2023-03-29 18:09:31 by ambuda-bot
This page has not been fully proofread.
22
notion of poetic deviation is uniquely or even adequately realized in the
universe of discourse called figuration (whether it may not be better
realized in some other non-figurative function of poetry, as dhvani);
what the principle of definition is, and whether it suffices for poetry; if
not, how it relates to other poetic principles.
INTRODUCTION
(II) HISTORY OF THE SEARCH FOR SYSTEM
(a) Arthasabda
The system of the figures and the manner in which they express or fail
to express the inexpressible are topics which condition the entire history
of Indian poetics for the antifigurationists as well as the figurationists.
We have stated that the figure as form must have a poetic application,
must be employed so as to convey its intent despite some elemental
disregard of the sense and limits of the figure itself. But the notion of
figuration in its most general form (vakrokti) is not an adequate guide
either to the universe of figures or, in fact, to the manner of poetry itself;
for the inexpressible aspect, the element of deviation, varies considerably
in character from one major category of figuration to another and is
itself partly a function of the logical and grammatical genera implicit
in the figures. This is why the Indian poeticians proved so uninterested
in the universals of poetry-its essence, spirit, and the like-committed
as they were to the notion that their propositions were directed to a
discriminable subject matter and had always to make explicit the actual
variation of intent and understanding in the poetic language.
The time-worn division of figures into artha ('meaning') and sabda
(*word or grammatical form') is the first and most obvious attempt to
characterize deviation concretely. Certain figures, as we have said, are
basically misapplications of a logical or propositional form. For example,
simile (A is like B) and hyperbole, which is the poetic variety of predica-
tion itself (A is B, or A has B), are understood despite the fact that the
statement cannot be true: "They have yarns / of a skyscraper so tall
they had to put hinges / on the two top stories so to let the moon go by",34
viz. "the skyscrapers are tall, very tall". Other figures involve no aspect
of intention at all, but merely reflect variations in the structure of the
language itself and of its grammar (conceived, of course, on many levels-
phonology, morphology, syntax). Perhaps the most elemental such figure
Carl Sandburg.
notion of poetic deviation is uniquely or even adequately realized in the
universe of discourse called figuration (whether it may not be better
realized in some other non-figurative function of poetry, as dhvani);
what the principle of definition is, and whether it suffices for poetry; if
not, how it relates to other poetic principles.
INTRODUCTION
(II) HISTORY OF THE SEARCH FOR SYSTEM
(a) Arthasabda
The system of the figures and the manner in which they express or fail
to express the inexpressible are topics which condition the entire history
of Indian poetics for the antifigurationists as well as the figurationists.
We have stated that the figure as form must have a poetic application,
must be employed so as to convey its intent despite some elemental
disregard of the sense and limits of the figure itself. But the notion of
figuration in its most general form (vakrokti) is not an adequate guide
either to the universe of figures or, in fact, to the manner of poetry itself;
for the inexpressible aspect, the element of deviation, varies considerably
in character from one major category of figuration to another and is
itself partly a function of the logical and grammatical genera implicit
in the figures. This is why the Indian poeticians proved so uninterested
in the universals of poetry-its essence, spirit, and the like-committed
as they were to the notion that their propositions were directed to a
discriminable subject matter and had always to make explicit the actual
variation of intent and understanding in the poetic language.
The time-worn division of figures into artha ('meaning') and sabda
(*word or grammatical form') is the first and most obvious attempt to
characterize deviation concretely. Certain figures, as we have said, are
basically misapplications of a logical or propositional form. For example,
simile (A is like B) and hyperbole, which is the poetic variety of predica-
tion itself (A is B, or A has B), are understood despite the fact that the
statement cannot be true: "They have yarns / of a skyscraper so tall
they had to put hinges / on the two top stories so to let the moon go by",34
viz. "the skyscrapers are tall, very tall". Other figures involve no aspect
of intention at all, but merely reflect variations in the structure of the
language itself and of its grammar (conceived, of course, on many levels-
phonology, morphology, syntax). Perhaps the most elemental such figure
Carl Sandburg.