There was an article in the NYTimes on rote memory of poems and how it
is lost but was so important. I was happy to see it because I had just
required my poetry students to memorize a poem, and though they were
stressed at the thought, they loved it. I share the idea in the article that
many values of former ways of teaching have been cut off by notions that
they were not effective. I think there should be a return to more lecturing
because students never do anything that develops an attention span, for
example. It is easy to say that it is just rote learning, but in fact a great
lecture is far more valuable than a bad discussion. Universities would do
better to encourage each professor to teach in the way they are most
effective, and students would have varieties of experiences. Anyway, I
mean to keep requiring memorization as on thing they do.
Date sent: Fri, 3 Jan 2003 20:06:20 -0500
Send reply to: "T. S. Eliot Discussion forum." <[log in to unmask]>
From: "Rickard A. Parker" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Why the LG meter question?
To: [log in to unmask]
Gunnar Jauch wrote:
> Rereading and memorizing the poem,
Gunnar amazed me while visiting here with all that he has memorized
and that was just a small part of what was in his head. He knows the
words AND the music too! His recitations were memerizing. His accent
helped I think. To my badly trained ears it seemed more like one of a
native speaker from some far-flung part of the old Empire than of a
> Any suggestions?
Get permission from Faber & Faber to produce a recording of the poems.
I'll buy a few.