From: cujo@petitmorte.net   
      
   nancygene.andjayme@gmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid (NancyGene) wrote in   
   news:T6Sdna9brLHRPdn0nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@giganews.com:   
      
   > [quote="HarryLime"]   
   >> HarryLime wrote:   
   >>   
   >>> Will-Dockery wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> George J. Dance wrote:   
   >>>> George J. Dance wrote:   
   >>>>   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> A mistake that poets often make is to use the last line of a poem   
   >>>>> as its title. (I just read another of those tonight; I won't name   
   >>>>> it, because it doesn't matter whose poem it was.)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> It's easy enough to make that mistake. A poet ends a poem with a   
   >>>>> very powerful line. Because it's the best line in the poem, he   
   >>>>> decides to use it as the title, on the idea that the most powerful   
   >>>>> line will attract the most readers.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Why is it a mistake? Because a line is more powerful if one is   
   >>>>> reading or hearing it for the first time, and less powerful if one   
   >>>>> has read or heard it before. Every time a line is reused, it loses   
   >>>>> power;.if a reader already knows that line, he does not have to   
   >>>>> concentrate on it but can simply skim through it. (A skilled poet   
   >>>>> learns to work around that, in poems where fixed lines are   
   >>>>> obligatory such as the triolet or villanelle), by subtly changing   
   >>>>> the lines themselves, or using the lines surrounding them to   
   >>>>> change the meaning of otherwise identical lines.)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> So: the poet has ended his poem with a powerful line. But he then   
   >>>>> robs the line of at least some, and possibly of all, of its power.   
   >>>>> Rather than reading that last line closely, and thinking "A-ha" or   
   >>>>> "Oh, wow", a reader will skim it and think "Oh, yeah" or "Sure";   
   >>>>> which is a much worse way to end the poem.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Excellent post, George.   
   >>>> Like I said, yes, one thing my teacher Dan Barfield stressed is   
   >>>> that the title is as important as the poem, really, maybe more in   
   >>>> some ways.   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> Just when you think that Team Donkey couldn't possibly get any more   
   >>> stupid, Will posts this.   
   >>>   
   >>> "For starters, Dunce's theory thati "a line is more powerful if one   
   >>> is reading or hearing it for the first time, and less powerful if   
   >>> one has read or heard it before" s just plain wrong.  Poe ends   
   >>> eleven stanzas of "The Raven" with the word "Nevermore"; and five of   
   >>> those with the full line "Quoth the Raven 'Nevermore.'"  And "The   
   >>> Raven" is arguably the best known, most read, and most quoted poem   
   >>> in the world.   
   >>>   
   >>> In fact, a large portion of the poem's success is due to the   
   >>> repetition of the closing line/word.  As Poe explains in "The   
   >>> Philosophy of Composition," the poem's power lies in the expected   
   >>> repetition of the word:   
   >>>   
   >>> "And here it was that I saw at once the opportunity afforded for the   
   >>> effect on which I had been depending " that is to say, the effect of   
   >>> the variation of application. I saw that I could make the first   
   >>> query propounded by the lover " the first query to which the Raven   
   >>> should reply 'Nevermore' " that I could make this first query a   
   >>> commonplace one " the second less so " the third still less, and so   
   >>> on " until at length the lover, startled from his original   
   >>> nonchalance by the melancholy character of the word itself " by its   
   >>> frequent repetition " and by a consideration of the ominous   
   >>> reputation of the fowl that uttered it " is at length excited to   
   >>> superstition, and wildly propounds queries of a far different   
   >>> character " queries whose solution he has passionately at heart "   
   >>> propounds them half in superstition and half in that species of   
   >>> despair which delights in self-torture " propounds them not   
   >>> altogether because he believes in the prophetic or demoniac   
   >>> character of the bird (which, reason assures him, is merely   
   >>> repeating a lesson learned by rote) but because he experiences a   
   >>> frenzied pleasure in so modeling his questions as to receive from   
   >>> the expected “Nevermore” the most delicious because the most   
   >>> intolerable of sorrow."   
   >>>   
   >>> Secondly, Will Donkey's claim that "the title is as important as the   
   >>> poem, really, maybe more in some ways," certainly goes a long way   
   >>> toward explaining the problem with his own attempts at poetry.  Will   
   >>> writes catchy titles.  But his titles are always better than his   
   >>> poems.  In fact, one might just as well read Will's titles and skip   
   >>> the poems altogether.   
   >>>   
   >>> It's also a very lazy method of writing, since the creative   
   >>> challenge ends before the actual composition of the poem has begun.   
   >>> But Donkeys are famous for their laziness.   
   >>   
   >>   
   >>   
   >> Returning to Dunce's post, which is too idiotic to simply let go: if   
   >> "a line is more powerful if one is reading or hearing it for the   
   >> first time, and less powerful if one has read or heard it before," a   
   >> poem would necessarily lose power each time one read it.  Carried to   
   >> its logical conclusion (Dunce logic, that is), memorizing a poem will   
   >> cause a reader to " simply skim through it," causing it to lose any   
   >> emotional/intellectual impact it might have had.   
   >>   
   >> Dunce has effectively turned poetry into a disposable art form.   
   >>   
   >> Read, spit, rinse, move on to the next.   
   >>   
   >> And, now that I think about it, that's exactly what Dunce's poems   
   >> are.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > Then by Dunce Reasoning, Will Donkey's "poems" should be posted once   
   > (and only once).  That's as good as they are going to get.   
      
   Let's hope they don't get any worse.   
      
   Oh wait, it's Dreckery. Of course it "will". Failure is in his genes.   
      
   --   
   "Post-editing someone's statement before replying to it is a sure sign   
   that you have already lost the argument." - Little Willie Douchebag gets   
   another asskicking from Pendragon   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)