I think it is appropriate at this juncture to say something about word choice in sonnets. First of all, word choice in sonnets is, in a sense restricted; that is, there are words that are legitimate English words, have definitions and spellings and pronunciations and all that, and yet are typically not found in sonnets. That does not mean these words cannot be found in sonnets, or should not; merely that their use must be carefully calibrated because they sound unusual, odd, or even forced within the sonnet form.
This concept may sound foreign, or even offensive: who am I to say that words should not be used? But the idea of restricted word use is not actually that strange or unusual. Some words are generally unused, either because they are overtechnical (laminar air flow is not something you tend to drop into ordinary conversation), archaic (how much use do thee and thou get outside of Pennsylvania?), rude (certain words I refuse to dignify with print here and tend to be spelled with asterisks, especially ones denigrating certain racial or ethnic origins), too Latinate or complex (mellifluous comes to mind), too Anglo-Saxon (how often do you see a cart called a wain?) or simply otherwise rarely used. If you're going to use those words, you can; there's nothing stopping you, nor is it in any sense inappropriate, with the exception perhaps of the rude words. But you have to be careful how you use them, and when. The same applies in a sonnet; only there are different (and generally, I would say, more) words that seem odd in that context. They can still be used, but care should be taken that they are justified.
Ignoring for the moment the issue of whether the words listed above for general restriction are restricted in sonnets, I would add certain others. Typically, modernisms are rare in sonnets; this is partly due to the sonnet being an artform rather less published in recent years, but whatever the cause, it will almost undoubtedly sound strange to a reader to have the terms of modern technology slapped directly into a sonnet without care. The same, for a totally different reason, goes for multisyllabic words whose emphases do not fall in the rhythm appropriate to the meter being used. Multisyllabic, for instance, is multisyllabic; neither iambic nor trochaic, but potentially anapestic or dactylic. Take care to make sure you want that irregularity in the line; if you don't, find another word or change things about so that you do want the irregularity.
But the real questions with diction come up regarding the words that don't usually show up in English. Rude words, technical terms, and otherwise rarely used words should obviously be used with caution, just like they are in normal use. But the real questions arise about Latinate words, Anglo-Saxon words, and most of all archaisms. Obviously there is substantial overlap between these three categories. In all three cases, the tradition of the sonnet form would seem to imply that these words should be embraced rather than avoided. After all, how can "I compare thee to a summer's day" without thee? And how can you get more archaic than Shakespeare (ignoring anyone who lived before him, of course)?
I firmly believe those days have passed. This is not the sixteenth century, nor the nineteenth, and the words appropriate to that time are not the words appropriate to this time; we have passed through modernism and post-modernism, e.e. cummings, Ezra Pound, and William Carlos Williams, and along the way we've lost the affection for intentional archaism and a lot of the tradition of using certain words, phrases, and formulations. This history cannot be undone; and sonnets must acknowledge that fact. If you wish to use those sorts of words, go ahead; but be as careful as you would be using them in other contexts. There are places where they are right, but there are also places they are wrong. The sonnet cannot survive if thee and thou are the default second person pronouns.
No comments:
Post a Comment