Temptation

[Brahma]

Temptation

My friend Zazu sports dappled hair
and costumes from a country far;
She likes bare feet, and on her face
she bears a scar.

We sometimes sit up late and talk
of lovers past and woman's strife;
She says she was a dancer in
some former life.

Zazu can conjure up a feast,
or ointment for a scabrous itch;
For she who was a dancer once
is now a witch.

In Zazu's garden I have seen
an ebony rose, a raven white;
And on a summer's evening once
there danced a sprite.

She says she'll teach me all her craft
if I will her apprentice be,
And help preserve her knowledge for
posterity.

It might be fun to be a witch;
to settle scores and wealth acquire.
To bend this nasty, brutish world
to my desire.

[MorpheusSandman]

It's another thoroughly charming lyric, Brahma. There are a few metrical hiccups, like the first line, which doesn't really follow the iambic tetrameter... it scans more like trochaic dimeter that then switches to iambic dimeter. Some might complain about the few instances of grammatical inversion ("raven white", "apprentice be", "wealth acquire"), but I tend to think it suits more classical pieces like this.

[Brahma]

Hello, Morpheus.

I'm a long way from being completely (or even substantially) au fait with the technicalities of poetic construction - seeming, at present, to operate more with intuition and instinct than with knowledge and understanding.

However, I am troubled occasionally by the old dilemma of form and function; I'm not sure that it can be applied to poetry as to architecture. But I'm not technically competent enough to argue the point.

As to grammatical inversion, can I claim poetic licence? Or perhaps not?

Incidentally, I've been re-reading Emily Dickinson - who seems to break a few rules. Yes?

Regards,

Brahma.

[MorpheusSandman]

For someone who's merely operating on intuition and instinct, you generally seem to have a perfect grasp on form, meter and rhyme! While I've read quite a bit about poetic form, meter, etc. I still think the best introduction I've read is Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poetry#Elements). It's an extremely simple and lucid intro to the basics, with great examples that illustrate the various concepts. English meter basically revolves around stress, as English is a stress timed language. If you listen to how you speak, some syllables have more emphasis than others. Poetry was classically sculpted around these stresses. To illustrate with your first stanza;

My friend Zazu sports dappled hair
and costumes from a country far;
She likes bare feet, and on her face
she bears a scar.

As you can see, lines 2-4 have the same daDA daDA daDA daDA rhythm, which is iambic. The first line is different, and there are actually number of ways to scan it. Either or both words in "My friend" can be stressed, as well as "sports dappled". I think in natural speech, "My friend Za..." and "sports dapp..." would all be stressed, which gives the line a long, hard rhythm. This isn't really a good or bad thing, it just depends on what you're going for. I remember one of the classic cases of Milton using spondees (two stressed syllables) in Paradise lost was beginning a line with "Hate stronger" so both the stress on "hate" and "stro..." emphasized what he was saying metrically. Such things are just poetic tools to use when you think they suit the sense of what you're saying. I tend to stick to the meter unless I have a reason to break it.

As for form in poetry, I think it simply depends. Rules are meant to be broken, sure, but I'm also a believer in that you have to know the rules intimately and be able to play by them in order to know when to break them, in order to understand what affect they have. One reason I like form is that repetition creates expectation, and one of the most powerful things you can do in art is play against expectation. So, for instance, if you've established an iambic meter and then suddenly switch for a line you can create a jarring affect to emphasize that line. I did this at least once in each of my Quartet for the End of the World (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=60467) poems.

And I'm not a stickler for grammatical normality. In fact, the insistence on plain speech grammar is one thing I dislike about most modern poetry. The classic poets knew that there was a time and place for plain speech and for more poetic, formal speech. I think apart of this is that the language has become more "fixed" over time, whereas, even 100 years ago, playing around with grammatical order wasn't as completely out of the ordinary. Then again, I don't think the language has ever improved on Chaucerian Middle English for sheer musicality and creative flexibility!

[Brahma]

Thank you, Morpheus.

How very kind of you to offer such an extended comment - with practical examples. Very much appreciated.

I've copied both your comment and the Wikipedia article into my poetry notebook - for continuing reference.

Incidentally, I was browsing The Canterbury Tales a day or so ago (my copy is a modern English only, Penguin illustrated edition). Chaucer's (modern English) facility with rhyme is very impressive; I have yet to come across a Middle English version.

Thank you again.

Regards,

Brahma.

[MorpheusSandman]

Probably the best place you can read The Canterbury Tales is here. (http://www.librarius.com/cantales.htm) Honestly, the online resources for reading older, difficult poetry far outweighs anything in book form. With something like The Canterbury Tales you can't beat side-by-side original & translation (I'm also reading Burns that way now here (http://www.worldburnsclub.com/poems/translations/index.htm)) as well as hyper-linked glossaries. Although, I do occasionally love the feel and smell of a good book, and I usually keep a book form for when I'm somewhere that I don't have internet access. The Riverside Chaucer (http://www.amazon.com/Riverside-Chaucer-Geoffrey/dp/0395290317/ref=wl_it_dp_o?ie=UTF8&coliid=I22SKYJ8FRJJCO&colid=3TMHFWXPPVM4M) is a superb textbook for one-stop-shop Chaucer, but I'm a big believer in the Norton Critical Editions (http://www.amazon.com/gp/search/ref=sr_nr_scat_283155_ln?rh=n%3A283155%2Ck%3Anorto n+critical+chaucer&keywords=norton+critical+chaucer&ie=UTF8&qid=1302249479&scn=283155&h=acb33c190b7fd31970b207b12478558fdd3d75aa) as they're always excellent in terms of text, glosses, and illuminating intros/essays.

[Brahma]

Hello, Morpheus.

Thank you for the information.

Regards,

Brahma