Rhyming & Contemporary Poetry
Rob Evans
In article <3269D4...@puc.edu>, Bryan Ness <bn...@puc.edu> writes
>I have been wanting to see a discussion of why rhyming poetry is so "out
>of style" in comtemporary poetry. I am probably exposing myself as
>being terribly old-fashioned for even bringing up such a topic. So be
>it.
>
>Most of us, I'm fairly certain, enjoy a number of poets from the past
>which would necessarily include poetry that rhymes. I am also fairly
>certain that most of us in the development of our craft have written
>rhymed poetry. In fact, it is my opinion, that to gain a maturity of
>writing form one has to write some poetry in traditional forms (e.g.
>sonnets, rhymed couplets, etc.)
>
>Having said that, why is rhymed poetry so much out of vogue? One
>possible reason might be the difficulty of writing good rhymed poetry.
>It is so easy to sound trite, "sing-songy", or just plain silly. But
>can't the same errors be committed in free verse? Another reason might
>be that rhyming constrains the poet from saying what he really wants to
>say. Basically, rhyming forces the poet to sacrifice "message" to form.
>
>I would like to be a bit rebellious to the new poetic tide and suggest
>that good rhymed poetry can still be written and should be taken
>seriously. There are so many journals that will reject rhymed poetry
>without even considering it. I think that is a mistake. Some journals
>still do accept some rhymed poetry, and although some of it is not good
>poetry, in my opinion, some of it is.
>
>I write more free verse than anything else, but I still do write with
>rhyme in some cases. For me certain ideas just seem like they need to
>be expressed in a sonnet form or some other rhymed form. I don't know
>what internal rules I use to decide that, but there are times when I
>just feel that a certain poem needs to be rhymed. It is also a
>rewardning challenge to write in a highly structured format like the
>sonnet.
>
>Now, if you would indulge me, give me some feedback. I'd like to hear
>what others have to say about rhyming. Should rhymed poetry be
>relegated to the past or should it have a place in contemporary poetry?
>Are people that enjoy and/or write rhymed poetry simply old-fashioned?
>Can good rhymed poetry still be written?
>
>As a final act of bravery (or stupidity) on my part I include a sonnet
>I've written:
>
>Living Mass
>
>I watch a former green hillside become
>Disfigured by sunburn, red as fire, and dried
>As brittle as beetle’s wings, scattered crumbs
>For hungry soil to eat, the darker side,
>Or maybe brighter, death transformed to life.
>I see no end to CO2 and water
>Though locked in cellulose or left in strife
>To roam the atmosphere, providing fodder
>For yet another round of birth and death.
>Inhaling oxygen I taste the past
>Of all the plants whose photosynthetic breath
>Was stripped from water’s iron grip, This vast
>Resilient reservoir of simple gas
>And liquid re-expressed as living mass.
>
A I recall, Bryan, rap has had this debate many times before. I think
the general consensus was that there is room for both rhyme and non-
rhyme and that both have equal validity. I also think that many people
had the feeling that great care had to be used with rhyme to prevent it
becoming mechanical and unsurprising. Your sonnet, with its run on lines
and interesting use of para-rhyme, is a good example of avoiding the
traps. Thanks.
Rob
--
Rob e-mail r...@mla001.demon.co.uk
Bryan Ness
Bryan Ness
C & C are certainly welcome on the above poem, but I am really more
interested in the whole question of the place rhymed poetry should or
should not have in contemporary poetry.
--
Bryan Ness (bn...@puc.edu)
http://www.puc.edu/Faculty/Bryan_Ness/index.htm
cin
In <58odBPAq...@mla001.demon.co.uk> Rob Evans
<r...@mla001.demon.co.uk> writes:
>
>In article <3269D4...@puc.edu>, Bryan Ness <bn...@puc.edu> writes
>the general consensus was that there is room for both rhyme and non-
>rhyme and that both have equal validity. I also think that many people
>had the feeling that great care had to be used with rhyme to prevent
it
>becoming mechanical and unsurprising. Your sonnet, with its run on
lines
>and interesting use of para-rhyme, is a good example of avoiding the
>traps. Thanks.
>
>Rob
>--
>Rob e-mail r...@mla001.demon.co.uk
If i paint two horses in a field
(i cannot paint) now, obvious to all,
my lack of skill would scream from any wall.
but should i shun my brushes rather wield
ing as my tools two mustard squirters and
a rake, if someone laughs i simply sniff
and take a supercilious attitude that says
'why ANYONE can paint what looks like life
or, better still, a camera can--while i
have sought to more directly show the strife
within my artist's storm-tossed soul.
