Talk:Clerihew

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

the external links on this page link to different sites, but both sites have the same article.

-- Good call. I left the link to that article's author's site and removed the other one. Platte Daddy 19:35, 24 May 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Clerihews on and under Mt. Olympus

Congratulations on your fine article on clerihews.

A section on my website is distinctive in that its numerous clerihews cover not only biography but also mythology.

For that reason, I am submitting this section for your consideration as a proposed link, www.benandverse.com/writings/index.htm

This is from a section I have just added to my website, a literary miscellany, called “Phony Pearls of Fictitious Wisdom”.

My original website, “Ben and Verse,” is devoted to Ben Franklin. It received the A+ award from the www.englishwebteacher.com (together with a link from the Franklin Institute).

The original website has persisted for years; I have instructed my executors that both the original website and this new addition shall remain unchanged until long after my death.

I’d consider it an honor to receive a link from the Wikipedia.

Sincerely,

John McCall Mccall63@aol.com

I've added a link to the above site. 62.136.143.124 22:37, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
Sorry, linking to personal web sites is inappropriate, as stated in Wikipedia's external links policy ("Links to blogs and personal web pages [should be avoided], except those written by a recognized authority"). --McGeddon 09:15, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Respectfully submitted

Ladislao Josef Bíró
Is writing’s great hero;
He did not disappoint
When he invented the ballpoint.

60 years ago. Bog 18:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too many Clerihews

This article seems to have turned into a sort of list of Clerihews, which is beyond the scope of this article. It should only contain a few examples of Clerihews, not be an anthology of them. So I have deleted most of them and left a few representative examples; the cut ones are below. 62.136.143.124 22:27, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Another about a famous UK scientist:

Sir James Dewar
Is better than you are.
None of you asses
Can liquefy gasses!

(Named as a Clarihew of the time in [1])


Edmund Clerihew Bentley
Worked swiftly if not gently,
Tracking murderers down by a hidden clew
In whodunit and clerihew.


Edmund Clerihew Bentley
Mused, when he ought to have studied intently;
It was this muse
That inspired clerihews.


Carl Gustav Jung
was very well hung,
a fact which annoyed
Sigmund Freud.


Sir Karl Popper
Perpetrated a whopper
When he boasted to the world that he and he alone
Had toppled Rudolf Carnap from his Vienna Circle throne.
(by Armand T. Ringer)



Alfred, Lord Tennyson
Lived upon venison;
Not cheap, I fear,
Because venison's dear.
(credited to Louis Untermeyer)


George the Third
Ought never to have occurred.
One can only wonder
At so grotesque a blunder.


Paula Regnier
Will have quite a career
One can attest
Via the size of her chest.
(Credited to Paul D. Joachim)


Ted Hughes,
Sylvias muse,
was rather good-looking.
Let his wife do the cooking.
(Credited to Caroline Dworin)


Charles Anthony Richard Hoare
His books are always such a bore.
Especially the most recent of his,
Communicating Sequential Processes.


Google Reader's
built with electrons and leptons, meters and liters.
We're off dealing with those particles
so we can bring you your articles.
(maintenance page seen on http://www.google.com/reader/view/, credited to Daniel Bentley)


Ted Hughes
Never wrote clerihews,
It was his fate
To become Poet Laureate.



Edmund Clerihew Bentley
was evidently
a man
who could not get his verses to scan
What I like about Clive
Is that he is no longer alive.
There is much to be said
For being dead.


I'm restroring the George III one, as it is arguably the most famous of all. JH (talk page) 21:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Project Gutenberg Accepts Ben & Verse

Michael Hart of Project Gutenberg has accepted a large section of my website for the collection of classics available for downloading.

This will be a rare honor for a website not in print.

It would be ridiculous to claim that my website is of the same literary value as the classics in that collection. However, given this recognition,I request that you consider restoring the link to my website. (Persons raising the objection would need to consult Michael Hart at this time since the title does not now appear in the Project's listing.)

Can a website be merely "personal" when endorsed by an internationally acclaimed institution?

I submit this inquiry with the greatest respect for Wikipedia, which, I believe, like Project Gutenberg, is one of the prime contributors to the advancement of knowledge and understanding.

John McCall

PS Clerihew lovers! Please forgive the somber tone here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.250.127.18 (talk) 17:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Please Bring Back Brief Candles

I am asking you to restore to your bibliography "Brief Candles: 101 Clerihews" by Henry Taylor. This book is widely considered to be the most signficant contriubution to the form for generations.

Technically, one might exclude sources of notable clerihews on the grounds that they do not reflect research or discussions of technique, and, clearly, with countless earnest applicants to Wikipedia, a line should be drawn somewhere. However, the Guidelines themselves indicate that exclusions should be made judiciously. Here are some reasons that I believe that the application should be flexible in the case of the clerihew.

The clerihew is a rather esoteric form of light verse, eagerly read by a few. Many who refer to this article already know the definition. Many are mainly interested in finding more clerihews.

Those who do not know clerihews, but have only seen the word can, I believe, only get to know them from examples. For them the deifnition and a brief discussion is important, but the glory of the form lies the humorous and imaginative application.

Believe me, as an editor, I realize that exclusions are very important, especially on the Internet, but please don't snuff out Brief Candles. In my opinion any bibliography that omits it is defective.

Sincerely,

John McCall

[edit] Please Delete Statement on Gutenberg

I'm asking someone -- with the authority to do so -- to delete my statement on Project Gutenberg. I feel that this kind of name dropping is not in my own best interests -- and even though I am not profiting commercially, it may prove embarrassing to Project Gutenberg.

I would like to remove any statements of mine on Wikipedia that mention Project Gutenberg. However, in my burst of enthusiasm over my acceptance, I mentioned the fact a number of places I cannot recall. Perhaps those who are editors would be kind enough to detect and delete those statements as well. Sorry for my poor judgment. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.205.29.116 (talk) 22:03, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Rhyme structure

Why does the article say the rhyme structure is AABBA when a clerihew has 4 lines? I don't see that last 'A' anywhere -- SteveCrook (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

It's OK, it was only the most recent edit which I think counts as vandalism. I've reverted it -- SteveCrook (talk) 23:20, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Wikipedia definition of a Clerihew

The Oxford Clerihew examples, and all the Clerihews I have seen use a first line which is solely the subject's name.

This is the main feature of the Clerihew. Otherwise it is merely a 4 line verse about a person, not a Clerihew.

The uncited definition, which allows other words in the first line, is not generally accepted and certainly not in the UK.

This article offers Games magazine 1983 as a source of alternative "Clerihews". Although this is undoubtedly a profound reference you may wish to reconsider its inclusion here.

I suggest you base a definition on the OUP examples which are longstanding and authoritative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.211.75.89 (talk) 09:51, 14 March 2008 (UTC)