Faraway Star wrote:

> George J. Dance wrote:
>>
>> Today I added this section to the Penny's Poetry Pages article on Alfred Austin. It covers the basics, and is therefore much better than nothing. Depending on the discussion, I may add to it in future.
>>
>> Austin's poetics are more interesting than his poetry.<ref>c.f. Alfred Austin, "The Essentials of Great Poetry" in ''The Bridling of Pegasus: Prose papers on poetry'' (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1967). [Austin (1967)]. Project Gutenberg, Web, Nov. 2, 2023.</ref>
>>
>> Austin believed that melodiousness (musicality) and lucidity (clearness of expression) were essential to poetry.
>>
>> :There must perforce be certain qualities common to all poetry, whether the greatest, the less great, or the[Pg 3] comparatively inferior, and whether descriptive, lyrical, idyllic, reflective, epic, or dramatic; and, so long as there existed any authority or body of generally accepted opinion on the subject, these were at least two such qualities, viz. melodiousness, whether sweet or sonorous, and lucidity or clearness of expression, to be apprehended, without laborious investigation, by highly cultured and simple readers alike.<ref>Austin (1967), 2-3.</ref>
>>
>> :The most generous critic, if he is to be discriminating and just, cannot, let me say again, allow that any verse which is profoundly obscure or utterly unmusical, no matter how intellectual in substance, deserves the appellation of poetry.<ref>Austin (1967), 7.</ref>
>>
>> He believed that narrative poetry, whether epic or dramatic, was the highest or greatest form of poetry, and that great poetry must be narrative poetry. On his theory, as I understand it, poetry was about the mind's engagement with the world. According to him, there are four distinct ways in which a mind engages with the world: (1) perception, (2) emotion, (3) thought, and (4) action. Each stage of engagement is a higher form, in that it emerges from and incorporates those below it. The four classed of poetry, corresponding to the different stages of engagement, are (1) purely descriptive poetry (such as [[imagism]]), (2) lyric poetry, (3) reflective or philosophical poetry, and finally (4) narrative (epic or dramatic) poetry.
>>
>> :Never forgetting the essential qualities of melody and lucidity, do we not find that mere descriptive verse, which depends on perception or observation, is the humblest and most elementary form of poetry; that descriptive verse, when suffused with sentiment,[Pg 10] gains in value and charm; that if, to the foregoing, thought or reflection be superadded, there is a conspicuous rise in dignity, majesty, and relative excellence; and finally, that the employment of these in narrative action, whether epic or dramatic, carries us on to a stage of supreme excellence which can rarely be predicated of any poetry in which action is absent? If this be so, we have to the successive development of observation, feeling, thought, and action, an exact analogy or counterpart in (1) Descriptive Poetry; (2) Lyrical Poetry; (3) Reflective Poetry; (4) Epic or Dramatic Poetry; in each of which, melody and lucidity being always present, there is an advance in poetic value over the preceding stage, without the preceding one being eliminated from its progress.<ref>Austin (1967), 9-10.</ref>

> Good day and again good read...!

Thanks for bumping it, FS. It's not a bad summary. I think the idea of letting Austin mainly speak for himself works well; not only do the quotes state his points well, but they're also a pretty good sample of his prose style.

I did change the first sentence; it now reads: "Of more interest than Austin's poems are his poetics." That sounds more like the way an encyclopedia would put it, and putting "poetics" at the end makes the reference more sensible. (It's not a citation, but a link to his major work on poetics.) It's not cited at all -- it's just personal opinion, rather than someone else's opinion, but having read some of both I'm convinced of it.