'cin
ps
rhyme like salt and pepper can be used
with ill effect or good so one should choose
considering the person you intend
as the recipient of what you cook before
you choose each spice and the amount.
A recipe is fine but what most counts
in any pudding is the tasting,and, as for
words, the only sin is wasting them.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Louise Van Hine
Bryan Ness (bn...@puc.edu) wrote:
: I have been wanting to see a discussion of why rhyming poetry is so "out
: of style" in comtemporary poetry. I am probably exposing myself as
: being terribly old-fashioned for even bringing up such a topic. So be
: it.
To understand why it is out of style in the modern era, I think it's
important to take a historical perspective. Rhyme has enjoyed various
levels of popularity for hundreds of years.
Here's an interesting "defense of unrhymed verse" (yes you read that
correctly) from Milton's publication of "Paradise Lost" - he felt he had
to justify NOT rhyming in his long poem, even though blank verse
represented a solid classical tradition from Greece:
"The measure is English Heroic Verse, without Rime, as that of Homer in
Greek, and of Virgil in Latin; Rime being no necessary Adjunct or true
Ornament of Poem or good Verse, in longer works especially, but the
Invention of a barbarous Age, to set off wretched matter and lame Meeter;
grac't indeed since by the use of some famous modern Poets, carried away
by Custom, but much to thir own vexation, hindrance, and constraint, to
express many things otherwise, and for the most part worse then else they
would have exprest them." - John Milton, 1667, introduction to
"Paradise Lost."
: Having said that, why is rhymed poetry so much out of vogue? One
: possible reason might be the difficulty of writing good rhymed poetry.
: It is so easy to sound trite, "sing-songy", or just plain silly. But
: can't the same errors be committed in free verse? Another reason might
: be that rhyming constrains the poet from saying what he really wants to
: say. Basically, rhyming forces the poet to sacrifice "message" to form.
It comes, it goes. I think Milton has a point that rhyme can entrap a
poet unnaturally, and may lead to more poor verse than good verse.
: seriously. There are so many journals that will reject rhymed poetry
: without even considering it. I think that is a mistake. Some journals
: still do accept some rhymed poetry, and although some of it is not good
: poetry, in my opinion, some of it is.
There is change in the air - it is called the "New Formalism" and it is
gaining popularity year by year, so that more and more formal verse in
traditional forms, including rhymed verse, is being published in journals
devoted particularly to it.
: relegated to the past or should it have a place in contemporary poetry?
: Are people that enjoy and/or write rhymed poetry simply old-fashioned?
: Can good rhymed poetry still be written?
Fashions come and go - I think for myself that rhyme is an important part
of my own art, but if I didn't do it well, I would abandon rhyme
entirely. Not everyone is quite as discerning.
: Living Mass
: Of all the plants whose photosynthetic breath
: Was stripped from water’s iron grip, This vast
: Resilient reservoir of simple gas
: And liquid re-expressed as living mass.
That "photosynthetic breath" phrase is a tripper, even though it
technically conforms to the pentameter, it makes the poem stumble badly.
Otherwise, not a bad effort!
--
Louise Van Hine
lou...@netcom.com
"Don't accept imitations."
Bryan Ness
Rob Evans wrote:
> A I recall, Bryan, rap has had this debate many times before. I think
> the general consensus was that there is room for both rhyme and non-
> rhyme and that both have equal validity. I also think that many people
> had the feeling that great care had to be used with rhyme to prevent it
> becoming mechanical and unsurprising. Your sonnet, with its run on lines
> and interesting use of para-rhyme, is a good example of avoiding the
> traps. Thanks.
>
> Rob
> --
> Rob e-mail r...@mla001.demon.co.uk
Rob,
I'm sure this has probably been discussed in the past here on a number
of occasions, and unfortunately I missed it. It is nice to hear that
there was a consensus about both rhymed and non-rhymed having a place,
but I really wanted to delve into this in a broader way. Maybe I'm
asking who decides what is acceptable and deserves to be published?
95%+ of the serious poetry being published these days is free verse of
some sort. This surely says something about the lack of acceptance for
traditional forms. But sho decides this? The editors would be a nice
trite answer, but who has put the pressure on them to decide that way?
Are the people reading poetry today uninterested in traditional forms?
