Clement Wood (1888–1950)

This is an updated version of Clement Wood's original work from 1936, which I have reviewed separately, although LIbraryThing seems to have combined the two. There is little difference, except for the addition of 10,000 new entries. Wood's original essay on "The Poet's Craft" is included basically intact, except for at least one slight edit, which replaces the N-word with "peoples". Other than that, the original essay, with its references and quotes to poets both well-known and largely forgotten--including Clement Wood himself--appears unchanged. (Wood was a prolific writer of all types of books, including poetry, pulp fiction, pornography, and pretty much anything else you can imagine, as well as being a socialist and atheist--which didn't sit too well with many folks in Alabama, where he grew up.)

I do find it a bit amazing that his highly opinionated and prescriptive essay is still in print, but I guess rhyming dictionaries are not on the top of the list for paying anyone to make substantial updates. In any case, it is mostly a good introduction, though he dwells too long on really obscure French forms of poetry. I am convinced that Stephen Fry used Wood's work as the basis for his brilliant "The Ode Not Taken" which provides, in a much more modern and humorous manner, the same sort of instruction, minus the non-essentials, and with integrated exercises along the way--in line with Wood's own suggestion.

As for the rhyming dictionary itself, it is laid out in a phonetic arrangement that takes a while to get used to compared to a rhyming dictionary that includes an index (or an ebook where you can easily search for the word you want to rhyme with). But by omitting an index, there is a whole lot more room for actual rhymes.

This newer version continues to insist, quite vehemently, that "north" and "forth" (and "nor" and "fore" as well) don't rhyme because the 'o' sound is different. The contention is that the 'o' in "old" and the 'o' in "for" are different sounds. But I don't buy it. Nor do the Penguin Rhyming Dictionary or Merriam-Webster Rhyming Dictionary I bought at the same time.

Of all four rhyming dictionaries I purchased, the M-W, which is organized alphabetically by the letters to be rhymed (such as "orth") may be the easiest to use. It doesn't really require an index, and you don't have to look at a lot of phonetic symbols.… (mere)

I bought this after reading reviews of some newer versions which said that they didn't include the long introductory part on The Poet's Craft. However, my newer version does include it, with at least one slight edit, which replaces the N-word with "peoples". Other than that, the original 1936 essay, with its references and quotes to poets both well-known and largely forgotten--including Clement Wood himself--appears intact. (Wood was a prolific writer of all types of books, including poetry, pulp fiction, pornography, and pretty much anything else you can imagine, as well as being a socialist and atheist--which didn't sit too well with many folks in Alabama, where he grew up.)

I do find it a bit amazing that his highly opinionated and prescriptive essay is still in print, but I guess rhyming dictionaries are not on the top of the list for paying anyone to make substantial updates. In any case, it is mostly a good introduction, though he dwells too long on really obscure French forms of poetry. I am convinced that Stephen Fry used Wood's work as the basis for his brilliant "The Ode Not Taken" which provides, in a much more modern and humorous manner, the same sort of instruction, minus the non-essentials, and with integrated exercises along the way--in line with Wood's own suggestion.

As for the rhyming dictionary itself, it is laid out in a phonetic arrangement that takes a while to get used to compared to a rhyming dictionary that includes an index (or an ebook where you can easily search for the word you want to rhyme with). But by omitting an index, there is a whole lot more room for actual rhymes. I haven't done any sort of comparison with the newer edition, which claims to include 10,000 new entries, but the arrangement is the same.

Both books also insist that "north" and "forth" (and "nor" and "fore" as well) don't rhyme because the 'o' sound is different. The contention is that the 'o' in "old" and the 'o' in "for" are different sounds. But I don't buy it. Nor does the Penguin Rhyming Dictionary or Merriam-Webster Rhyming Dictionary I bought at the same time.

Of all four rhyming dictionaries, the M-W, which is organized alphabetically by the letters to be rhymed (such as "orth") may be the easiest to use. It doesn't really require an index, and you don't have to look at a lot of phonetic symbols.… (mere)