07-26-2018, 11:37 AM
I like edit 1, it cleans up and clarifies without actually explaining. Good!
As expected, other critics press to economize on words. That would be beneficial, however the many words (but watch actual repetition) are a part of the poem's spirit and character so don't go to extremes. Patter is patter, and while ideally every word should be necessary, sometimes two words are better than one, hence necessary. Even repetition can be necessary repetition
.
But see (for example) which stanza is least necessary; could extracts of it in another stanza work just as well?
As expected, other critics press to economize on words. That would be beneficial, however the many words (but watch actual repetition) are a part of the poem's spirit and character so don't go to extremes. Patter is patter, and while ideally every word should be necessary, sometimes two words are better than one, hence necessary. Even repetition can be necessary repetition
.But see (for example) which stanza is least necessary; could extracts of it in another stanza work just as well?
Non-practicing atheist