Your point about care being taken to keep it from being mechanical and
unsurprising is well taken. I am the first to avoid poetry that doesn't
have a freshness and new approach. I just feel that there are lots of
ways to be fresh with the old forms. In my sonnet I attempted just
that. The runon lines are my planned attempt at keeping the message of
the poem of foremost inportance. Of course, I am still constrained by
rhyme to say things in a certain way, but I have tried to break free
from the tendency to sacrifice all to the form of the poem. A balancing
act which I wish was more greatly encouraged these days.
An interesting aside. I wonder how many bad rhymed poems there were in
the past? If a place like rap had existed in 1850, for example, what
percentage of the poems posted would be just the same old stuff (i.e.
boring)? Would the percentage be the same as today or worse?
One additional note concerning free verse. Free verse is deceptively
simple. My guess is that it can be as easy to write boring free verse
as for rhymed verse. Yet I think it is easier to sound silly using
rhymed verse.
Bryan
Margaret Havey
Let's keep it simple. There will be rare times in your writing career
when the material simply called for a rhymed form, but these are few
and far between, however that's what the craft is all about. Learn the
forms and scans. Especially learn how much off-rime and form you can
let things slide to make a poem really work. This only comes from
practice and study.
Phil Havey
pha...@ix.netcom.com
Jaimes Alsop
Well posed, Bryan! And what well-thought-out responses.
Here's a thought: If we don't see something around us, there's a
tendency to feel it isn't there.
This was brought home to me a couple of days ago when I discovered
SNAKESKIN magazine at http://linux.nildram.co.uk/~simmers/
It occurred to me that, although I might not be coming across (good)
rhymed poems very often, it might be that I simply wasn't in the places
where the good rhymed poetry is!
--
The Alsop Review
http://www.hooked.net/~jalsop/
http://geocities.com/Athens/1001/
jlaakko
I write in a non-rhyming style because when i write the words come from
my heart and not from my mind.. the words flow out so quickly that i
dont have time to go through and make them rhyme.. most of my stuff
sounds better without the rhymes though.. at least thats what i think..
dont know if anyone else does though...
George Gehrke/Professional Sportsman
jlaakko wrote:
>
> Louise Van Hine wrote:
> >
> > Bryan Ness (bn...@puc.edu) wrote:
> >
> > : I have been wanting to see a discussion of why rhyming poetry is so "out
> > : of style"
Is it? I don't agree. I think you've lost your horizons as there is
more good poetry 'out there' than what you may have been finding here on
this
post. For example; when Tex Bennekie of the Glen Miller Band plays (to
this
very day) the romantics come from everywhere! The older generation is a
bit
too quick to concede that which they THINK they have lost. The styles
of the
rhyme, romance lyrics of the past are still here today. This business
of
allowing (for example) teenagers and rap artists dictating the musical
tastes
of an entire nation is pure idiotcy. Rhyming poetry is NOT out of
style. We
just have lesser educated masses who know less than the older majority.
Like
it or not. gg
---------------------
Rhyme has enjoyed various
> > levels of popularity for hundreds of years.
Make that thousands of years. Rhyme was first chanted and also used in
drums.
---------------------
> >
> > : Having said that, why is rhymed poetry so much out of vogue? One
> > : possible reason might be the difficulty of writing good rhymed poetry.
> > : It is so easy to sound trite, "sing-songy", or just plain silly. But
> > : can't the same errors be committed in free verse? Another reason might
> > : be that rhyming constrains the poet from saying what he really wants to
> > : say. Basically, rhyming forces the poet to sacrifice "message" to form.
With school drop-outs the worse in human history, literature is not
a
strong suit in todays educational high-school systems. It is difficult
for
many today to THINK in terms of complete sentences. The action words,
verbs
and adjectives elude their 'huh minds?' Few American New Generation
Poets that
are on the web today are loaded with children who are surfing, sounding
good
enough to almost sound like an adult, and who have no education beyond
the
'Roses are Red, Violets are Blue' themes. Stanzas are short, complete
thought
is short, and finally, few if any of them (and this may throw you) are
Professional Listeners. If you can't hear, you can't talk. If you
don't
listen, you cannot be taught. So, out they come, get home, turn on the
WWW
and here comes bimbo! 'Rah, rah, piss boom bah!'
But enter now themes, like 'Out of Africa' and Mozart. Who today can
write
music as prolifically as that today? No one. Or the poetry recited in
'A
River Runs Through It' like "The Fig"? We have plenty of poets today
that can
do it and they are original poets. Many of them have read FEW of the
masters.
They just write. When they do and they post here, what does everyone
else do?
They start comparing them to the past Masters, past phrases, past lines
of
wisdom.
