Talk:Heroic verse

February 2007

From the first line of the article: 'The term is used in English exclusively.'
That's not true, at least all latin languages use this term.

Possible text display problem

"the famous AvBbr rtpg5os of Homer" in the third paragraph seems to display incorrectly in Netscape and Internet Explorer. Or else I don't have a clue what "AvBbr rtpg5os" means. Jason3777 12:32, 31 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I made an attempt to restore it to how it appears in the 1911 Britannica. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.232.249.160 (talk) 12:16, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

French verse

I am having problems with the line in the article: "In French the alexandrine has always been regarded as the heroic measure of that language." Throughout the middle ages, the "heroic verse" in French epic poetry was generally the 10 syllable line (the decasyllable), and indeed the 10 syllable line is still referred to in France as "vers héroïque". Could one of the poetry editors rewrite that section? Thanks. - NYArtsnWords (talk) 22:58, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Milton

Milton, in his preface to the 2nd edition of Paradise Lost:

"The verse is English heroic without rhyme."

Something doesn't add up. The categorical statement that Paradise Lost is NOT heroic verse, then, needs moderation or clarification. I believe that the introduction to this article, although written in a stridently authoritative tone, is confusing the English heroic couplet with heroic verse. I am going to remove that categorical sentence, because it seems, on the face of it, more false than true, and therefore is not just a case of a "missing citation," or mere quibble. Ah, I see now this is from the old Britannica. However, that article seems highly problematic to me, if not downright prejudiced. I believe what Milton means is that each line simply has five stresses, unpatterned (that is, not to be scanned necessarily as iambs) and single lines therefore frequently contain an extra unstressed syllable. On the whole, in English, there is practically no difference between what we might simply call a "pentameter" (or even, more simply, a "decasyllabic") line and "heroic verse," as there is simply almost no other option (for an English verse epic), and even less sign of any other tradition. Richmond Lattimore, in his translations of the Homeric epics, went for a line with six stresses, pretty much regardless of syllable counts. This might be counted as a sort of blank English "Heroic" verse (albeit a sort of hexameter) as well. As a final point, English heroic verse may on the whole be unrhymed by defintion, as opposed to the "heroic couplets," which are, by definition rhymed. Thanks for listening, I just don't feel like sourcing all this stuff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.21.123.155 (talk) 07:37, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're absolutely correct. One source candidate is the Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry & Poetics, which contains a number of other sources that disagree with the 1911 article. As an aside, I'm quite surprised at the amateur quality of the old Britannica article. 96.232.249.160 (talk) 12:12, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merging heroic couplet to heroic verse

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was not to merge, but rather to improve the existing articles. Phil wink (talk) 15:07, 1 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I propose merging heroic couplet into heroic verse. Although conceivably these titles could accommodate different subject matter, in practice they are covering the same ground. Merging them (with clear sections separating Classical and later English traditions) could produce a much stronger article overall.Alarichall (talk) 11:04, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose... and agree? They are different (though related) topics, and we should do a better job of clarifying their distinctions, rather than merging. The heroic couplet is a specific English verseform. Heroic verse is a sort of global honorific or general historically-dependent category.
Heroic meter is the meter characteristic of heroic poetry: in classical Greek and Latin, this was, of course, the dactylic hexameter... the hendecasyllable (versi sciolti) in Italian; first the alexandrine, then the décasyllabe in French; and first the fourteener, then blank verse in English... Heroic verse is still today the most neutral term for the ten-syllable, five-stress line in English otherwise called iambic pentameter or decasyllable.
— The Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics (4th ed.) sv. "Heroic Verse", p. 625
So Heroic verse should be general, global, and clearly point the reader to whichever of the several types of heroic verse they may be most interested in. Heroic couplet should then do all the heavy lifting for that specific verse form. So I have little objection to shifting around some of the information in the articles (presumably from Heroic verse to Heroic couplet) to maintain the correct emphasis in each article... although honestly I am hesitant to bring EB1911 into more articles than it already is in. Phil wink (talk) 14:33, 17 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Phil wink. I'm not certain I understand you, but I think you're saying that Heroic verse is more or less the same as Epic poetry? If so, how would this be:

1. Make Heroic verse a disambiguation page leading to Epic poetry (for the genre), Heroic couplet (for the English metrical form), and Dactylic hexameter (for the Classical metrical form)

2. Make Heroic meter a disambiguation page leading to Heroic couplet (for the English metrical form), and Dactylic hexameter (for the Classical metrical form)

3. Merge useful material from Heroic verse into relevant articles

? Alarichall (talk) 19:05, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, @Alarichall: I'll try to clarify my senses of these terms. "Epic poetry" is a literary genre, based chiefly on content; formally the only qualification would be that it somehow is poetry... which, nowadays, is a pretty loose constraint. So it won't have much to do with the rest of my discussion. "Heroic verse" and "Heroic meter" I take to be virtually synonymous. I guess technically "herioc meter" points to the metrical structures themselves, and "heroic verse" can mean literature written using those metrical structures, but in practice I take them to be nearly interchangeable, and I assume that "heroic verse" is a little more common, so that "heroic meter" would be a redirect to "heroic verse" (as it is now).

Heroic verse/meter is defined as whatever metrical form is principally used for heroic poetry, which lead to 2 important points: (1) whereas "epic poetry" was chiefly content-based, "heroic verse" is a strictly formal term, meaning that you can write a recipe or fart joke in heroic verse, and it's still heroic verse. Though the definition derives from epic/romance, its use has no necessary connection. (2) Heroic verse/meter stands as a genus to the different species that have filled this role in various languages and centuries. So I think it's very appropriate to have an actual article (not DAB) for "Heroic verse" -- it's just that the current one is bad because almost all its emphasis is on one particular ... not even species, but subspecies: "Heroic couplets". Instead, the article should essentially be an expansion of the PEPP quote above, well linked so that anyone can follow up on any species they have particular interest in. Then all the bulk of the technical descriptions/history/examples/practitioners/criticism etc. should go under the "species" articles: Iambic pentameter, Dactylic hexameter, Alexandrine etc.

Essentially, my solution is more expensive than yours. It requires a major expansion (ideally without EB1911, in my view) of Heroic couplet and really a total rewrite of Heroic verse (although my target for "heroic verse" would be a relatively brief article). But I'm willing to be part of that solution. Can't do it just this moment... but I can help get us there if this solution is what is wanted. By the way, I did something a little similar to this with the genus Alexandrine and its species French alexandrine, Polish alexandrine, and Czech alexandrine (the latter 2 chiefly written by another editor). I don't know that I'd plan for the "genus" Heroic verse to be quite as capacious as the "genus" Alexandrine, but conceptually, that's what I'm talking about. Does that clarify at all? If not, I'm happy to try again. Cheers. Phil wink (talk) 20:56, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! That makes sense! I guess I'll give this discussion a few days to see if other views come in but otherwise I'm happy to follow your suggestions :-) Alarichall (talk) 21:23, 19 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Alarichall: just in case you're still in the mood to look at this. Klbrain (talk) 12:51, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Alarichall and Klbrain: Sorry, this task got shoved to the side. I've rewritten the article. It still needs more work (particularly for additional languages), but this was essentially my plan. Heroic couplet of course can still be improved, but now at least the actual relation between these 2 articles will be clear. I'll try to do a little more with this, but at least it is respectable as it stands, and I believe the merger discussion can be closed. Let me know if you have any comments/questions. Cheers. Phil wink (talk) 21:57, 31 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.