01-19-2015, 09:45 AM
Jack,
Jack,
I think you could get away with the first four syllables (unless you want to be a stickler) if you rectified the problem with "flock's. That is what is primarily screwing up the line. Although if you read the last four syllables as
flock's naive hearts (heart would generally be read as unaccented, but with the plural the "s" give it a harder feel, at least to me, plus it is where one would expect the accented syllable, or harder emphasis in an iambic line) As you see, if read this way, and I think most would if not thinking about it, it gives you three accented syllables. Plus the supposed two in the first four syllables it give a total of 5 accents/stresses. So at the least something must be done with the second half. I do not see a way to salvage it with those word, that is without making for a really ungainly line. Something like:
"might damn our poor small flock's naive." That is all there is room for. You can boot the naive and go with
"might damn our poor small flock's bruised hearts."
I don't think that makes a very readable line but it is close enough to pass as iambic tetrameter; that is to say it will not be disruptive to the reading. I would think you would want a better line but at least it is an example of a line that can work despite not being completely in meter. Milo is much better at scanning metrical lines than I am. I tend to do what you do; imposing the meter onto lines that actually do not have it so you are not alone. I don't know if milo is actually better than I, but he puts forth he assessment with such confidence I usually defer to him
Actually I would like to here his reading of the first four words and if he believes them to be neutral words, or if he even acknowledges such a concept. My idea is that certain single syllable words can be heard as both stressed or unstressed depending on what surrounds them.
That's about the extent I can help on this, to do more would severely affect the meaning of the line.
Luck,
Dale
Jack,
Quote:Jack wrote: "Do you have any suggestions for converting it to iambs?"Re: "might damn our poor flock's naive hearts."
I think you could get away with the first four syllables (unless you want to be a stickler) if you rectified the problem with "flock's. That is what is primarily screwing up the line. Although if you read the last four syllables as
flock's naive hearts (heart would generally be read as unaccented, but with the plural the "s" give it a harder feel, at least to me, plus it is where one would expect the accented syllable, or harder emphasis in an iambic line) As you see, if read this way, and I think most would if not thinking about it, it gives you three accented syllables. Plus the supposed two in the first four syllables it give a total of 5 accents/stresses. So at the least something must be done with the second half. I do not see a way to salvage it with those word, that is without making for a really ungainly line. Something like:
"might damn our poor small flock's naive." That is all there is room for. You can boot the naive and go with
"might damn our poor small flock's bruised hearts."
I don't think that makes a very readable line but it is close enough to pass as iambic tetrameter; that is to say it will not be disruptive to the reading. I would think you would want a better line but at least it is an example of a line that can work despite not being completely in meter. Milo is much better at scanning metrical lines than I am. I tend to do what you do; imposing the meter onto lines that actually do not have it so you are not alone. I don't know if milo is actually better than I, but he puts forth he assessment with such confidence I usually defer to him
Actually I would like to here his reading of the first four words and if he believes them to be neutral words, or if he even acknowledges such a concept. My idea is that certain single syllable words can be heard as both stressed or unstressed depending on what surrounds them.
That's about the extent I can help on this, to do more would severely affect the meaning of the line.
Luck,
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.