Milton may have had a point about rhyme entrapping . . . but only if the
poet
is forcing rhyme for rhyme's sake. Complete, original thoughts flow
from
complete, original experiences. One does not (in my opinion) take two
words
that mate in rhyme and then think, "Now, what are all those other words
do I
have to discover to make these two words fit?" Nope. Rhyme here is a
trap.
Complete thoughts, whole thoughts, whole experiences create rhyme.
Rhyme does
not create the former.
I think, 'the hell with Journals'. When a writer writes, he should go
into
their own (what I call for me) 'Quazer Nine'. Its a place way out there
in
space that I take myself. It is packed with truth. No lies can live
here.
It has no up, no down, no left or right. It has no dimensions. It has
only
words and chemical pictures that come and go, weave in and out. It is
an
area of infinite thought for me. There is no beginning and there is no
end.
The writer should write for themselves alone. It cannot be forced. It
simply happens, like a birth. The real KICK is that I wrote it. Or
with
yourself it should be the same. I care not if anyone reads anything I
write
after that. I wrote it. Haven't time to wait around. Don't need
reviews.
I'm off to the next project. However; should anyone care to read, that
is
wonderful . . . but . . . I'm not dependent upon it. Its a beautiful
place
to be.
I think you should start to re-e-aaaly leave your hair down. If a line
of
verse in a mile long, and it works for you, wing it! But there is too
much
one and two and three word line verses that speaks more of ineptness,
not
cleverness. If I write a short ditty, it may be one out of a thousand
trys.
Those that do lesser work or efforts have little to say, but enough to
make
'them' feel good. But isn't that enough? I just don't have to read it.
I'm off onto another voyage on another 'high seas' waiting for me.
See you there baby!
Mr G./the Critic
---------------------------
> > Louise Van Hin
deb
lou...@netcom.com (Louise Van Hine) immortalized the moment, writing:
>There is change in the air - it is called the "New Formalism" and it is
>gaining popularity year by year, so that more and more formal verse in
>traditional forms, including rhymed verse, is being published in journals
>devoted particularly to it.
Louise - thanks for the interesting comments. i was reading an
article that talked about the yearning for a simpler better time in
art (cinema in particular) and i was thinking how this new formalism
might be in line with that discussion.
we are in an interesting time in the history of the west, i think, in
which people with all different voices are making a chance for
themselves to speak. i think the new formalism is a natural response
to the foreign-ness of these unsilenced voices. sort of like boarding
up the windows when a hurricane is coming. what would be nice,
though, is for the intelligentsia to try to understand those voices on
their own terms rather than hiding in special projects ('course i've
also been reading bell hooks lately).
- deb
************
deborah kilgore
college station, tx
Louise Van Hine
deb (kil...@mail.myriad.net) wrote:
: lou...@netcom.com (Louise Van Hine) immortalized the moment, writing:
: Louise - thanks for the interesting comments. i was reading an
: article that talked about the yearning for a simpler better time in
: art (cinema in particular) and i was thinking how this new formalism
: might be in line with that discussion.
Well, I'm not sure that the "New Formalism" could be characterized as a
'return to simplicity', I guess it depends on what forms are being used -
some of them are quite complex and artificial; part of the reason I shy
away from traditionalist forms in my own writing.
I'm sure that it represents a minority trend right now, but 10 years ago,
you would be hard put to find very many journals that would admit to
accepting or showing an interest in any formal poetry - now there are
several regular publications devoted to it.
--
Louise Van Hine
Bryan Ness
Yes, it may be that I am not in the right places to see some of the good
rhymed poetry that is done. Thanks for the link to Snakeskin and I'll
check it out. One thing I notice (and which was pointed out to me by
someone else in email) is that rhymed poetry is more accepted in the
UK. And what do you know, Snakeskin is over there.
Bryan
--
Bryan Ness (bn...@puc.edu)
http://www.puc.edu/Faculty/Bryan_Ness/index.htm
Office Phone: 707-965-6634 Department of Biology
Home Phone: 707-965-2220 Pacific Union College
FAX: 707-965-6390 Angwin, CA 94508
Bryan Ness
jlaakko wrote:
> I write in a non-rhyming style because when i write the words come from
> my heart and not from my mind.. the words flow out so quickly that i
> dont have time to go through and make them rhyme.. most of my stuff
> sounds better without the rhymes though.. at least thats what i think..
> dont know if anyone else does though...