Otherwise I've left the piece alone, and probably will continue to do so; every week I have to move on to new poets. Here's the link to the wiki article, in case you do want to check on it in the future.
https://pennyspoetry.fandom.com/wiki/Alfred_Austin?so=search#Austin's_poetics

On Saturday, November 25, 2023 at 3:35:21 AM UTC-5, George J. wrote:
> Faraway Star wrote:
>
> > George J. Dance wrote:
> >>
> >> Today I added this section to the Penny's Poetry Pages article on Alfred Austin. It covers the basics, and is therefore much better than nothing. Depending on the discussion, I may add to it in future.
> >>
> >> Austin's poetics are more interesting than his poetry.<ref>c.f. Alfred Austin, "The Essentials of Great Poetry" in ''The Bridling of Pegasus: Prose papers on poetry'' (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1967). [Austin (1967)]. Project Gutenberg, Web, Nov. 2, 2023.</ref>
> >>
> >> Austin believed that melodiousness (musicality) and lucidity (clearness of expression) were essential to poetry.
> >>
> >> :There must perforce be certain qualities common to all poetry, whether the greatest, the less great, or the[Pg 3] comparatively inferior, and whether descriptive, lyrical, idyllic, reflective, epic, or dramatic; and, so long as there existed any authority or body of generally accepted opinion on the subject, these were at least two such qualities, viz. melodiousness, whether sweet or sonorous, and lucidity or clearness of expression, to be apprehended, without laborious investigation, by highly cultured and simple readers alike.<ref>Austin (1967), 2-3.</ref>
> >>
> >> :The most generous critic, if he is to be discriminating and just, cannot, let me say again, allow that any verse which is profoundly obscure or utterly unmusical, no matter how intellectual in substance, deserves the appellation of poetry.<ref>Austin (1967), 7.</ref>
> >>
> >> He believed that narrative poetry, whether epic or dramatic, was the highest or greatest form of poetry, and that great poetry must be narrative poetry. On his theory, as I understand it, poetry was about the mind's engagement with the world. According to him, there are four distinct ways in which a mind engages with the world: (1) perception, (2) emotion, (3) thought, and (4) action. Each stage of engagement is a higher form, in that it emerges from and incorporates those below it. The four classed of poetry, corresponding to the different stages of engagement, are (1) purely descriptive poetry (such as [[imagism]]), (2) lyric poetry, (3) reflective or philosophical poetry, and finally (4) narrative (epic or dramatic) poetry.
> >>
> >> :Never forgetting the essential qualities of melody and lucidity, do we not find that mere descriptive verse, which depends on perception or observation, is the humblest and most elementary form of poetry; that descriptive verse, when suffused with sentiment,[Pg 10] gains in value and charm; that if, to the foregoing, thought or reflection be superadded, there is a conspicuous rise in dignity, majesty, and relative excellence; and finally, that the employment of these in narrative action, whether epic or dramatic, carries us on to a stage of supreme excellence which can rarely be predicated of any poetry in which action is absent? If this be so, we have to the successive development of observation, feeling, thought, and action, an exact analogy or counterpart in (1) Descriptive Poetry; (2) Lyrical Poetry; (3) Reflective Poetry; (4) Epic or Dramatic Poetry; in each of which, melody and lucidity being always present, there is an advance in poetic value over the preceding stage, without the preceding one being eliminated from its progress.<ref>Austin (1967), 9-10.</ref>
>
> > Good day and again good read...!
> Thanks for bumping it, FS. It's not a bad summary. I think the idea of letting Austin mainly speak for himself works well; not only do the quotes state his points well, but they're also a pretty good sample of his prose style.
>
> I did change the first sentence; it now reads: "Of more interest than Austin's poems are his poetics." That sounds more like the way an encyclopedia would put it, and putting "poetics" at the end makes the reference more sensible. (It's not a citation, but a link to his major work on poetics.) It's not cited at all -- it's just personal opinion, rather than someone else's opinion, but having read some of both I'm convinced of it.
>
> Otherwise I've left the piece alone, and probably will continue to do so; every week I have to move on to new poets. Here's the link to the wiki article, in case you do want to check on it in the future.
> https://pennyspoetry.fandom.com/wiki/Alfred_Austin?so=search#Austin's_poetics

Pleasure was mine, found it to be a good read...!

