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.

    Rick Parker