Re: RE: RAT John Sylvain and "grammar"

[LeeWochner@movingarts.org (Lee Wochner)]

You're still talking about people who knew how to write and how to use the
language, and then played with it. Emily Dickinson's poems don't work
without the dashes; check out the early "corrected" version with the added
commas and periods and you'll see what I mean. She knew she needed the dash
because she understands how the language and its punctuation work. Thanks
for helping prove my point. Spelling wasn't standardized in Shakespeare's
time; you can't blame him for that. If you're still trying to pin that
"academia" thing on me, I'm just laughing about it. Otherwise, I'm not sure
why you're bringing it up. I don't work in academia and I don't disagree
with your point of view about it. As for Brad's reading series, I already
commended him for starting it up. Finally, I love writers who play with the
language; Coover, Barthelme, Beckett, and Borges are all favorites. But
again, they did so knowingly instead of just blundering about and insisting
that their ignorance was our bliss.

Lee


At 9:40 PM 10/20/99, DennisLMo@aol.com wrote:
>actually travis is right. the original shakespeare folio was more like a
>prompt script. writers who've had a production in the last five years will
>know what they are like. there never was an authorized printed script of
>shakespeare. samuel johnson, i think, said he had small latin and less greek.
>or was it ben johnson. meaning he wasn't much for the conventional learning
>scheme of the day. a clue there about something. (yes i don't use question
>marks when with friends.) keats and shelley's manuscript had idiosyncratic
>spelling everywhere. and how do you parse the grammar of a poem by robert
>creeley, emily dickinson or one of those shakespeare sonnets... words fit
>this way and then they fit that way. part of their evocation. most poems are
>like that. so. lets see. one could say its the ignorant calling those who may
>have more experience and knowledge then themselves, ignorant. that happens.
>i've been in academia now and then. often the scholars have a small view, are
>wed to their theories and suffer writer's block. and many of the poets i know
>read all over the place, including the classics a lot. also the classics in
>other languages and cultures. often they are wrestless delvers. find out
>about what they've read. from what i can tell the poets (paywrights) have
>often read wider and better than the critics and academics who can be snide.
>but then a lot of the rats know this, have experienced this, when they get
>there works done. preaching to the converted...
>
>hey lee, couldn't get away from philly and go to la, too much to do at
>Theatre Double. now does mentioning hard work, even as an aslant, open me up
>to villification. or did i misunderstand some correctly spelled and
>grammatical, non rat spew.
>
>love,
>d

______________________________________________________________________
www.movingarts.org

Internet access for Moving Arts generously provided by MindSpring.  For
more information, call (800) 719.4664.