For me lyric/al remains most useful in its sense of musicality, suitable for singing or partaking of sung qualities, song-like and therefore a factor of all poetry, a necessary part of any definition of poetry. To stress it (as, say, Kelvin Corcoran does) is to prioritise the "sound of words" and beauty of line, as against poetry seen as having primarily a moral function, like Wallace Stevens versus Charles Olson. Whether the "avant-garde" (we seek them here, we seek them there...) is opposed to lyric depends on its attitude to this (unnecessary) conflict.
PR
On 20 Nov 2014, at 15:50, GILES GOODLAND wrote:
Unrevised OED:
Of or pertaining to the lyre; adapted to the lyre, meant to be sung; pertaining to or characteristic of song. Now used as the name for short poems (whether or not intended to be sung), usually divided into stanzas or strophes, and directly expressing the poet's own thoughts and sentiments. Hence, applied to the poet who composes such poems.
Thanks to everyone who has contributed to this thread--the discussion has been fruitful for my thinking. Mark, the student didn't define lyrical; he treated it as understood, unfortunately. As the student is not my own, I don't have recourse to him for an explanation, either.
Does anyone know or have a viable definition of lyric or lyrical that would be useful for future discussions?
Cheers,
Carrie
