Is established form important to you when writing poetry?
Anonymous
<< post removed >>
I think that not just poetry, but any art form should be free and not bound by restrictions. Art is an expression of the feelings and ideas of the artist so artists should be able to express themselves without worrying about things such as cadence, rhyming words, or adhering to a structure.
I think structure is important only when it serves to enhance or better deliver the poet's message. To be overly critical of structure can negate the authenticity and beauty of the message. I do, however, enjoy the challenge of learning and writing in long established, or newly invented styles while still maintaining the authenticity and rawness of my story.
What do you do when you find there can be "rules" to dancing?
Some run away crying and insisting on the freedom to waggle about spontaneously as if having a fit, others anre content to learn and pracise within the guidelines.
I suppose theres a time and a place for everything and, each to his own.
Some run away crying and insisting on the freedom to waggle about spontaneously as if having a fit, others anre content to learn and pracise within the guidelines.
I suppose theres a time and a place for everything and, each to his own.
There is no 'fixed form' that every poem should adhere to. In my own work, I vary the form according to what feels right for the poem, ranging from free, non-rhyming verse to rhyming couplets and anything else which seems to suit the poem, i.e. which conveys what I want to say in the way I want to say it. A particular favourite form of mine is the sonnet, which has strict rhyme and rhythm requirements, but it's not for everybody. However, if you reject form of any sort on principle, on the grounds that any form constrains your boundless inspiration, don't be surprised if readers struggle through the first couple of lines of your meandering, formless ramblings and can't be bothered to go any further because they're having to do all the hard work of making sense of it. Surely one thing we all want for our poems is that they are read.
I am very very interested in this. I think that it is critically important where and how how one's particular enthusiasm originates and is generated from. in my case it was prose and the memorization of prose that first brought me to the pleasure of reciting texts and from that I started to write my own rather declarative but slightly poetic texts. I am not now and never have been a fan of or able to appreciate traditional poetry that relies on formal schemes and plans such as sonnets rhyming metre scanning etc etc the music and the rhythm fundamental to poetry does not require such schemes in order to exist I find that works where the author has made an effort to conform to a scheme betray a loss of meaning in the obvious inefficiency of that process in relation to to expression of intention other than the intention of conforming to a scheme- this was commented on by Baudelaire among others.
If form had no place in poetry, it wouldn't exist. That said, forms evolve over time. When I first started writing many years ago, the classic forms were the most accepted. Writings in the style of say e.e cummings was considered 'modern' or 'free form' and as a result were slightly looked down upon. Should one force their work into a form? No. Poetry forced is poetry murdered. If it falls naturally into a form, or if you are looking for the works to be easier for others to read/appreciate, then form has some merit. When I started here, after a 12 year hiatus from writing, I wrote in the classical, next to no punctuation, all first letters uppercase style. Which is not unacceptable. But I was gently schooled into the fact that if I want people to see and appreciate what I have to say I have to write it in a way they can appreciate.
Throwing in my hat here with an opinion no one may read, which is okay. I believe I posted my opinion here before about 4ish years ago, so I have a bit more testing on my thoughts to share.
I think established form is essential for anything, just not traditional form. My elaboration for this is that when barriers or obstacles are being put in your writing, you have to think outside the box more to convey what you want to convey. Doing traditional forms is like taking an exercise in trying to defeat obstacles that past poets have defeated, while creating something wholly unique through the struggle, something pretty or clever or strange.
When you write poetry, you don't even write "freely". You have an idea of what poetry is, even in casual poetry, and limit parts of your writing subconsciously to make your poetry fit that image of what you think poetry is. I don't really like this method for myself, it feels like I'm already imagining what my poem should *be* before I started writing, and without obstacles tonmy writing I write flatly, I write basically, with the most minimal of cleverness of strangeness.
Some of the most unique poetry I've read didn't use traditional form but instead their own personal established form, maybe they write like it's a conversation? Stream of consciousness? Writing backwards? Using octaves instead of pentameter? Writing about feelings that is unshared by anyone vocally, feelings you've never seen expressed in media before?
These strike me a lot more, and I've found unless you actively stop yourself from being straight forward and simple, the poem that comes out is stock; a poem we already had thought of and said in our minds as a reader.
There's the saying that restrictions begets creativity, and with none it begets dullness.
Unless you establish a "form", you'll default to the form you use in your daily life. If you want to speak differently, you need to establish a form.
(But now there's a secret third option, you can actually forgo an established form and try speaking normally as a way to break form and introduce your own personality strongly)
My old opinion sticks, there is always form, and it's less "should I use form" and more "do what you want, just be mindful forms come in many...forms"
I think established form is essential for anything, just not traditional form. My elaboration for this is that when barriers or obstacles are being put in your writing, you have to think outside the box more to convey what you want to convey. Doing traditional forms is like taking an exercise in trying to defeat obstacles that past poets have defeated, while creating something wholly unique through the struggle, something pretty or clever or strange.
When you write poetry, you don't even write "freely". You have an idea of what poetry is, even in casual poetry, and limit parts of your writing subconsciously to make your poetry fit that image of what you think poetry is. I don't really like this method for myself, it feels like I'm already imagining what my poem should *be* before I started writing, and without obstacles tonmy writing I write flatly, I write basically, with the most minimal of cleverness of strangeness.
Some of the most unique poetry I've read didn't use traditional form but instead their own personal established form, maybe they write like it's a conversation? Stream of consciousness? Writing backwards? Using octaves instead of pentameter? Writing about feelings that is unshared by anyone vocally, feelings you've never seen expressed in media before?
These strike me a lot more, and I've found unless you actively stop yourself from being straight forward and simple, the poem that comes out is stock; a poem we already had thought of and said in our minds as a reader.
There's the saying that restrictions begets creativity, and with none it begets dullness.
Unless you establish a "form", you'll default to the form you use in your daily life. If you want to speak differently, you need to establish a form.
(But now there's a secret third option, you can actually forgo an established form and try speaking normally as a way to break form and introduce your own personality strongly)
My old opinion sticks, there is always form, and it's less "should I use form" and more "do what you want, just be mindful forms come in many...forms"
I have some form to my poetry but it depends. I just write and let the work form itself how it choses. Sometimes there are rhymes and sometimes not. Many of mine are short poems and I have some that form a short series but each of the series is different.