I too often write in free verse for the same reason you mention. I feel
constrained by having to rhyme too. Still, there are times when I like
the challenge of writing a meaningful poem that uses rhyme. Certainly
rhyming will take more time and effort to make the poem work, so often I
use free verse too. I'm just glad we're in a time where we can go
either direction to some extent. A couple hundred years ago if you
didn't rhyme (or at least use blank verse) you didn't write poetry.
Free verse has liberated us from that, but I hope we don't throw out the
conventions and be left with free verse only.
Bryan Ness
Marty Fouts wrote:
>
> I've given this much thought, because I *never* write rhyming poetry,
> and rarely write poetry that follows any of the formal forms; except
> for that of english pseudo-haiku. Further, I have an old-fashioned
> friend who refuses to accept any work as poetry unless it rhymes; and
> have had several discussions on the topic.
>
I know some people like your friend too . . . Aren't they exasperating?
No art form is static and free verse had to happen some time.
> I refuse to speak for "poets," but my excuse is this: English has
> drifted rather far from being a rhyming language, and my working
> definition of poetry (borrowed from an essay in one of the Norton
> Anthologies) is that poetry is "that which is intended to be read
> aloud."
>
I very much agree with you that poetry is meant to be read aloud. Even
when I don't actually read it aloud I read it in my head as if it were
being spoken. I'm not sure I agree with you on the change in language
from possible more rhyming in the past to less today. I'm not sure
rhyming has ever been that much a part of speech in the English language
except that I think poetry was more widely read back 100 years ago or
so. It was published in newspapers and almost everyone had read the
standard poems (I'm speaking of those who were educated and literate, of
course). As a consequence rhyming may have worked its way into the
language a bit, but it was a flow from poetry to daily usage rather than
the other way around.
Rhyming is a convention that I doubt ever reflected actual day to day
speech patterns. I think modern poetry rejects rhyming to a great
extent because we want to be freer now. I certainly have no complaint
with free verse, and it is freeing ina sense. But, as you say below,
free verse can be as difficult to write well. I definitely agree.
> I find it just as difficult to write free verse as to write rhymed
> verse. Rhymed verse is difficult because I must adhere to the rhyming
> scheme. Free verse is difficult because I must not allow the fredom
> gained to cause me to write sloppy. Good free verse often has a
> narrative cadence that can be read on the first try without tripping
> over the words; and that is what I strive for.
>
> If I do my job well, my poems should be 'effortless' to read. The
> blood sweated over making them so should appear nowhere on the page.
>
Exactly! Still, having said that, I still bemoan the nearly total loss
of conventions like rhyming in the mainstream. I wouldn't argue that
rhyming should encompass a large part of the ouvre, but it should be
there and there shouldn't be a stigma attached to those who write a bit
that way.
> Also, for me, content and technique interact. I can't set the cadence
> without knowing the metaphor i am going to develop, and I can't simply
> spew forth words that map to image I'm after. When I've done it well,
> and I have rarely done it well, you should be able to read my words
> aloud so that the cadence reinforces the images, and the effect of the
> whole thing should be to leave you with an "aha" moment.
>
I like your comments here about the writing process, but for me it all
seems a bit more complicated. I definitely have to have a core image
before I begin a poem in free verse (or otherwise), but as the process
of writing proceeds often the poem will take an unexpected turn. It's
as if my mind is working in parallel: as I am writing I am composing
and doing something else I can't really pinpoint. The creative process
is elusive, at best. This is actually a different topic that deserves
more discussion. The process of writing always intrigues me, especially
the part that deals with what is going on in my mind while the writing
is happening. Problem is, when you focus on that you lose the creative
flow required to write the poem.
Willaim Dubberley
> I like your comments here about the writing process, but for me it all
> seems a bit more complicated. I definitely have to have a core image
> before I begin a poem in free verse (or otherwise), but as the process
> of writing proceeds often the poem will take an unexpected turn. It's
> as if my mind is working in parallel: as I am writing I am composing
> and doing something else I can't really pinpoint. The creative process
> is elusive, at best. This is actually a different topic that deserves
> more discussion. The process of writing always intrigues me, especially
> the part that deals with what is going on in my mind while the writing
> is happening. Problem is, when you focus on that you lose the creative
> flow required to write the poem.
