PDA

View Full Version : To read aloud



urbandekay
August 26th, 2017, 07:40 PM
I am surprised the importance placed here on grammar and I applaud the use of good grammar in everyday writing and prose for clarity of expression, this often seems in decline. For instance, the habitual use of the Oxford comma when far from clarifying the text it obscures it.

However, in poetry that, at least for some is essentially a spoken not a written tool, the strict rules of grammar can hamper expression, I find. Like everything else should be sacrificed where they conflict with other virtues. For poetry must communicate not just intellectually but viscerally.

Pete_C
August 27th, 2017, 07:51 AM
Unless you intend to only perform your work, the reality is that the highest percentage of people experiencing any poem will read it, and not aloud. As such, grammar is vital to dictate the flow and pace. A well crafted piece of work with correct grammar will be far more accessible to the vast majority of readers.

If a poem doesn't read well with correct grammar, then it probably won't read well without grammar. Too many writers kick back when people criticise the flow and pace of a piece, or a rhythm that jars, because they are reading it the way they wrote it. For the reader, we can only see what we've been given, and if the phrasing, grammar, flow or enjambments are off, then that's what we get.

Ideas, thoughts, feelings and images are key in poetry, and many people can deliver them. Getting the structure to a point where everyone reads it with the same rhythm and pace is very difficult, and often separates the great from the average. If a few more poets considered the readers' experience we'd see much better work in general.

urbandekay
August 27th, 2017, 08:01 AM
Unless you intend to only perform your work, the reality is that the highest percentage of people experiencing any poem will read it, and not aloud. As such, grammar is vital to dictate the flow and pace. A well crafted piece of work with correct grammar will be far more accessible to the vast majority of readers.

If a poem doesn't read well with correct grammar, then it probably won't read well without grammar. Too many writers kick back when people criticise the flow and pace of a piece, or a rhythm that jars, because they are reading it the way they wrote it. For the reader, we can only see what we've been given, and if the phrasing, grammar, flow or enjambments are off, then that's what we get.

Ideas, thoughts, feelings and images are key in poetry, and many people can deliver them. Getting the structure to a point where everyone reads it with the same rhythm and pace is very difficult, and often separates the great from the average. If a few more poets considered the readers' experience we'd see much better work in general.

Agreed but therein lies the catch for even the best grammar cannot hope to portray the spoken word and sometimes even does damage to it. The use of emoticons, that are now almost everywhere, is a lazy and corruptive way to attempt to overcome the limitations of grammar. Don't know what is needed but something is.

JustRob
August 27th, 2017, 11:31 AM
There is a substantial thread on this subject HERE (https://www.writingforums.com/threads/172425-Structured-for-reading-aloud-or-viewing-on-page/).