I read several poems intending to offer an opinion but found I was completely at sea. I write poetry for children and all my poetry is humorous, scans, rhymes and tells a story, even if it is nonsense. Poetry today seems to dwell on the miserable, dark and depressing. To compare this with music which is often uplifting, beautiful and moving and can take the soul soaring to great hieghts of emotion. Why can't poetry be all these things? However I shall shortly post one of my poems for children and wait to be slated. Or you could have a look at my website, which many adults have found entertaining. www.youngbookworms.org

hi i am new to the forum
i run a private nursery for children aged 2 to 5 years and i have to say it is nice to find poetry for children that is cheerful and witty as small children are not interested in boring long winded drawn out poetry or stories. Keep up the childrens poetry.
joschick

I read several poems intending to offer an opinion but found I was completely at sea.

I find that when I read poetry as well. I simply can't offer an intelligent opinion of it--at all. And I've tried. I understand rhythm and metre, and if asked, I can write pathetic doggerel in perfect trochaic tetrameter or iambic pentameter or even nordic drott-kvaett if you like.

But it isn't poetry and I know it, because I'm an insensitive clod firmly stuck in my prose rut.

That's by way of preamble, though; the meat of my post relates this:

Poetry today seems to dwell on the miserable, dark and depressing.

That struck a chord with me, because it describes my prose perfectly. I write what I suppose a Victorian would have called "penny dreadfuls"--my computerised virtual pen loves to dwell fulsomely on the grotesque and the macabre.

Oh, certainly, I can (eventually) produce little passages that are relatively tranquil. With an enormous amount of effort, I can even manage to avoid sounding trite when I do it, but by golly it's hard work for me.

Give me a chance to write of dark skies and desperation and the depths a man can sink to, and the words just flow.

I think it's because writing is so therapeutic for me. It's a healing experience. When I'm cheerful, I don't want to sit alone at my desk, and there's nothing to heal; so I share that time with my wife and my son. But when something disturbs me or makes me angry, I'm bad company. So I retreat to my desk by the window and the keys clatter away late into the night, sucking at the poison and spitting it onto the page.

There's anger and revulsion in what I write, and I don't see that as entirely negative, because the world's full of things that any decent person finds outrageous and disgusting, and I think it's a mistake to be blind to them.

Poempedlar, I too have had some of the same concerns and questions. I'm not enamoured with rhyme for rhyme's sake, but I find that many of what are presented as poems are raw emotions piled on paper, without much effort to structure the verses or to make the best use of words and imagery.

Certainly the darker side of life is ripe for expression as poetry. But there are other emotions as well that aren't as popular anymore. Peace, wonder, joy, laughter, love, all these are as worthy as fear, pain, death, and despair.

I, for one, would love to see your kind of poetry offered for review. And by all means, do express these views in reviewing other people's work. Subject matter is the poet's choice, but if you can suggest other ways the author can express the subject matter, that is valuable!

I find there are a lot of poetry these days about sadness and despair and pain...but if you look hard enough there is poetry on here that is happy and uplifting. Most of us are beginners on the site, so I think we are all trying to write with emotion...and that usually is easiest when writing about something a bit darker. No idea why this is the case, but I find it is easiest to write about the darker things because you can be more startling and it is easier to capture the readers attention. Fluffy bunnies, on the other hand, make people cringe (as I have found out lol) Hopefully your children poems and happeier poems will set a trend.
cheers
ww

Fluffy bunnies, and clowns and grinning rocking horses make for great nightmare imagery.

Throw in a Jack-in-the-box for waking up in a quaking cold sweat.

I think that poetry is often used as a release for writers when they are feeling particularly negative or depressed. I generally only write poetry when I'm feeling very down and feel that I need to express my pain.

Poetry is an excellent way of releasing your emotions and I think it is often more effective if the writing is depressed. I also think it's more difficult to express happiness or excitement in a poem, for some reason it just seems harder to me.

Fluffy bunnies, and clowns and grinning rocking horses make for great nightmare imagery.

Throw in a Jack-in-the-box for waking up in a quaking cold sweat.

Wow. That sounds utterly terrifying.

Poetry is a structured form of writing. There are several optional components to it, such as rhyme, but there needs to be some structure. Poetry is not just prose without complete sentences, which is what is sometimes offered up as poetry.

Poetry is generally more concise than prose, but that is because more thought goes into every word and phrase, to make it conform to the chosen structure for the piece, and to distill it down to its essence, like a $700 bottle of perfume. It's not an easier form of writing than prose - quite the opposite.