i have not been writeing for long and most of what i do is fairly raw in in
the fact that i see and image in my mind and write what is see but that the
poem taks its own form that i do not see untill i re read it at its end
the message comes of its own volition so to speak the poem creats itself at
least it does for me. but like i said i have not been writing long at all
it is a newly discover love and as such i ma learning what my mistress
wishes of me. and most of the editing i do is spelling and fixing words
like the when itis suposed to be they the spell checker doesn't find. but
pretty much leave the main core of the poem alone. I feel that to over
edit is to lose the heart of the poem and stumble on the dance the mind
does as the words sing in your mind
but then i am a dreamer who feeds on fantasy dances with the winds of the
mind so this is an uneducated opion of a simple dyslexic that happens to
love to write
William Dubberley
AKA DragonLord on IRC
As the dreamer touches the edges of his mind he find that with a leap of
faith he can soar to th heights of imaginition and laugh with the joy of
life
lmerkel on BIX
How to see enlightenment on the issue of rhyme in poetry:
1. Wear loose clothing.
2. Sit on a hard wood floor with your back straight and your
arms hanging at your sides.
3. Close your eyes.
4. Take deep, slow breaths while chanting this mantra:
"Bohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Rrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggg"
5. Repeat a thousand times, and then as often as needed.
-- Lee Merkel
Sir Rooke
Marty Fouts wrote:
>
> I've given this much thought, because I *never* write rhyming poetry,
> and rarely write poetry that follows any of the formal forms; except
> for that of english pseudo-haiku. Further, I have an old-fashioned
> friend who refuses to accept any work as poetry unless it rhymes; and
> have had several discussions on the topic.
>
My two cents worth:
Sonnet 55
On Poetry
A rhyme doth carry meaning more than merely words convey
through poetry all infinite and subtle truths are caught
and filter’d through inversion and alliteration they
a logic doth reveal eluding simple mind and thought;
In verse there is a magic and a grandeur unexplain’d
and wherefrom doth the words come I hath not the means to say
but this I know: no wisdom I doth draw therefrom is feign’d,
nor hath the lyric insights ever guided me astray
for when each line hath I completely shaped to proper ends
when I my craft hath best fulfill’d and care with each arranged
when rhythm doth the words into their proper place ascend
the fragments I believe a greater whole and truth thus gain;
Each piece and poem cast I hope someday will last assure
I’ll know again the happiness I loss’d in losing Her...
-E.C.C., 9 May-9 Jun 1995
Bryan Ness
Willaim Dubberley wrote:
> i have not been writeing for long and most of what i do is fairly raw in in
> the fact that i see and image in my mind and write what is see but that the
> poem taks its own form that i do not see untill i re read it at its end
> the message comes of its own volition so to speak the poem creats itself at
> least it does for me. but like i said i have not been writing long at all
> it is a newly discover love and as such i ma learning what my mistress
> wishes of me. and most of the editing i do is spelling and fixing words
> like the when itis suposed to be they the spell checker doesn't find. but
> pretty much leave the main core of the poem alone. I feel that to over
> edit is to lose the heart of the poem and stumble on the dance the mind
> does as the words sing in your mind
> but then i am a dreamer who feeds on fantasy dances with the winds of the
> mind so this is an uneducated opion of a simple dyslexic that happens to
> love to write
>
I know how you feel about the fear of editing out the core meaning of a
poem. Still, for me, I find I have to edit and sometimes a lot. The
reason it takes a lot of editing is that I don't want to ruin the core
meaning in the process of making it a better poem.
I have had a number of students who were dyslexic and none of them
seemed to like writing. I suppose it's because of the fantastic
struggle it must take to sort it all out when your brain mixes it all up
on the page. It's great to see someone who enjoys it in spite of the
obstacles. Keep it up!
Bryan
Bryan Ness
Lee,
Thank you for your enlightenment <smile>. I do agree with you in
certain ways. For example, I find "The Bells" by Poe to be very boring
on the rhyming side as well as its repitition in other ways. Even some
of the acknowledged "best" rhymed poetry can become boring. Still, I
find some rhymed poetry far from boring.
For another light comment on this same topi see my separate post under
the Subject "POEM: To Rhyme is a Crime". I think we can all agree that
badly done rhymed poetry is bad :-)
Jim Standish
Sir Rooke wrote:
>
> Sonnet 55
> On Poetry
>
> A rhyme doth carry meaning more than merely words convey
===Uh-oh, one of those archaic language poems. Let's see if he
can pull it off...
Right off the bat, I'd say probably not. A "sonnet" in heptameter
is not the old-fashioned kind.
> through poetry all infinite and subtle truths are caught
> and filter’d through inversion and alliteration they
> a logic doth reveal eluding simple mind and thought;
===It doth, but they do, even in archaic language. As with any
language, it's best to learn it before trying to write poetry in it.
