meter (by any other name)

[softlyfalling]

I am not permitted to delete, it seems

[Leanne]

Sorry, I can't help but disagree. Meter is mathematical progressions that are already part of the patterns of the natural world. Those primal chants use exactly the same meter as all poetry -- meter simply controls the speed at which a poem is read, builds mood and tension and helps cement words into the memory. Learning to "manipulate it" is no different to learning the drums. If a drummer misses a beat, you notice -- but is he being unnatural by trying to keep time?

There is no wresting control from nature. The iamb is a heartbeat: da-DUM, da-DUM. An anapaest is the sound of hoofbeats: da-da-DUM, da-da-DUM. Trochees and dactyls are the sound of feet stamping the earth in that primal dance: DUM-da, DUM-da, faster now, DUM-da-da, DUM-da-da.

We name it to make it easy to refer to. We use it to make our poetry closer to nature, not further away. Everyday human speech is a much later invention than the mathematical precision of the earth and its own sounds.

[softlyfalling]

Sorry, I can't help but disagree. Meter is mathematical progressions that are already part of the patterns of the natural world. Those primal chants use exactly the same meter as all poetry -- meter simply controls the speed at which a poem is read, builds mood and tension and helps cement words into the memory. Learning to "manipulate it" is no different to learning the drums. If a drummer misses a beat, you notice -- but is he being unnatural by trying to keep time?

There is no wresting control from nature. The iamb is a heartbeat: da-DUM, da-DUM. An anapaest is the sound of hoofbeats: da-da-DUM, da-da-DUM. Trochees and dactyls are the sound of feet stamping the earth in that primal dance: DUM-da, DUM-da, faster now, DUM-da-da, DUM-da-da.

We name it to make it easy to refer to. We use it to make our poetry closer to nature, not further away. Everyday human speech is a much later invention than the mathematical precision of the earth and its own sounds.

I know you are right, Leanne. It was a tantrum of sorts...should I delete it?

[Leanne]

No. Tantrums make valuable discussion points I know lots of people have trouble with meter -- I generally think it's because they're trying to do pretty much what you said in your first post and twist the words in ways they don't want to go. Meter is organic. It doesn't want to be twisted, it wants to work with you to make something incredible.

[milo]

No. Tantrums make valuable discussion points I know lots of people have trouble with meter -- I generally think it's because they're trying to do pretty much what you said in your first post and twist the words in ways they don't want to go. Meter is organic. It doesn't want to be twisted, it wants to work with you to make something incredible.

The problem with discussions on meter is that a simple google search will turn up more than you or I could ever say.

Meter is not an opinion and the science of it is a 7,000 year old discussion.

milo

[Leanne]

The problem with google, of course, is that even though it's at everyone's fingertips, most people won't even think to search

---

Besides, you cannot google up an opinion. Some things, you just have to do for yourself.

[softlyfalling]

No. Tantrums make valuable discussion points I know lots of people have trouble with meter -- I generally think it's because they're trying to do pretty much what you said in your first post and twist the words in ways they don't want to go. Meter is organic. It doesn't want to be twisted, it wants to work with you to make something incredible.

The problem with discussions on meter is that a simple google search will turn up more than you or I could ever say.

Meter is not an opinion and the science of it is a 7,000 year old discussion.

milo

You missed the point. No matter how ancient a discussion may be, the possibility exists for a creative thought or analogy or personal reference. Otherwise, all philosophy would be a closed book, Milo. And as helpful as Google searches may be, there is no interchange of ideas or ANY possibility if creative input. Google is a catalyst for creative thought by providing information. Now, if you insist, you can align your mind with a search engine...far be it from me to interfere. But, the fact is, such a defiant and self-righteous and imperious attitude does not become an intelligent gentleman.

[milo]

No. Tantrums make valuable discussion points I know lots of people have trouble with meter -- I generally think it's because they're trying to do pretty much what you said in your first post and twist the words in ways they don't want to go. Meter is organic. It doesn't want to be twisted, it wants to work with you to make something incredible.

The problem with discussions on meter is that a simple google search will turn up more than you or I could ever say.

Meter is not an opinion and the science of it is a 7,000 year old discussion.

milo

You missed the point. No matter how ancient a discussion may be, the possibility exists for a creative thought or analogy or personal reference. Otherwise, all philosophy would be a closed book, Milo. And as helpful as Google searches may be, there is no interchange of ideas or ANY possibility if creative input. Google is a catalyst for creative thought by providing information. Now, if you insist, you can align your mind with a search engine...far be it from me to interfere. But, the fact is, such a defiant and self-righteous and imperious attitude does not become an intelligent gentleman.

the argument is facetious.
Philosophy is a continuing discourse on an evolving society.
Meter is more like arithmetic.
What can I add as to why 1 and 1 are two.

I guess that I agree.

milo

[billy]

we can go to google and search almost everything, why bother with discussion? because google doesn't really interact or put it's own spin on things. it doesn't ponder and then give a slightly slanted answer that could still be right, it doesn't have a point of view.

what google can't tell us, is that in poetry meter is a huge thing, it's naming day was probably the day we strung two words together. it can't tell us how meter puts bumps in a two dimensional piece of text and lift it in places, off the paper.

Giving meter a name and making a list of all the ways to manipulate it seems like another of these desperate and doomed attempts.

the reason for giving it a name is simple, we give everything names. it less confusing than calling everything this or that we could have called it horse shit and horse shit meter and they both would still represent what we defined them to represent.

ps, all argument is facetious

discussion on the other hand brings forth understanding.

[softlyfalling]

No. Tantrums make valuable discussion points I know lots of people have trouble with meter -- I generally think it's because they're trying to do pretty much what you said in your first post and twist the words in ways they don't want to go. Meter is organic. It doesn't want to be twisted, it wants to work with you to make something incredible.

The problem with discussions on meter is that a simple google search will turn up more than you or I could ever say.

Meter is not an opinion and the science of it is a 7,000 year old discussion.

milo

You missed the point. No matter how ancient a discussion may be, the possibility exists for a creative thought or analogy or personal reference. Otherwise, all philosophy would be a closed book, Milo. And as helpful as Google searches may be, there is no interchange of ideas or ANY possibility if creative input. Google is a catalyst for creative thought by providing information. Now, if you insist, you can align your mind with a search engine...far be it from me to interfere. But, the fact is, such a defiant and self-righteous and imperious attitude does not become an intelligent gentleman.

the argument is facetious.
Philosophy is a continuing discourse on an evolving society.
Meter is more like arithmetic.
What can I add as to why 1 and 1 are two.

I guess that I agree.

milo

One COULD claim that the disclaimer "the argument is factitious" is rather argumentative....and facetious.
But, that would be argumentative...and facetious.

---

we can go to google and search almost everything, why bother with discussion? because google doesn't really interact or put it's own spin on things. it doesn't ponder and then give a slightly slanted answer that could still be right, it doesn't have a point of view.

what google can't tell us, is that in poetry meter is a huge thing, it's naming day was probably the day we strung two words together. it can't tell us how meter puts bumps in a two dimensional piece of text and lift it in places, off the paper.

Giving meter a name and making a list of all the ways to manipulate it seems like another of these desperate and doomed attempts.

the reason for giving it a name is simple, we give everything names. it less confusing than calling everything this or that we could have called it horse shit and horse shit meter and they both would still represent what we defined them to represent.

ps, all argument is facetious

discussion on the other hand brings forth understanding.

I think it should be called Milo...LOLOL LOLOL LOLOL