After reading a long, unsparing piece on The Elements of Style this morning, I found myself hung up on a sentence in a long, reverent New York Times profile of the poet Frederick Seidel. The context for this sentence: whether poems ought to include references to expensive hotels and restaurants and rare motorcycles:
The poetic propriety of such inclusions has, by a certain kind of commentator, been questioned.
That's the sort of sentence to which Strunk and White's (overly simple) rules apply: "Use the active voice." "Keep related words together." Possible revisions:
Some critics think poems should not refer to such things.
Some critics think such things have no place in poetry.
Or if you want the alliteration (which to my ear sounds stilted):
Some critics have questioned the poetic propriety of such references.
I'm not sure what the fuss is about: poetry long ago made room for Achilles' shield, an object far grander than any motorcycle. The question is not whether motorcycles belong in a poem but whether the poem is good.
And if you're wondering: I'm no fan of Seidel's work, which I find, well, boring. (It's funny how quickly
shocking turns
boring.) Some years ago I turned down an invitation to review Seidel's
My Tokyo (1993). I wish I had a copy of the letter I sent back, which quoted a few choice bits of the poems.
[This post is no. 24 in a very occasional series, "How to improve writing," dedicated to improving stray bits of public prose.]
Two posts on
The Elements of Style
Hardly [adverb] convincing [adjective]
Pullum on Strunk and White
All
"How to improve writing" posts (via Pinboard)