> In verse there is a magic and a grandeur unexplain’d
> and wherefrom doth the words come I hath not the means to say
===He hath, but I have. Get this: I have, thou hast,
he/she/it hath, we have, ye have, they have. Okay?
> but this I know: no wisdom I doth draw therefrom is feign’d,
===And it's I do, thou dost, she/he/it doth, we do, ye do,
they do. Your total ignorance of these basic facts of grammar make your
archaic language sound simply silly.
> nor hath the lyric insights ever guided me astray
> for when each line hath I completely shaped to proper ends
> when I my craft hath best fulfill’d and care with each arranged
> when rhythm doth the words into their proper place ascend
> the fragments I believe a greater whole and truth thus gain;
> Each piece and poem cast I hope someday will last assure
> I’ll know again the happiness I loss’d in losing Her...
==="last assure"??
"lost" not "loss'd"
I can just hear you saying "I'm _so_ _sher_". Only in ValleyGirl
talk does "assure" rhyme with "her".
Oh, I suppose your excuse is that this is _creative_ anachronism. Well,
grow up, "Sir Rooke", and get a real name and a real language. So far
you sound like Squire Pawne. (God, do I sound like George or what?)
>
> -E.C.C., 9 May-9 Jun 1995
===Jim, 24 Oct 96, hoping you'll tell me to lighten up because
it's just a parody.
George Gehrke/Professional Sportsman
Sir Rooke wrote:
> -E.C.C., 9 May-9 Jun 1995
ROOKIE BABY! I am attracted to the discussion regarding, "I always try
to avoid rhyme." Whoever said it. Anyone that is a 'Sir Rooke' has to
be an insatiable romantic no matter what the title. They are the ones
that smell roses, not dandelions.
The mating of words is to the mind an adventure discovered discovered
(with poetry in this case). The corridors of the mind are lit with the
pleasure of natural rhyme that makes secondly, the words shine. Bees
come to honey and those who have no sense for the roses, smell only
dandelions.
Mr. G./the Critic.
lmerkel on BIX
Bryan Ness <bn...@puc.edu> writes:
:
:lmerkel on BIX wrote:
:>
:> How to see enlightenment on the issue of rhyme in poetry:
:> 4. Take deep, slow breaths while chanting this mantra:
:> "Bohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
:> Rrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggg"
:>
:
:Lee,
:
:Thank you for your enlightenment <smile>. I do agree with you in
:certain ways. For example, I find "The Bells" by Poe to be very boring
:on the rhyming side as well as its repitition in other ways. Even some
:of the acknowledged "best" rhymed poetry can become boring. Still, I
:find some rhymed poetry far from boring.
No, no, no. My message was about rhymed poetry as an
issue. Not the poems themselves -- they stand or fall on
their merits. Long-winded arguments over whether to use
or not use rhyme -- THAT'S boring. At least it HAS been
boring. Someone could undoubtedly de-borify it, but why
bother?
-- Lee Merkel
Bryan Ness
Ken Knighton wrote:
> and badly done free verse stream of consciousness sentenceless
> poetry i think not to be a very interesting on other hand possibly
> not too bad unless one wants to make sense out of something but
> who really cares im depressed just in tune with my own thoughts
> and i don't care what other people think its all about feeling and
> imagery unfettered by form or punctuation anarchists dont require
> any rules but chained by 9th grade english school marms to the
> alter of poetic correctness i cant express myself therefore i must
> break free of bonds flying on eagles wings above the fray i am one
> with myself and the reader is simply a pawn in my game of
> selffulfillment
>
I couldn't agree more. I guess we must face the fact that bad poetry is
bad poetry no matter what conventions are used (or not used). See my
poem "To Rhyme is a Crime" for another bad piece of poetry.
Ken Knighton
Bryan Ness wrote:
>
> lmerkel on BIX wrote:
> >
> > How to see enlightenment on the issue of rhyme in poetry:
> >
(Snip)
>
> Thank you for your enlightenment <smile>. I do agree with you in
(Snip)
> I think we can all agree that
> badly done rhymed poetry is bad :-)
and badly done free verse stream of consciousness sentenceless
poetry i think not to be a very interesting on other hand possibly
not too bad unless one wants to make sense out of something but
who really cares im depressed just in tune with my own thoughts
and i don't care what other people think its all about feeling and
imagery unfettered by form or punctuation anarchists dont require
any rules but chained by 9th grade english school marms to the
alter of poetic correctness i cant express myself therefore i must
break free of bonds flying on eagles wings above the fray i am one
with myself and the reader is simply a pawn in my game of
selffulfillment
Ken Knighton
Licensed to Shrill
Ken Knighton
Tracy Miller
On Oct 21, 1996 17:42:04 in article <Re: Rhyming & Contemporary Poetry>,
'Marty Fouts <fo...@hpl.hp.com>' wrote:
>English has
>drifted rather far from being a rhyming language
in English do not provide as many rhyumes as they do in some other
languages, i.e. Italian, Russian or Spanish. However, unrhymed poetry is
written in all those Western languages that have traditionally had
rhyiming, 'bound' verse until the influence of Whitman and others made free
verse popular.
