Quote:
Originally Posted by doubleshuffle
I do agree that in modern times there is a difference between poetry written to be read and song lyrics written to be sung, but, firstly, why shouldn't the latter be considered literature if they are well written and have something original to say? I like the Swedish Academy's argument that originally all literature was made for performance.
|
The ancient greeks had nine muses for every creative and performance endeavor they knew. Singing was not listed separately. They considered it poetry. Indeed, their term for performers of the great epic poems was "singer".
http://www.greekmyths-greekmythology...eek-mythology/
Quote:
“Rhapsodes originated in the Ionian district, which has been sometimes regarded as Homer’s birthplace, and were also known as Homeridai, disciples of Homer, or “singers of stitched lays.” ”
“The performance of epic poetry was called in classical Greek rhapsōidia (ῥαψῳδία), and its performer rhapsōidos. The word does not occur in the early epics, which use the word aoidos (ἀοιδός “singer”) for performers in all genres including this one.”
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhapsode
|
The Academy is on safe ground.