >> http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=962
> >> Recording Dates
> >> (Rubicon Press)
> >>
> >> Art is always the replacing of indifference by attention.
> >>
> >> Guy Davenport
> >
>
|