German at Tracy's computer
Kevin Carlson
I think of Theodore Roethke as being a fairly "contemporary" poet -
and much, or most of his work was in rhyme.
Somehow your style seems reminiscent of his.
His rhymed poetry was successful, I believe, mainly on the strength of
his substantial range of vocabulary, which facilitated meaningful
rhymed expression without triteness.
I've always felt that rhyming, when done well, adds another dimension
to the poem, not unlike the way music adds meaning to song lyrics.
Ultimately, content is everything; I encourage you to keep writing
good rhymed poetry!
"A poem should not mean, but be."
- Archibald Macleish
On Sun, 20 Oct 1996 00:27:46 -0700, Bryan Ness <bn...@puc.edu> wrote:
...
>I have been wanting to see a discussion of why rhyming poetry is so "out
>of style" in comtemporary poetry. I am probably exposing myself as
>being terribly old-fashioned for even bringing up such a topic. So be
>it.
>
>Bryan Ness
S. Walton Krayne
lmerkel on BIX wrote:
>
> How to see enlightenment on the issue of rhyme in poetry:
>
> 1. Wear loose clothing.
> arms hanging at your sides.
> 3. Close your eyes.
> "Bohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
> Rrrreeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnnnngggggggggggg"
>
>
> -- Lee Merkel
Are you implying that rhyme in poetry is boring?
If so,
shallow.
Are you implying that the discussion of the issue of rhyme in poetry
is boring?
If so,
bravo.
Sam Lanham
In article <32778af...@news.seanet.com>,
kcar...@kcarlson.seanet.com says...
>
>I think of Theodore Roethke as being a fairly "contemporary" poet -
>and much, or most of his work was in rhyme.
>Somehow your style seems reminiscent of his.
>
>His rhymed poetry was successful, I believe, mainly on the strength of
>his substantial range of vocabulary, which facilitated meaningful
>rhymed expression without triteness.
>
>I've always felt that rhyming, when done well, adds another dimension
>to the poem, not unlike the way music adds meaning to song lyrics.
>Ultimately, content is everything; I encourage you to keep writing
>good rhymed poetry!
>
>"A poem should not mean, but be."
>- Archibald Macleish
>
>
it's often been discussed here but it continues to be a matter for
struggle. I often turn to traditional forms when I'm having trouble
getting a poem going. The discipline of rhyme and meter seems to force
me to think through the idea in more depth and at a wider variety of
levels than my poorly disciplined self would do otherwise. For me it
drags out the writing but the results and the workout seem to be worth
it. I find rhyme particularly helpful when trying to express something
simply and with brevity:
Hurry, hurry, hummingbird
The winter skies are looming
Hurry, hurry, hummingbird
While yet the flowers are blooming.
So, as one of you wise ones said, there's a place for all kinds of
poetry and we all need the wisdom or art to pick the most appropriate
one for the moment. Sam Lanham (sla...@hctc.net)
Bryan Ness
Kevin Carlson wrote:
snip
> I've always felt that rhyming, when done well, adds another dimension
> to the poem, not unlike the way music adds meaning to song lyrics.
> Ultimately, content is everything; I encourage you to keep writing
> good rhymed poetry!
>
Yes, exactly! Forcing a poem to fit a particular form can definitely
add dimensions not already present in the initial idea which might have
been lost had the poem been written in free verse. Sometimes free verse
is the only way to get the idea out right. Other times rhyming helps an
idea crustalize. Still, great care must be taken in doing the rhyming
or the message can just as easily be spoiled.
Was just reading some Anthony Hecht this week. He is a die hard
formalist and another example of modern poetry with rhyme. And just as
proof that such poetry is not dead yet, he is regularly published in the
jounal "Poetry". From what I've read of Hecht I doubt he ever does any
free verse, although I've only read a little of his work.
--