Writing should not be classified as poetry by default.

Good God, poetry is definitely harder than prose. There are less limitations on poetry, which rather than making it easier, makes it much harder. I have always found that writing prose is easy, within the limitations, I know technically what is right and wrong. Whereas for poetry, the perameters are less defined, and it is harder to know what is right or wrong as a result.


Just my (rather confused) opinion on the matter.

I thought about this topic further this morning and I'm starting to see where you're coming from. As I said earlier, it does seem to be easier to write something depressing via poetry rather than something joyous, but why? Poems are usually filled with emotions, but they shouldn't necessarily be negative ones.

I guess poetry is just more popular amongst the darker groups of society and therefore, the majority of it is depressing.

Well, I think it's also a bit of a fad, combined with a popular misconception of what constitutes poetry.

Angst has become a badge of honor; the greater the pain you can express, the deeper you are, so much of what gets written, whether it be poetry, prose, or a list of sentence fragments, is more likely to be dark and depressing than uplifting.

Besides, pain and horror and depression have always been easier to describe than bliss. How many depictions of Hell have you seen and read? How vivid are the details? Now think of how many depictions of Heaven you have seen. Of those few, do any of them seem clear or detailed to you?

I actually find that my poetry derives from conversations of late.

I don't find poetry that is happy and so forth harder to write. It is just trying to find something happy to write about in such a way it will draw the readers attention. A lot of people like to read about how messed up someone is rather than how happy they are that they learnt to tie their own shoe lace.

I know that was a bad way of saying it but most of the time that is what you will find. I have written a lot of poetry and not all of it is posted up here. I try to write about very unusual thing like the bubbles in soft drink and a leaf falling to the ground. I even wrote a poem about a rocks feelings. It was interesting to say the least.

One thing that I have noticed about modern poetry is that it tends to be more about hiding the message then allowing it to be seen. We as writers are covering up everything raw about the emotions in the poetry and filling it with amzaing imagery but losing the the rawness within it. Sometimes it is nice to read a piece just based on raw emotion rather than seeing metaphors and so forth.

Enough of me ranting now. :p:p

Poetry and prose from members of society in which free speech was not guaranteed is one model for hidden meaning. As an example, Mother Goose rhymes were supposedly chock full of political criticism, although I have never analyzed them from that perspective. But hiding the message is not, in my opinion, the best idea. Good poetry, or good prose, illuminates any message it is trying to convey, by adding layers that the readers can appreciate on more than one level.

The purpose of writing is to communicate, even if the objective is to entertain. Some mystery or challenge is beneficial, but only to the degree that it involves the reader in actively seeking the message. If the reader walks away puzzled and frustrated, the communication has failed.

Well, I think it's also a bit of a fad, combined with a popular misconception of what constitutes poetry.

Besides, pain and horror and depression have always been easier to describe than bliss. How many depictions of Hell have you seen and read? How vivid are the details? Now think of how many depictions of Heaven you have seen. Of those few, do any of them seem clear or detailed to you?

Yep, that's exactly my point. Amongst the Gothic and Emo cultures it has become very popular to write dark, depressing poetry and is almost an icon for those cultures.

And as I said my first post, I agree, it's a lot easier to write about pain and negativity than to write about something uplifting.

My poetry is dark and depressing, because, when I do write poetry it is precisely to get rid of those emotions so I can get to my "real" writing.

That being said, my poetry absolutely goes no further than my own journal. I am not enough of a sadist to inflict it on other people.

Just my tuppence,
Rosalinda

Poetry for many people is an outlet for thigns that are bottling up inside. I do the same thing when I need to get things off my chest. I find it hard to talk so I write it out in poetry.

But I also enjoy writing about other things that really hold no personal meaning at all to me. I can write about almost anything at all. But it depends on the state of mind I am in and all the usual things like writers block and so forth.

I think that people find derpressing things easier as they are most certainly easier to describe.

Poetry online is more often depressing than not, because of all the reasons listed above; it's a release, it's emotional, it's not always meant to be edited or polished but just there as some expression of feeling. I think you'll get more variety if you seek out poets who write and polish their work, because they'll write about anything and everything [I'm not saying as a rule, but in general] rather than just spilling out negative emotions every time they need a release.

