=O
What the Christ
no posts for almost an hour
then four posts within minutes of mine

I will be scrolled off the page
Before I ever get
any advice.
:(

Blockquoted for emosity.

I think it was Frosty who said that writing freeverse (verse without meter) was like playing tennis without a net.

No

According to my sister, who is a "poetics" PhD (whatever that means), rhyming is not even part of the definition of poetry at at all.

My personal impression is that it is what you get when you put a bunch of prose in a pot, put it on the stove at high heat until the kitchen fills up with smoke, then you scrape the black stuff onto a sheet of 8.5x11.

This thread makes me really sad. If I could write, I would write a poem about how awesome poetry is.

I don't know much about poetry, but I know what I like:

To make a prairie it takes a clover and one bee,—
One clover, and a bee,
And revery.
The revery alone will do
If bees are few.
- Emily Dickinson

The Gift

Time wants to show you a different country. It's the one
that your life conceals, the one waiting outside
when curtains are drawn, the one Grandmother hinted at
in her crochet design, the one almost found
over at the edge of the music, after the sermon.

It's the way life is, and you have it, a few years given.
You get killed now and then, violated
in various ways. (And sometimes it's turn about.)
You get tired of that. Long-suffering, you wait
and pray, and maybe good things come - maybe
the hurt slackens and you hardly feel it any more.
You have a breath without pain. It is called happiness.

It's a balance, the taking and passing along,
the composting of where you've been and how people
and weather treated you. It's a country where
you already are, bringing where you have been.
Time offers this gift in its millions of ways,
turning the world, moving the air, calling,
every morning, "Here, take it, it's yours."

- William Stafford

And everyone's favorite 'what the hell is he talking about' poem:

The Emperor of Ice-Cream

Call the roller of big cigars,
The muscular one, and bid him whip
In kitchen cups concupiscent curds.
Let the wenches dawdle in such dress
As they are used to wear, and let the boys
Bring flowers in last month's newspapers.
Let be be finale of seem.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.

Take from the dresser of deal,
Lacking the three glass knobs, that sheet
On which she embroidered fantails once
And spread it so as to cover her face.
If her horny feet protrude, they come
To show how cold she is, and dumb.
Let the lamp affix its beam.
The only emperor is the emperor of ice-cream.

- Wallace Stevens

I think poems are meant to produce feelings in the reader that aren't expressible otherwise. The sound and the meaning of the words go together. I don't like poems that are just clever games where the author can show off his vocabulary in choosing a particular word just to make a particular rhyme or meter work.

There was a book a while ago by Bill Moyers called "Fooling With Words" about poetry that was a good introduction, at least for me.

I think poetry is the artful use of language to create an emotional impact.

Throughout most of the history of poetry, form (not necessarily rhyme but discernible form) determined what poetry was. It did become somewhat harder to define when the revolution of free verse came about. Many people legitimately asked, then, 'how is this different from prose? Funny line breaks?'

When people approach poetry without much study of poetry, they tend to either create doggerel - or mimic some poetry they've seen without understanding why they might choose to do them. That's when you get that rambling, free-verse effect that falls flat. If it's not done well, with some understanding of the genre, then it's kind of like me walking to the piano, plunking the black keys, and saying 'get me! I'm playing Chinese music!'

That might mimic some of the tonal qualities of Chinese music. But it's not Chinese music. And scattering words around randomly might mimic some qualities of poetry, but that doesn't make it truly poetry.

Of course, the question you're asking is one which can be debated, and is debated, at both the mostly highly developed and most innocently hackish ends of the artistic spectrum: What is poetry?

I don't really Get poetry—I was exposed to a fair number of self-directed poetic types in high school and college and found them likeable and some of their poetry also likeable, but I never really dug in. So I don't feel like I'm competent to try for a detailed answer.

But from what I do get from it, what little I've gleaned from casual reading and from trying to write prose and songs and think about what's going on, I'd say this:

Poetry is about a kind of intentionality in the use of words that goes beyond merely putting words into clauses and sentences with a craftsman's skills. That's where it splits away from prose: when the words you use and the way you use them are a careful, considered thing apart from merely saying what you mean clearly and well.

Some prose has a poetic feel to it, as best as I understand the term personally; and some poetry reads almost like prose with happenstance linebreaks (or are they happenstance? is there some method there, some meaning in the breaks that I can't appreciate, as the naive reader). But everywhere, along all the points of these weird and vague poetic continua, I think there's a central thing, a nexus of more-than-simply-writing purpose and choice to how words are used that makes poetry poetry.