George J. Dance wrote:

> Michael Pendragon wrote:

>> On Thursday, November 2, 2023 at 10:03:59 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>>> Today I added this section to the Penny's Poetry Pages article on Alfred Austin. It covers the basics, and is therefore much better than nothing. Depending on the discussion, I may add to it in future.
>>>
>>> Austin's poetics are more interesting than his poetry.<ref>c.f. Alfred Austin, "The Essentials of Great Poetry" in ''The Bridling of Pegasus: Prose papers on poetry'' (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1967). [Austin (1967)]. Project Gutenberg, Web, Nov. 2, 2023.</ref>
>>>
>>> Austin believed that melodiousness (musicality) and lucidity (clearness of expression) were essential to poetry.
>>>
>>> :There must perforce be certain qualities common to all poetry, whether the greatest, the less great, or the[Pg 3] comparatively inferior, and whether descriptive, lyrical, idyllic, reflective, epic, or dramatic; and, so long as there existed any authority or body of generally accepted opinion on the subject, these were at least two such qualities, viz. melodiousness, whether sweet or sonorous, and lucidity or clearness of expression, to be apprehended, without laborious investigation, by highly cultured and simple readers alike.<ref>Austin (1967), 2-3.</ref>
>>>

>> I wholeheartedly concur with Mr. Austin, and have expressed both of these thoughts on numerous occasions in the past.

>> Indeed, I have often described my own poetry as being akin to a musical composition wherein the tone of each word is used to contribute to the spoken music of the piece (hard sounds, soft sounds, stressed/unstressed syllables, various vowels, consonants and combinations thereof correspond to forms of musical notation, etc.). I'd attempted to explain this to PJR, but was unable to express it to his satisfaction.

>> I have also repeatedly stated my belief that a poem should readily lend itself to being read without one's having to consult a dictionary or encyclopedia. Again, my rule of thumb is that if I have to consult a dictionary more than three times when reading a poem, I will most likely abandon it in favor of one that is more accessible. This is not done out of intellectual laziness on my part, but in accordance with my belief that a poem is effectively a spell. In order for the spell to work, the poem should be brief enough for the reader to complete it in a single sitting, and should not be interrupted by one's having recourse to a dictionary. A poem should rarely exceed 100 lines, and each word, each syllable, each meaning and connotation, should contribute to creating the overall effect (or effects) in regard to mood, tone, emotion, musicality, and meaning.

>> Not only should it be readily understandable, but it should be clearly expressed -- in terms of grammatically correct sentences. I have often raised this point regarding the Fragmentist poetry of the Donkey and his Stink. Poetry, indeed language, is first and foremost a form of communication. If a poet is unable to clearly express his thoughts to his readers, his readers will soon abandon his work out of frustration (over its impenetrability) or out of a repulsion to its grammatical incompetence.

>>> :The most generous critic, if he is to be discriminating and just, cannot, let me say again, allow that any verse which is profoundly obscure or utterly unmusical, no matter how intellectual in substance, deserves the appellation of poetry.<ref>Austin (1967), 7.</ref>
>>>

>> Exactly! This is the basis of my aversion to Modern Verse. The lack of both rhyme and meter make it impossible for the poem to contain musical qualities. It can be *poetic*; but it cannot be *poetry.* Similarly, the academic obscurity of T.S. Eliot, and the conceptual obscurity of PJR, renders their works unintelligible. A poem cannot create a spell over the reader if the latter is forced to guess at its possible meaning.

>>> He believed that narrative poetry, whether epic or dramatic, was the highest or greatest form of poetry, and that great poetry must be narrative poetry. On his theory, as I understand it, poetry was about the mind's engagement with the world. According to him, there are four distinct ways in which a mind engages with the world: (1) perception, (2) emotion, (3) thought, and (4) action. Each stage of engagement is a higher form, in that it emerges from and incorporates those below it. The four classed of poetry, corresponding to the different stages of engagement, are (1) purely descriptive poetry (such as [[imagism]]), (2) lyric poetry, (3) reflective or philosophical poetry, and finally (4) narrative (epic or dramatic) poetry.
>>>

>> Funny how you claimed (in two other threads today) that you were unaware of Mr. Austin's ever having used the term "dramatic verse." Do you feel there is a significant difference between the meanings of "verse" and "poetry"; or were you just trolling on the basis of his not having used those exact words?