Old discussion, but Im going to contribute. It's sad, very sad, that poetry now days is all dark, doomy and gloomy. Based around pain and sadness. The problem is not because of the base of these emotions, the problem is the sheer amount of writers based around these emotions. Reading poems about the same things over and over again(as I've found myself doing here) is tiring. Im not the most patient of people, and needless to say, it wears thin very quickly, hence the occassional nasty comments I leave. Im not one to base around these emotions. With that said, I rarely base my poetry around emotions full stop. They may contain emotion, but rarely are they based around it.

One thing that I have noticed about modern poetry is that it tends to be more about hiding the message then allowing it to be seen. We as writers are covering up everything raw about the emotions in the poetry and filling it with amzaing imagery but losing the the rawness within it. Sometimes it is nice to read a piece just based on raw emotion rather than seeing metaphors and so forth.

I am yet to see a piece of this nature that has truely satisfied me. Sorry. The ones I have seen tend to be simple techincally (just revamped with a depressing vocabularly), boring, and filled with pathetic undertones of self-pity. To be frank, whenever I see poems of this kind, I either exit the thread or slate it. Writers need to understand, in my opinion, that telling the world of how sad you are without any attempt at making it mildly interesting, without any attempt of a metaphor or simile just isn't done anymore.

In regards to PP's particular style of poetry, well I see nothing wrong with it. The way she writes is clever, witty and humorous. She writes for children, and she writes well for children. There is no doubt about that.

Yep, that's exactly my point. Amongst the Gothic and Emo cultures it has become very popular to write dark, depressing poetry and is almost an icon for those cultures.

And as I said my first post, I agree, it's a lot easier to write about pain and negativity than to write about something uplifting.

I wish these sub-cultures never came to pass. The internet would be far better of poetry wise. In this post, Cogito explains that it's a fad - I agree completely.

Personally, as I said, I write poems around concepts, not emotions. Thats just how I write. My last couple of pieces, nobody on this forum has understood too clearly, but plenty of people on another forum I post on have. To an extent, it's very much the style of writing you grow up around. I first learnt to write poetry on the other forum, and the writers there have very different styles, but rarely do any of them base around emotions(thats the elite ones Im talking about there, the really, really good writers. The ones who taught me.) Those writers I learnt from understand what I'm writing because they taught me to write in the first place, and I've just added my own style. A member here, Myst (who's regrettfully disappeared) had a similair style to me and usually understood everything I wrote. So upbringing contributes.

Anyway, Ill shut up now.

Thank you for speaking up, Frost, and please don't "shut up now."

I would not want people to stop writing poems that package emotional pain. Poetry is well suited for packaging emotion in a way that lets the reader explore it and see inside the writer. But do, in fact, package it. Poetry is a complex form of writing, far more difficult than prose. It takes work to shape it in such a way that it truly delivers the message in depth.

It is the difference between a shapshot taken impulsively with a disposable camera and an artistic photograph that the photographer has planned every element of composition, and lighting, and exposure, choice of shutter speed, focal length, and depth of field to produce exactly the vision he or she conceived.

But there really is more than one emotion. And if depression is all you try to convey to the reader, well success is its own curse. Readers will walk away when they have been sufficiently depressed.

How about blending emotions? If you are depressed, are you not perhaps also a bit relieved? Or defiant? Show the blend! Show that there is some depth. If you are head over heels in love, what about the fear of inadequacy, or of betrayal, that you may also feel? Or the lingering feelings you still have for someone else?

Just show us something different, or tell it in your own unique way.

I wish these sub-cultures never came to pass. The internet would be far better of poetry wise. In this post, Cogito explains that it's a fad - I agree completely.

I agree :) I think it's sad that dark poems are only ever related to or associated with those two cultures these days. A person can't write a depressing poem without having some stereotype placed on them.

I think part of the problem with the culture of 'depressed' or 'emotional' poetry and all the backpatting and sympathy and so forth is that many of these poems tend to dwell in abstraction. It's really easy to go "my life is pain" but hard to put any of this into a concrete, relatable, evocative piece of writing ... and so praise for this stuff builds up around the "I know how you feel" aspect of it, and not craft, feeding the mill.

too sadly true!... angsty 'poor me' stuff next to never [if not, never ever!] qualifies as 'poetry'... it's the sort of stuff the word 'doggerel' was coined for...

good poetry deals with universal issues that readers can relate to, but seldom has any 'me' in it... writing about one's own trials and tribulations and pouring out stuff most would be embarrassed to say out loud to strangers is not being a 'poet'... and, as isis wisely notes, will 99% of the time not be critiqued by others [who aren't serious poets] for its craft, but only lauded for its emotional strings-pulling...

