archaic language and/or syntax in poetry!

[billy]

abu nuwas said something about the use of archaic words, syntax in poetry in relation to a comment i made about something in a poem.

i thought it would be a good topic for a discussion.

So what are the views of you people.

personally i feel that the use of it is okay in a period piece, or if one is writing in the style of; say shakespeare etc, (not the form but the language) be they words; such as thou and thou'st among many more, or syntax such as; will not you dance, etc.
that said, to use such words which are no longer prevalent in an odd line or two of a poem where the language used is mainly modern, makes certain parts seem forced. in general i think if we want to write poetry and we don't mean it to be archaic, then we shouldn't use archaic language (aka; yoda-speak)

abu nuwas; it doesn't matter how new you are, feel free to say what you think, if what you want to say is about something someone else said and not a reply to the poem, just bring it here and say it, be as honest and outright as you want, saying as much as you want.

[abu nuwas]

Malheureusement, it being still before breakfast, I cannot find my remark. Well, it was a whole day ago......

I really say that, whatever people choose to do, words are like the colours on an artist's palette. One of the Impressionists used only shades of red and green. That was his choice, but, unless other colours were for some reason unavailable, that's what it was: a choice. The artist is restricted by the colours available -the discovery of cobalt was a big thing a few years ago -- and writers by the limits of their vocabulary.

It once was quite frowned upon to use slang of any sort; but I have managed to write poems around Cockney rhyming slang, and if I knew more, I could use the old circus language, Parlari. Naturally, I believe it limiting if, conversely, a person has the idea that they must use old-fashioned, or 'poetic' language.

As to dropping in and out of archaic language, (quite apart from the possibility that it may be one's natural speech), I think that is fine--- wasn't John Betjeman with his peculiar delivery rather like that? A normal line or two, slightly arch, and then talk about the Number Nine bus at Kensal Rise? Or that kind of thing. I do not think people should do what they like; or rather, they may, provided they don't mind producing garbage. I do think that use of archaic language proffers many more banana-skins, so care should be taken. Then again, care should be taken anyway.....

[billy]

i can't doubt your logic so i won't try.

you wrote;

I do not think people should do what they like; or rather, they may, provided they don't mind producing garbage. I do think that use of archaic language proffers many more banana-skins, so care should be taken. Then again, care should be taken anyway.....

for me that's a lot how i feel, only i couldn't be as succinct in my opinion.
i'm only just beginning to read the likes of betjeman so can't comment on his work.
i do think a good poem is a good poem however it's written. jmo

thanks for the response.

[Leanne]

A word of caution: if you do choose to use archaisms, make sure you know how to use them properly. That doesn't just mean putting "-eth" on the end of every second word and theeing and thouing all over the place.

For example: thy is your in front of a word beginning with a consonant, thine is your in front of a word beginning with a vowel. Not tricky. And these are only for 2nd person singular -- if it's an address to more than one person, use your. (And you/ye is the plural)

[abu nuwas]

i can't doubt your logic so i won't try.

you wrote;

I do not think people should do what they like; or rather, they may, provided they don't mind producing garbage. I do think that use of archaic language proffers many more banana-skins, so care should be taken. Then again, care should be taken anyway.....

for me that's a lot how i feel, only i couldn't be as succinct in my opinion.
i'm only just beginning to read the likes of betjeman so can't comment on his work.
i do think a good poem is a good poem however it's written. jmo

thanks for the response.

If you are interested in Betjeman, here is a recording which gives his voice:

http://www.poetryarchive.org/poetryarchi...oemId=1537

[billy]

nice, what i did notice is that he, and others who read their poetry; (we have a few in our site reference section) the likes of t s eliot, even those who read eliot and the like, mainly have the boarding school accent of the english upper class. they definitely can be heard pronouncing the stressed or unstressed syls. thanks for the link. i see what you mean about him drifting into archaic now and again. that said, he probably knew what he was doing.