> Neither. I asked you for a quote (in one thread, twice) where he used the term because I thought you were misquoting him. Now that I've tracked down what he does say about the subject, I'm convinced of it.

"Words matter."

>> That said, I disagree with his assessment. I believe that there are forms of poetry: 1) one-dimensional, and 2) multi-layered. The former categorization includes perception/imagist, emotion/lyric and actionnarrative-epic-dramatic. The latter, to thought/reflective-philosophical.

>> A multi-layered poem is one which can be interpreted on two or more levels; the first level being the one-dimensional (apparent) level exemplified by Austin's categorizations of perception, emotion, and action, the second (third, fourth, fifth, etc.) being on a more abstract or symbolic level. As an example of the latter, I refer you to the recent discussion regarding my poem, "The Blue Rose." Ostensibly, it can be read as a broken-hearted love poem; however, it can also be read as referring to the Jain concept of the same name. Ideally, both levels interact with one another so that the poem becomes both a love poem and an exploration of Jainism at the same time -- the each interpretation lending meaning to the other.

>>> :Never forgetting the essential qualities of melody and lucidity, do we not find that mere descriptive verse, which depends on perception or observation, is the humblest and most elementary form of poetry; that descriptive verse, when suffused with sentiment,[Pg 10] gains in value and charm; that if, to the foregoing, thought or reflection be superadded, there is a conspicuous rise in dignity, majesty, and relative excellence; and finally, that the employment of these in narrative action, whether epic or dramatic, carries us on to a stage of supreme excellence which can rarely be predicated of any poetry in which action is absent? If this be so, we have to the successive development of observation, feeling, thought, and action, an exact analogy or counterpart in (1) Descriptive Poetry; (2) Lyrical Poetry; (3) Reflective Poetry; (4) Epic or Dramatic Poetry; in each of which, melody and lucidity being always present, there is an advance in poetic value over the preceding stage, without the preceding one being eliminated from its progress.<ref>Austin (1967), 9-10.</ref>

>> See above. I agree that purely descriptive poetry is the humblest form, and that the inclusion of emotion can raise it to another level. However, "action," (i.e., narrative/dramatic) poetry is merely the description of an event or sequence of events. It is the inclusion of other (intellectual/abstract/symbolic) levels of meaning that raises a poem above the commonplace and into the sublime.

George J. Dance wrote:
>
> Today I added this section to the Penny's Poetry Pages article on Alfred Austin. It covers the basics, and is therefore much better than nothing. Depending on the discussion, I may add to it in future.

> Austin's poetics are more interesting than his poetry.<ref>c.f. Alfred Austin, "The Essentials of Great Poetry" in ''The Bridling of Pegasus: Prose papers on poetry'' (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1967). [Austin (1967)]. Project Gutenberg, Web, Nov. 2, 2023.</ref>

> Austin believed that melodiousness (musicality) and lucidity (clearness of expression) were essential to poetry.

> :There must perforce be certain qualities common to all poetry, whether the greatest, the less great, or the[Pg 3] comparatively inferior, and whether descriptive, lyrical, idyllic, reflective, epic, or dramatic; and, so long as there existed any authority or body of generally accepted opinion on the subject, these were at least two such qualities, viz. melodiousness, whether sweet or sonorous, and lucidity or clearness of expression, to be apprehended, without laborious investigation, by highly cultured and simple readers alike.<ref>Austin (1967), 2-3.</ref>

> :The most generous critic, if he is to be discriminating and just, cannot, let me say again, allow that any verse which is profoundly obscure or utterly unmusical, no matter how intellectual in substance, deserves the appellation of poetry.<ref>Austin (1967), 7.</ref>

> He believed that narrative poetry, whether epic or dramatic, was the highest or greatest form of poetry, and that great poetry must be narrative poetry. On his theory, as I understand it, poetry was about the mind's engagement with the world. According to him, there are four distinct ways in which a mind engages with the world: (1) perception, (2) emotion, (3) thought, and (4) action. Each stage of engagement is a higher form, in that it emerges from and incorporates those below it. The four classed of poetry, corresponding to the different stages of engagement, are (1) purely descriptive poetry (such as [[imagism]]), (2) lyric poetry, (3) reflective or philosophical poetry, and finally (4) narrative (epic or dramatic) poetry.

