Too much free flow?

[HopperWolf]

I've been surfing round various boards lately and reading what today's amateur poets have to offer. I've seen quite a range of things, some bad (in my opinion at least) some extremely good, stuff I only dream of writing. (though unsurprisingly this here site boasts the biggest percentage of good poetry per post. cool huh?)

 

Anyway, one thing I had noticed was that there seems to be an overwhelming amount of freeflowing poetry out there. (By this I mean no set structure or sometimes even rhyme scheme). Now, don't get me wrong, freeflow form is well and good, and I can appreciate it just fine. Heck, I use it myself a fair amount, more than I would like though. And a lot of it is good stuff, raising interesting issues and theories.

 

My thought is this: Are we relying to much on free flow poetry? Is there too much of it around comparativly?

 

As I said before, a lot of what I have read is good stuff, but even with the good works I often get the feeling that people are rushing ahead with the ideas they want express and not pausing long enough to think about the best form to express them in. I find structure and rhyme scheme alters the mood of a piece quite considerably. and there in fact academically agreed forms of poetry suited to styles of expression. for example, a long winded rant raging against society in the first person is quite well suited to decametre rhyming couplets.

 

The sonnet form does tend to enhance a love poem.

 

I'm not saying that themes should be confined to these particular forms, just that poets of today should consider them more fully when composing a piece. when you have an idea for a poetic theme, consider your form. Or, if you want to use a certain form, chose a suitable topic.

 

What are your views/thoughts?

[Regel]

Style versus Content. That could also be the subject of another thread. I believe you could compare different styles of poetry to different styles of music. It is possible to enjoy all kinds of styles in both. Some songs (and poems) win me over by virtue of their content. The exercises that I have seen posted I have found to be excellent opportunities to explore different styles. Structure does help if the content is weak but I am sure that many of the works could have been polished and mulled over a little more before the get posted. That said this board encourages personal growth and development and does it gently. I would hate to see that change.

Edited December 17, 2003 by Regel

[Wyvern]

I believe that the lack of rhyme schemes in most modern poetry can be attributed to poets constantly searching for original manners to state their thoughts and feelings. While I personally love rhyme schemes in poetry, the difficulty with them is that poets have used them for the past few centuries, and because of this rhyming has become somewhat of a cliche to many modern poets.

 

Having said this, a lack of rhymes in poetry shouldn't be confused with a lack of form. Line breaks, punctuation, and capitalization are all still used in poetry for a reason. Good "free flow" poetry is often editted many times by the author to achieve a maximum effect.

 

There's certainly still great rhyming poetry out there as well, though.

[Appy]

*Appy raises her hands and jumps up and down on her seat* oeh got an opinion yes!

 

As those people who know my work know, I write free-form, almost solely free-form. And not because I don't think about what I want to say how...

 

First, I only know the basic rhyme schemes. Second, like wyvern pointed out already

the difficulty with them is that poets have used them for the past few centuries, and because of this rhyming has become somewhat of a cliche to many modern poets.

I get an uncomfertable 'high-school-stuffy-classroom'-feeling when trying to write in a certain rhymescheme.. education is deadly to creativity I say

 

Third.. uhm.. was there a third? Don't remember, maybe later..

 

Again quoting Wyvern:

a lack of rhymes in poetry shouldn't be confused with a lack of form

Couldn't agree more.. I have slaved over my poems and edited, re-written and punctuated and spend a lot of blood sweat and tears on them.

If I didn't put it down in a box to simmer and reconsidered, it's not worth posting.

And that's how I write.

 

I DO agree that in many cases rhyme works well.. if I can get over the 'stuffy'-feeling

 

Reading all this makes me want to try it out.

 

*wonders if she has anything else to add*

 

I think that was it.. good topic hopper, thanks!

[Alaeha]

Appy - There are more interesting forms to write in than standard High School English forms. The Petrarchan/Italian Sonnet can be interesting, and a stanza of Ottava Rima is nothing short of fun in my opinion. The Villanelle and Terzanelle are nightmarishly challenging and require a lot of forethought... the Sestina is just twisted.

 

And who's to say you can't experiment with your rhyme? I do it a lot - as when I'm writing an acrostic and need a stanza of seven lines.

 

As to the original question... I almost can't write anything that doesn't rhyme, unless it's absolutely required by the form I'm writing in... probably because I've read and heard so much "poetry" that would be better termed "prose with funky line breaks and no punctuation" and I don't want to write any more of that.

 

Personally, I don't really care for "free form" poetry - that which has no rhyme, no structure of any sort.

 

I don't see, myself, why there has to be a competition between style and content. The content is what you're saying. The style is how you get people's interest, and make it more pleasant for them to read. The best poetry has both... but given the choice, I'd choose one with good style that says nothing over one that says a lot poorly...

 

But maybe that's just me. Just my ramblings.

[X-Sabre]

I really wish I had more to comment on this subject, but to agree with Wyvern, rhyming does feel cliche'd at times. A lot of the lines I want to use always feel like they've been overdone.

 

I'm also thinking the amount of free flow also corrilates(sp?) to the experience of poets. At least speaking for myself, I know that when I first started to write, there was a lot less structure to my works. But the more and more I wrote, and the better I *hopefully* got, the more structure my poems seemed to find.

 

But then again, a big part of that is from the advice, critique, and support of people in the Pen.

 

So, just my 2 cents..

[Quincunx]

A metered, formed poem makes trite expressions much more noticeable. It is very discouraging to record your thought and realize that you've seen it before in just that frame. I hope freeform makes it easier for poets to learn how to select the exact stops and words to illustrate their thoughts, instead of making lazy poets.

 

Create, cringe, change. . .cheer?

 

To answer the original question: There are many freeform poets who do not put enough of themselves into their work, and may as well be as amoeboid as their lines. Every poem requires steel, if not necessarily girders.

[Peredhil]

I was going to write my feelings into a response, but the Quincunx stole them away

winding binding chanting and transformation, She gave a glitter to that which I wished to convey

And so I find myself having spoken, while remaining quite mute on the issue...