There are words that are strangely appealing to writers, even though they should be resisted in almost all contexts except the context for which they were created. Their allure is the allure of shiny things, when what a writer needs is usually not flashiness but clarity of meaning.
“Shard” is such a word. It is, to be fair, not so much shiny as purple, (as in “purple prose”) - or, if not precisely purple, certainly gaudy. It is a peacock feather word, a glossy substitute for “fragment” or “sliver” or “broken bit”. When encountered in a contemporary poem, it is a disappointing sign that there is probably little point reading further. It serves almost always as an indicator the writer has swooned at the altar of their own poetic rapture.
“Liminal” is another current favourite of writers, although more favoured in prose than in poetry. It is a show-off word. It is supposed to tell the reader that the article they are reading is not a bit of tabloid nonsense but something intellectual. It tells me that I am entering the territory of pomposity. I look for something else to read instead.
"Shard" I usually see in computing contexts--allocating records to different machines according to some key range for efficiency.
ReplyDeleteOne could argue that the senses of "marginal" and "liminal" overlap, and "marginal" appears in the 15th and last poem in J.V. Cunningham's sequence "To What Strangers, What Welcome."
I had no idea shard could have a computer context. Even though I think liminal is used in an unnecessary way, I believe marginal & liminal (when used properly) have different functions.
DeleteI hope your heating is functioning well as the whole world cannot be unaware that it is extremely cold im DC today. ZMKC
It would be a cold day to march in a parade, or to sit in reviewing stands to watch. It seems to me that the inauguration in 2009 was in quite cold weather, though perhaps with less snow.
DeleteBut yes, we are warm, thanks.