※ [本文轉錄自 dale 信箱] 作者: [email protected] ([email protected]) 標題: Re: [轉錄] 林婉瑜《部分與全部》 時間: Sun Oct 2 21:25:53 2005 作者: dale (冰城城主) 站內: dale 標題: Re: [轉錄] 林婉瑜《部分與全部》 時間: Tue Sep 27 15:35:44 2005 ※ 引述《dale (冰城城主)》之銘言： : 有時，閱讀一些年輕的稿件，讀畢後總覺得自己必須去說服作者 : 兩件事：一是詩和其他文類一樣在必要時才使用形容詞；二是情緒需 : 要轉化或拓展意義才有被閱讀價值。 這幾天一直在想──Pound 有說過類似的話！ 然而，基於時間壓縮、記憶力太糟等理由，翻爛了了 "ABC of Reading" 也找不到（我還是覺得應該會有：符合他愛說教的個性）。 沒想到剛剛在圖書館偷懶一下卻找到了！:D 以下是 Ezra Pound 寫給 Harriet Monroe 的信。 Coleman's Hatch, January 1915 Dear H. M.: -- Poetry must be as well written as prose. Its language must be a fine language, departing in no way from speech save by a heightened intensity (i.e. simplicity). There must be no book words, no periphrases, no inversions. It must be as simple as De Maupassant's best prose, and as hard as Stendhal's. There must be no interjections. No words flying off to nothing. Granted one can't get perfection every shot, this must be one's INTENTION. Rhythm MUST have meaning. It can't be merely a careless dash off, with no grip and no real hold to the words and sense, a tumty tum tumty tum tum ta. There must be no clich'es, set phrases, stereotyped journalese. The only escape from such is by precision, a result of concentrated attention to what one is writing. The test of a writer is his ability for such concentration AND for his power to stay concentrated till he gets to the end of his poem, whether it is two lines or two hundred. Objectivity and again objectivity, and expression: no hindside-beforeness, no straddled adjectives (as "addled mosses dank"), no Tennysonianness of speech; nothing -- nothing that you couldn't, in some circumstance, in the stress of some emotion, actually say. Every literaryism, every book word, fritters away a scrap of the reader's patience, a scrap of his sense of your sincerity. When one really feels and thinks, one stammers with simple speech; it is only in the flurry, the shallow frothy excitement of writing, or the inebriety of a metre, that one falls into the easy -- oh, how easy! -- speech of books and poems that one has read. Language is made out of concrete things. General expressions in non-concrete terms as a laziness; they are talk, not art, not creation. They are the reaction of things on the writer, not a creative act _by_ the writer. "Epithets" are usually abstractions -- I mean what they call "epithets" in the books about poetry. The only adjective that is worth using is the adjective that is essential to the sense of the passage, not the decorative frill adjective. Aldington has his occasional concentrations, and for that reason it is always possible that he will do a fine thing. There is a superficial cleverness in him, then a great and lamentable gap, then the hard point the true centre, out of which a fine thing may come at any time. Fletcher is sputter, bright flash, sputter. Impressionist temperament, made intense at half-seconds. H. D. and William C. Williams both better emotional equipment than Aldington, but lacking the superficial cleverness. Ought to produce really fine things at great intervals. Eliot is intelligent, very, but I don't know him well enough to make predictions. Masters hits rock bottom now and again. He should comb the journalese out of his poems. I wish Lindsay all possible luck but we're not really pulling the same way, though we both pull against entrenched senility. -- Sandburg may come out all right, but he needs to learn a _lot_ about _How to Write._ I believe his intention is right. Would to God I could see a bit more Sophoclean severity in the ambitions of mes amis et confr`eres. The general weakness of the writers of the new school is looseness, lack of rhythmical construction and intensity; secondly, an attempt to "apply decoration", to use what ought to be a vortex as a sort of bill-poster, or fence-wash. Hinc illae lachrymae. Too bad about Amy -- why can't she conceive of herself as a Renaissance figure instead of a spiritual chief, which she ain't. Ebbene -- enough of this. 結論： ‧Pound 的筆，很機車！XD ‧計中鍵盤真他喵的難打，軟趴趴的沒骨氣。 ‧上個世紀的批判，到現在還是很受用。 ‧其實我是回計中查 paper 的……Orz||| -- ╭──────────────────╮╭────────────╮╭─╮ │ 世界正崩毀離析，時間正傾倒頹壞。 ├┴╮http://distract.org/╭┴┤ │ ╰─┬────────────────╯ ├──────────┤ ╰┬╯ ╰──────────────────╯ ╰──╯ --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢兔(ptt2.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.7.59 ※ candb:轉錄至看板 Room2012 09/28 00:56 -- ╭──────────────────╮╭────────────╮╭─╮ │ 世界正崩毀離析，時間正傾倒頹壞。 ├┴╮http://distract.org/╭┴┤ │ ╰─┬────────────────╯ ├──────────┤ ╰┬╯ ╰──────────────────╯ ╰──╯ --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 218.166.77.147