Jump to content

Talk:Poetics

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.


Untitled

I've expanded this stub and would like to continue upgrading it. I'm also currently working on Modernist poetry, and many of the sources I'll be using there should result in material that can be used to create further sections here. I expect this article to cooperate with the mentioned existing articles on figures of speech and on meter, but to be distinct from them in a focus on large-scale concerns that are more theoretical. William P. Coleman (talk) 16:58, 7 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This is rather horrid for such a broad and meaningful topic. Please improve. 76.122.18.1 (talk) 03:58, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Improvement required

This article is in much need of improvement. In particular, the second section of the article refers far too much to a specific interpretation of poetics, rather than to the topic of poetics generally. Probably far more important would be an overview of the various theories of poetics, these being objectivism, formilism and Aristotelianism.

Also, I am not sure I understand why this is ranked of low importancce, where this concerns the overarching theories of poetry (and perhaps drama as well). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.84.248.99 (talk) 14:31, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Emily Dickinson section

I am really unclear why imagery and a Dickinson poem are topics covered in an article on poetics.--MDesiree13 (talk) 18:37, 11 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have removed that section, as it was not readily apparent in what way it was related to the subject at hand. --Saddhiyama (talk) 22:48, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Big Claim, No Citation

"Aristotle's Poetics is the first extant philosophical treatise to focus on literary theory." Is this true? This is 1) a pretty big claim to make without a citation and 2) relies on a fairly narrow definition of "literary theory." I think, for example, that enough of Plato's Republic focuses on the theory of poetry that a reasonable argument could be made that books III and X predate Poetics as the first dedicated treatises on literary theory. Something might even predate the Republic - that's just one example off the top of my head. Noah Hickman (BYU) (talk) 19:51, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the sentence to read "one of the first" to hedge the claim for now. Noah Hickman (BYU) (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosed COI

Hi! I'm Noah - I work for the Harold B. Lee Library at BYU, and I'll be working on this page. Please, feel free to reach out with questions, comments, or concerns regarding the edits that I make, and feel free to visit my user page to read about my credentials and my COIs. Noah Hickman (BYU) (talk) 20:45, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Page Restructure and Lack of Citations

I'm focusing my efforts in two main areas:

1) The page needs to be restructured to expand the scope of "poetics" to include non-western theories. I'll be using the treatment of "poetics" in The New Princeton Encyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics as a general scaffolding for the structure here.

2) The page is rife with uncited claims, most of which sound true but simply lack substantiation. I would prefer to find citations rather than purge the page of most of its text, and I would tremendously appreciate any and all help scouring sources to find missing evidence. Noah Hickman (BYU) (talk) 21:21, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I need a better citation for the etymology of "poetics." If we can't find one, I'm not opposed to scrapping it altogether. Noah Hickman (BYU) (talk) 22:16, 10 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]