as a lifelong reader and lover of the works of our species' finest poets since words were first set down, and a more or less full time poet of many decades standing myself, i find even reading such stuff embarrassing to the point of pain... like when you see a hokey sex scene on the screen, and have to look away, as if that will help the participants keep some semblance of dignity... so, i skip over it all... i can probably count on the fingers of one hand, the times i've seen a 'real' piece of 'poetry' on the many writer's sites i've monitored over the years...

writing the stuff i see the most of may be a good catharsis for the suffering [or recovering] writers of same but if one really wants to be a poet, it's necessary to study the art and to perfect the requisite skills... sad to say, i rarely see any signs of that being done...

Better out than in, as they say. Once put into words, you can forget it, hopefully.

Hi there Weaselword, I don't sit down and write a poem... I struggle and cross out, I start again, I throw the whole lot in the bin. Next day I get it out the bin and move the first verse down to the third, I scratch out the fourth alltogether, I change all the words in the first line, I pinch a verse from another poem. After weeks and sometimes months of work and even sometimes over a year, I produce what appears to be a simple poem only to wake up in the night pouring over a verse that came to me while asleep. In other words, I sleep eat and dream poetry in order to produce something that appears to be easy.

Koosier-- poet lauriate of the US (past?) teaches at the local college here. They are constantly publishing his stuff. I cant stand it. It really does not remind me of anything more than simple sentances, chopped up because there is not meter or anything that I can see. This is my idea of a Ted Koosier Poem:

One day I went to the laundromat
and saw a big truck backing up
near the window
I turned to a lady picking through dirty socks
and asked her where her dog was
she began to weep bitterly
and the tears turned into oatmeal
then I saw the men were unloading a coffin
were am I?
Oh
The Laundromat

Of course, this is just an "off the cuff" example. I just don't get this sort of poetry.

i'd rather see one of his real ones... why don't you post an excerpt from one here?... as long as you provide the attribution and it's for 'educational' purposes [;-) ], it's not a crime...

as a lifelong reader and lover of the works of our species' finest poets since words were first set down, and a more or less full time poet of many decades standing myself, i find even reading such stuff embarrassing to the point of pain... like when you see a hokey sex scene on the screen, and have to look away, as if that will help the participants keep some semblance of dignity... so, i skip over it all... i can probably count on the fingers of one hand, the times i've seen a 'real' piece of 'poetry' on the many writer's sites i've monitored over the years...

writing the stuff i see the most of may be a good catharsis for the suffering [or recovering] writers of same but if one really wants to be a poet, it's necessary to study the art and to perfect the requisite skills... sad to say, i rarely see any signs of that being done...

I would love to see some of your art, some the writing you have perfected to the point of which you can call yourself a true poet. Sad to say, I've never seen any signs of that yet.

just where did i call myself a 'true' poet?... if all you can offer here is a childishly snide slap at a fellow member, while deliberately misquoting same, sad to say, i see no signs of intelligence or courtesy... and i see no reason why i should have to prove anything to you...

Why would you refer to yourself as 'a poet of many decades' if you didn't think you were a true poet? You wouldnt call yourself a poet if you thought you were a fake.
As for what I've got to offer, I've already put my input into this conversation, and as Im sure you're aware, I'm an active reviewer of poetry, which, I note, you're not.
Also, I didn't misquote, I highlighted what's relevant.

I didnt expect you to prove anything anyway.

Umm, respectful discussion please, no personal atacks.

i'd rather see one of his real ones... why don't you post an excerpt from one here?... as long as you provide the attribution and it's for 'educational' purposes [;-) ], it's not a crime...

not a fan. I'm sure you can look him up on the web, seeing he was U.S. poet laureate (just the last one before this one-- of course being Bush's poet doesn't really recommend him for much). My point his stuff is really normal sentences cut up and stacked. I think I did a really fine send-off.

My point his stuff is really normal sentences cut up and stacked.

...just checked and have to agree for the most part... being chosen by bush is, i also have to agree, not a great recommendation... but the guy did win a pulitzer... wonder if the quality of the judges there have gone downhill, too... ;-)

sorry. I wonder that too. I suppose I have to study it.

Lol, this discussion is so depressing... I often get made fun of for my "greeting card verse" and guess who says that: all those angsty emo poets who use it for the "expression" aspect and not for the "art" and "craft."

