Thread replies: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1
File: 7a999ef75463270118576ed2ccc41d07.jpg (33KB, 564x376px) Image search:
[Google]
33KB, 564x376px
What is the advantage of the blank verse (only metrical observation, but no rhyme) over prose?
Homer, Hesiod, Aeschylus, Sophocles, Euripides, Virgil, Ovid, Shakespeare, Milton: all of them made ample use of such verse. It was much more common in antiquity than rhymed poetry. But was is the great advantage of using verse over prose?
I wonder: it is only rhythm that makes the non-rhymed verse an alternative to prose, or is there something more?
>>
>>8604089
bump
>>
>>8604089
Rhyme is only a single element in poetry and one absent or far less prevalent in other languages than English. Poetry is so much more than just metered text with rhymes.
>>
There is no advantage. One uses either depending on what the work demands. They are also very different from each other. Just because blank verse doesn't have rhyme it doesn't mean that it is equal with prose, or that prose is just blank verse without line cuts.
>>
>>8604089
mirin' those marbles
>>
>>8604089
Verse is easier to memorize. Many of these works were either oral tradition or plays, and in those days actors had to memorize tons and tons of characters because the plays they put on rotated often.
>>
>>8604089
Verse is preferred to prose in oral traditions where writing is expensive or literacy is rare because it aides memory. Now it is a style choice.
Thread posts: 7
Thread images: 1
Thread images: 1