I've heard similar fuzzy definitions of music: sound over time with intent, the difference between purposeless and purposeful wailing or lilting or rhythm. Helplessly vague, and inadequate still for all that, but there's something there that rings true to me.

make that: the artful use of language [in ways that do not necessarily follow the same set of rules we use to govern prose writing] to create an emotional impact.

I love reading poetry, it's like being petted or poked, depending. It's the most pure form of linguistic masturbation, nothing but flights of fancy, or at least it CAN be impressionistic. I write it, too, but pretty droll huh huh huh stuff. Here ya go.

His stature straight and strong,
oaken in resolve, willowy in acquiescence
the winds, the rains, they rustle him,
never can they, though I may,
with tenderly kindled tinder, my glowing ember
penetrate his rough textured husk
His arms stetched, bowlike upward
bursting with abundance of verdant youth,
emit a mulchy musk

My ardor, my arbor, has limbs that lumber
but with the supple grace of new stalks, he walks
closely he trods the tepid loam,
dragging rootfeet, that seamlessly embrace the springy earth
he seems to wade. He serves to shade
from the unfiltered sun his eyes and mine
For him, for him I pine.

The funny thing about "free-verse" is that form is still so so important. That's why E.E. Cummings is the most famous "free-verse" poet - he uses the form of the poem - the line breaks, the capitalization - to convey another dimension to the words, with great effect. And, when he wrote sonnets or other traditional poetry styles, he did so with full awareness of the purpose of the "rules", and when he could bend them and where he could break them. And why.

I once had an argument with a girlfriend (soon-to-be-ex, as it turned out, but that's not the point) about the nature of poetry.

Not a knock-down, drag-out, sweep up the broken crockery afterwards and start looking for a new apartment argument, but it did last at least an hour and there were harsh words exchanged.

Years later, I now realize that she was actually in the right. That's not the point either. The point is this:

The next day at work, I mentioned the argument to some coworkers with whom I was having lunch. They all got up and moved to the other end of the table.

Most of James Fenton's excellent short book An Introduction to English Poetry is online here. Well worth reading if you've got the time.

If you don't have time, just read the iambic pentameter one. It's by far the most common form of English poetry, so you can almost always shoehorn "iambic pentameter" into a conversation to sound intelligent.

I'd join in this conversation but I'm currently at a poetry evening.

The irony...

I think someone said once that poetry was the distillation of prose into its purest essence. Which, strangely, is a lot like pie's definition.

My poetry has usually managed to be good, but never managed to be great. When I was young, I thought I'd be a published poet. Ironically, the only things I've gotten published are professional journal articles and a couple essays on Quaker spirituality.

Historically, a lot of poetry was about meter, a sadly lost art.

As others have said, poetry is what people write when prose won't do the job. Writing outside the usual rules lets you surprise the reader in ways that give an emotional directness- the reader has to process it differently, and experiences something new.

I don't like a lot of poetry, but when I find some I do like, I really really like it. Anne Sexton is my favorite, and this is my favorite poem from her.

Pretentiously Poor Thread Post Reply

Unloosed from rotating turtles
A sliver of space betwixt
Unfurled, shredded, burnt to embers
Tethered and stitched, a tack sailed
gust containing no mass, amassed
amalgamated contraption von rapture
Unfettered, unfeathered, unstuck
from the tick tock of the tortoise stock.

Po et ry.

snap, snap, snap

I think there's also a component of "Humans and Their Overly-Complex Brains": we love patterns! Our brains go psycho trying to make something out of nothing - it's why we love conspiracy theories and optical illusions and magic shows. I think it's also why we (and I'm talking about the general here) love music and poetry, and why even free-verse poetry is still a different beast than prose.

I'm with Miko here.

I don't really "get" poetry. I'm a prose person. That's what I write. That's what I understand. Writing in verse, with extra-special tab placement, when you could just as easily write a nice, sensible paragraph, has always seemed pretentious to me.

Oh, but did I mention that the girlfriend is currently getting her Master's in poetry writing?

It's kind of opened my eyes to the fact that not all poets are pretentious (at least, not just for the sake of being pretentious, or precious, or whatever).

GF is currently applying to MFA programs for poetry. I asked her yesterday what the MFA could do for her that an MA couldn't. The answer is irrelevant, but the question made her pretty emotional. Something along the lines of "I don't express myself well when I'm talking. [Ed. -- Which is somewhat true.] Writing poetry is the only way I know how to express myself well. And when I write poetry, I can get it out there. [Ed. -- which is also true.]"