Koosier-- poet lauriate of the US (past?) teaches at the local college here. They are constantly publishing his stuff. I cant stand it. It really does not remind me of anything more than simple sentances, chopped up because there is not meter or anything that I can see. This is my idea of a Ted Koosier Poem:

One day I went to the laundromat
and saw a big truck backing up
near the window
I turned to a lady picking through dirty socks
and asked her where her dog was
she began to weep bitterly
and the tears turned into oatmeal
then I saw the men were unloading a coffin
were am I?
Oh
The Laundromat

Of course, this is just an "off the cuff" example. I just don't get this sort of poetry.

True but some of his work, this one for example is very good indeed. Worthy of the pulitzer I don't know but worthy nevertheless.

Tattoo

What once was meant to be a statement—
a dripping dagger held in the fist
of a shuddering heart—is now just a bruise
on a bony old shoulder, the spot
where vanity once punched him hard
and the ache lingered on. He looks like
someone you had to reckon with,
strong as a stallion, fast and ornery,
but on this chilly morning, as he walks
between the tables at a yard sale
with the sleeves of his tight black T-shirt
rolled up to show us who he was,
he is only another old man, picking up
broken tools and putting them back,
his heart gone soft and blue with stories.


from Delights & Shadows, Copper Canyon Press, Port Townsend, WA 2004

Lol, this discussion is so depressing... I often get made fun of for my "greeting card verse" and guess who says that: all those angsty emo poets who use it for the "expression" aspect and not for the "art" and "craft."

As far as I'm concerned, labelling someone's work "greeting card verse" is not productive. Now if someone feels that the rhymes are forced, or that the poetry only speaks on a literal level, that's a step closer to constructive criticism. If someone takes it a step further and offers alternatives or other work to compare with, that's truly constructive/ And that remains true even if the author doesn't feel the suggestion fits his or her intent or style.

Reviews are opinions, and the act of discerning what you do or do not like about a particular piece may give you ideas for your own work, but it will certainly help you see where the weak points are, before you present it for others to examine.

There isn't a right way or a wrong way, but rather finding what works best for each writer.

And a lot of modern poetry proponents ignore the fact that you should know how to do something before denigrating it. I think they give a bad name to the people who actually know what they're talking about(or writing) in relation to so-called "modern poetry".

Are you kidding me mate?

And a lot of modern poetry proponents ignore the fact that you should know how to do something before denigrating it.

If you think that modern poetry is bad for your traditional poetry, then that's up to you, but at least try and prove it. I've read poems from angsty teens that are atrocious, just as Ive read poems from traditional no-hopers who are on the same level of lame as the angsty teens. No style of poetry is any better or worse than the other. It's like arguing whether any style of music is better than the other. There is only the quality of what people write within the style and then peoples opinions.

Get off your high-horse mate. Step down off the pedestal. Open your eyes and mind and learn, instead of being ignorant.

I don't think it's necessarily bad for "my traditional"*cough* poetry. I dont see myself as on a high horse, or a soapbox either. I'm not saying it's a worse style either. It can be very useful,,and I have written some more "modern" poems to an extent. My only problem with the style is that most of the original writers and forebears of it had a kniwledge of traditional poetry, and had very concrete reasons for their deviation(s), and even had a set of priniciples that they used with some consistency to provide their own personal rhythm or flow. I see a lot of people on sites like this now(not refering to any people here that I know of) who post up poems for what I would normally assume is the expression aspect, and then proceed to reject in totality any suggestions on the grounds that "free verse" and/or "modern poetry" has no rules and is all about experimenting. The first is generally unrue, and the second is true under the conditions that the poet understands how their "experimentation" differs, and has a reason for the form choices they have used, rather than having just ejaculated onto the paper and posted it without even bothering to give it a look-through. I have enjoyed many more experimental, avant-garde style poems, but only when the poet knew what the heck they were doing. The reaso I advocate that people learn traditional style (if not all the different specific forms) is because I think the discipline doing such a thing gives them can make their efforts to expand beyond the "stereo-typed, overwrought, etc..." style of traditional poetry a more interesting and useful venture.


I'm not arguing that either style is better, just that the second was formed by people knowledgable in the first, and I think having at least some basis in poetic device and rhythm(line-breaks for eample are generally horrible in poems by beginners who have looked only at free-verse) is important when considering why (and how) not to use "traditional" meter and imagery.

Frost, we've discussed adding some information about patterns and techniques of traditional poetry. Why not do the same with some techniques and approaches unique to modern poetry style?