> :Never forgetting the essential qualities of melody and lucidity, do we not find that mere descriptive verse, which depends on perception or observation, is the humblest and most elementary form of poetry; that descriptive verse, when suffused with sentiment,[Pg 10] gains in value and charm; that if, to the foregoing, thought or reflection be superadded, there is a conspicuous rise in dignity, majesty, and relative excellence; and finally, that the employment of these in narrative action, whether epic or dramatic, carries us on to a stage of supreme excellence which can rarely be predicated of any poetry in which action is absent? If this be so, we have to the successive development of observation, feeling, thought, and action, an exact analogy or counterpart in (1) Descriptive Poetry; (2) Lyrical Poetry; (3) Reflective Poetry; (4) Epic or Dramatic Poetry; in each of which, melody and lucidity being always present, there is an advance in poetic value over the preceding stage, without the preceding one being eliminated from its progress.<ref>Austin (1967), 9-10.</ref>

Again.... Well put....

George J. Dance wrote:
>
> Today I added this section to the Penny's Poetry Pages article on Alfred Austin. It covers the basics, and is therefore much better than nothing. Depending on the discussion, I may add to it in future.

> Austin's poetics are more interesting than his poetry.<ref>c.f. Alfred Austin, "The Essentials of Great Poetry" in ''The Bridling of Pegasus: Prose papers on poetry'' (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1967). [Austin (1967)]. Project Gutenberg, Web, Nov. 2, 2023.</ref>

> Austin believed that melodiousness (musicality) and lucidity (clearness of expression) were essential to poetry.

> :There must perforce be certain qualities common to all poetry, whether the greatest, the less great, or the[Pg 3] comparatively inferior, and whether descriptive, lyrical, idyllic, reflective, epic, or dramatic; and, so long as there existed any authority or body of generally accepted opinion on the subject, these were at least two such qualities, viz. melodiousness, whether sweet or sonorous, and lucidity or clearness of expression, to be apprehended, without laborious investigation, by highly cultured and simple readers alike.<ref>Austin (1967), 2-3.</ref>

> :The most generous critic, if he is to be discriminating and just, cannot, let me say again, allow that any verse which is profoundly obscure or utterly unmusical, no matter how intellectual in substance, deserves the appellation of poetry.<ref>Austin (1967), 7.</ref>

> He believed that narrative poetry, whether epic or dramatic, was the highest or greatest form of poetry, and that great poetry must be narrative poetry. On his theory, as I understand it, poetry was about the mind's engagement with the world. According to him, there are four distinct ways in which a mind engages with the world: (1) perception, (2) emotion, (3) thought, and (4) action. Each stage of engagement is a higher form, in that it emerges from and incorporates those below it. The four classed of poetry, corresponding to the different stages of engagement, are (1) purely descriptive poetry (such as [[imagism]]), (2) lyric poetry, (3) reflective or philosophical poetry, and finally (4) narrative (epic or dramatic) poetry.

> :Never forgetting the essential qualities of melody and lucidity, do we not find that mere descriptive verse, which depends on perception or observation, is the humblest and most elementary form of poetry; that descriptive verse, when suffused with sentiment,[Pg 10] gains in value and charm; that if, to the foregoing, thought or reflection be superadded, there is a conspicuous rise in dignity, majesty, and relative excellence; and finally, that the employment of these in narrative action, whether epic or dramatic, carries us on to a stage of supreme excellence which can rarely be predicated of any poetry in which action is absent? If this be so, we have to the successive development of observation, feeling, thought, and action, an exact analogy or counterpart in (1) Descriptive Poetry; (2) Lyrical Poetry; (3) Reflective Poetry; (4) Epic or Dramatic Poetry; in each of which, melody and lucidity being always present, there is an advance in poetic value over the preceding stage, without the preceding one being eliminated from its progress.<ref>Austin (1967), 9-10.</ref>

Again, thanks for the back story.