 |
 |
I feel that the whole question of form is more personal. That is: each of us decides (a) what we think poetry is/is for; and (b) and what we're doing in it. And of course answering these two questions may not be all that conscious, it may just be process but I think that's where it starts. I don't think you can even begin to think about form until you've 'answered' those two questions. cheers david -----Original Message----- From: William Herbert <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> Date: 19 February 2000 10:23 Subject: Re: Narrative etc. >Dear Group, > >"now that traditional structures, ballads etc don't >convince or interest us anymore." > >Can I get some further clarification on John Bennett's comment here? Do >people feel that the presence of other modes of writing invalidates >traditional forms? It's my feeling that becoming one mode among many can >rejuvenate them -- for instance I found it quite entertaining to write a >conventional Wordsworthian sonnet about visiting the grave of a Dadaist >(Kurt Schwitters). I'm never very confident about throwing things out, I >suppose, or disposing of one thing simply because we have another. > >Best, > >Bill H > > %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%