Normally, I'm pretty free form with my writing. Almost all of my structure is uniquely specific to whichever sentence or paragraph I happen to be writing. However, lately, I've been stuck in a personal argument as to whether or not works have better features when structure driven, like Shakespeare's infamous iambic pentameter, or the heroics' dactylic hexameter. Given that the heroics were better suited for Hebrew and Greek, I doubt that's a meter I'll take to immediately, but the concept of meter hasn't been eluding my thought of late.
The draw behind meter makes it easier to which it can be related, as well as more memorable. However, I find that trying to write to a specific meter will often injure the language as much as it would improve it for rhetorical or nmemonic devices. That certainly does speak to a lack of particular quality of my writing, but doesn't necessarily speak to the pure benefit of meter.
It's really hard to validate with myself whether or not my mode of thinking is better, or better left behind in favor of improvement. Then again, given that Shakespeare himself is considered not only The Bard in terms of general talent, but also a nigh-perfect example of English poetry and playwriting, one may think it has some merit. Perhaps I know a hawk from a handsaw! Alas, poor talent, I knew it well...
No comments:
Post a Comment