|
|
I do hope the middle-brow party line isn't going to be enforced rigidly around here. Barbelith seems different from the Fowler's-Modern-English-Usage-worshipping minions on less erudite boards. All of you seem eclectic and inviting from a distance. I hope that perception's correct.
More on rhythm in prose:
The discipline of conventional prose is *not* to rhyme or fall into obvious meter. Other writers used to make fun of Dickens for lapsing into iambic pentameter; many twentieth century writers (such as Ford Maddox Ford) spent days ferreting out and removing unintentional rhymes.
Personally, I don't mind intrusions of meter into prose -- free verse has made it all meter, really -- and I enjoy elaborate cadences. Are there really no fans of Thomas de Quincey or Thomas Browne on these boards?
Contrary to Fowler's premise, a Latinate vocabulary and complex sentence structure aren't always indicative of a meretricious middle-class person with upper-class pretensions. Some people express themselves that way sincerely; they grew up reading old books from some relative's well-stocked study. Their style might strike you as unnecessary or opaque, but that's really how they think.
Also (and I hope this doesn't sound self-aggrandizing):
The subject of rhyming seems strangely pertinent. I've had rhyming poetry (along with *vers libre*) publised in the Mississippi Review, Storming the Reality Studio (Duke University Press) and many other anthologies and periodicals. Certain of those poems have also been translated into Japanese, German and French for other anthologies. Recently, my essay on poetry and music notation was published in a critical anthology titled _An Exaltation of Forms_ (Michigan University Press). The examples I give in that essay are from Thomas Campion, Sidney Lanier, Celia Zufofsky and (you guessed it) my own "Justine Variations." Perhaps including "Justine" was simply an excuse to get my work into a book with Pulitzer-winning poets. If so, *that* would be an example of obnoxious class warfare. |
|
|