Dear jgdittier,
I very much appreciate your calling me on the cadence of my poem. I too enter few contests and am rarely published. Not because I feel inadequate, but I conclude most judges honestly do not know either.
I honestly have never seen anyone tackle a bump Vs intentional substitution. For the type of poetry that you and I prefer, your approach is something of which to take note. I accept your first try to be sing-songy, which is a somewhat forced promotion/demotion, which does encourages IP cadence. I only do this if the format is supposed to be iambic pentameter like sonnets, blank verse, etc. I believe a great deal of this demotion/promotion is a crappy excuse for inability. As you know, my scansion skill sucks, but insist on climbing that greasy pole.
I am very mechanical in using my favorite American Heritage dictionary for pronunciations and ictus emphases. This justifies ignoring dialect, regional, and geographical influences. I use an American Ford manual to work on American Ford brands, so to speak.
I normally do not substitute prolifically when writing iambic. I thought the rules applied to valid substitution should be given a run down the highway. Hence, my missile with excessive substitutions. I am glad you tackled my posted scansion for further discussion.
I think your approach is equal to or more valid than mine. Intend to return with further discussion.
Don
|