12-30-2011, 08:37 PM
Ed's right...he is a lousy critic 
However I will jump on his dream idea and re-characterize it as a reverie, and I can agree it does have that feel to it.
If the speaker is female, it helps some with the Hans problem, although to me it has overtones a of watching to many 007 movies. But I think a lot of people have those experiences that in psychology is called disassociation, where people we have known forever, briefly seem like total strangers. The often referenced "deja vu" is a milder experience of this.
Although I have done so myself in the past, I have come to believe that using Roman numerals in such a short piece is a bit ostentatious, especially when something like a line break, or at most a short line in the middle of the page will suffice to act as a divider. In regards to outlining, Roman numerals are used for the second largest division in a generally large work, usually only under the division of a chapter. Personally I see them in this piece as a bit disruptive, because I think most people will think they are odd given their general usage, and so the reader begins thinking about why there are Roman numerals there (as though there is a hidden reason of which the reader is unaware), rather than focusing on the poem. Why this is problematic to me is the really only justifiable reason for using them is simply, "because I wanted to". To me a whim is not sufficient justification to support disruption. I also think it is right to honor the past to a certain degree by acknowledging generally accepted usage. I think for the last century we have rebelled in large portions just to rebel, and an error we made is to see such things as this as rules rather than guidelines.
Just my take,
Dale
However I will jump on his dream idea and re-characterize it as a reverie, and I can agree it does have that feel to it. If the speaker is female, it helps some with the Hans problem, although to me it has overtones a of watching to many 007 movies. But I think a lot of people have those experiences that in psychology is called disassociation, where people we have known forever, briefly seem like total strangers. The often referenced "deja vu" is a milder experience of this.
Although I have done so myself in the past, I have come to believe that using Roman numerals in such a short piece is a bit ostentatious, especially when something like a line break, or at most a short line in the middle of the page will suffice to act as a divider. In regards to outlining, Roman numerals are used for the second largest division in a generally large work, usually only under the division of a chapter. Personally I see them in this piece as a bit disruptive, because I think most people will think they are odd given their general usage, and so the reader begins thinking about why there are Roman numerals there (as though there is a hidden reason of which the reader is unaware), rather than focusing on the poem. Why this is problematic to me is the really only justifiable reason for using them is simply, "because I wanted to". To me a whim is not sufficient justification to support disruption. I also think it is right to honor the past to a certain degree by acknowledging generally accepted usage. I think for the last century we have rebelled in large portions just to rebel, and an error we made is to see such things as this as rules rather than guidelines.
Just my take,
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.