So it's a form that doesn't make sense to me, but I respect it. It's a form that makes sense to a lot of other people. It's how they know how to express themselves. I do it in paragraphs, they do it in verse. Other people do it by writing code, or cooking a nice meal, and so on.

In the end, all that matters is that you get yourself across, and that your audience understands you. Maybe they won't the first time, but hey -- that's life.

[Also, I'll add that there are a lot of affected, pretentious, twee little poet wannabes in the GF's classes, and I can no longer sit through those readings. Gah. Like with any form of "art," there is the good, and there is the very, very bad.]

Poetry is what happens when
Syllables fall out of your ears at night
And then in the cold, quiet of morning
The random letters on your pillow
Look like a ransom note from Jesus

I disagree with most normal definitions of poetry.

There's a tendency to try and define poetry within the context of great art. Layered meanings; an emotional impact outside or beyond the words; expressing the inexpressible. I think all great art does this, and poetry should not be treated differently.

So my definition is that poetry is a short prose form with odd line breaks.

That's pretty much it. Within that context, you can say what you like, and as long as someone else likes it, you've done a good job. It doesn't need to be clever or have an emotional base. Rhythm, rhyme, symbolism, metaphor and simile are important, but not necessary.

There's a well known saying that poetry is the "right words in the right order." That's bullshit. My saying is that poetry is the cool thing you wish you'd said at the time.

The more important question here is why you don't get it, and I believe that you don't get it for a number of reasons.

- You haven't developed a poetry ear. Blame the poetry world for this. Nobody wants to be the next Britney Spears & everyone wants to be the next Mingus. There's no space in the poetry world for gateway poems. Easily digestible work that gives a love of the art form & the beginnings of the language. The readers are as bad as the writers here.

- Intertextuality. There's a gap between the cultural references used by poets and the rest of the world. If I tell my poetry friends that pieisexactlythree is an awesomely funny screen name, they're not going to get it. They don't have that cultural baggage. Same with poetry. The loneliness of cold glass is embedded into the poetry world mindset, but doesn't chime with people who don't live that life.

- Most poetry is shit. You're going to have to believe me on this one, but the intellectuals have taken over poetry and made it there own. The easiest way to make any headway in the poetry world is to bow down to the poetry kings and write stuff nobody understands. So that's what everybody does.

- You're trying to place too much potential meaning on stuff. I posted a poem called redacted here recently, and you said you didn't get it. But you probably did get it, and thought - "Is that it, there must be more. There must be stuff I can't see." I didn't see much the first time I read it either. But it's cool to see words blacked out and the meaning lost, and this said something about other (governmental) stuff that contains redacted text & I liked that.

I personally love writing poetry, and it's arguable that I have a natural affinity for it. But it's just a hobby. And whatever they say, it's nowhere near as skillful or as meaningful or as difficult as making music or painting. In a way, it's just what artists do when they don't have the skills to create any other kind of art. And it should be treated as such.

Here's a poem I wrote with geek references...

And Batman loses his parents as a child,
dreams a dark dream, a smoking shot of pearls
breaking the squeaking darkness
of a hidden cave. 
Takes to fighting crime.


And Superman's no better,
his adopted country needs him
to fight the communists
And he trys not to remember
how his parents deserted him
trys not to think
about the shadow, man and wife,
blinded in the harshness
of a supernova light. 


Spiderman gets the roughest deal.
No parents, then Uncle Ben
is sold out, shot for
the sake of a wrestling contract.
After recriminations, Aunt May does
the best she can, Brings him up better than
most. The Osbournes are green
with jealousy.

Superheros. After thirty years in the
funny papers,
Both the Express and the Daily Mail seem eager to
meet up.

So, these orphans will meet secretly in pubs,
curse their wives, the system, the government.
plan on scaling buildings,
plot targets,
scribble plans onto the back of beermats,
give themselves a name. 


“Father's for Justice” says Batman.
And both Superman and Spiderman
agree.

It's nothing special. Try and retell the story in a way which is condensed and sounds nice, then a joke at the end remarking on the irony of the fact Fathers for Justice use orphans as mascots.

People like this poem. But it's NOTHING special.

In a way, it's just what artists do when they don't have the skills to create any other kind of art

Sure, but that's true of every kind of art.