Having read many of the recent poems in the Review Room, I have come across an interesting occurence. Very few are written in any set form, meter or syllable count, or any sound techniques besides alliteration. I hear a lot about "Modern Poetry," but it seems to me that what Modern Poetry really is is an excuse to be lazy. Anybody can break up a paragraph of very abstract imgery into some semblance of poetic form, but it requires some hard work and talent for it to be more than just reformatted prose.
What good is those three elements on their own? What do those three elements create when you bind them together? Flow. How a poem reads and flows in general, in my mind is more paramount than exact meter, count and form.
That's right, flow is important, and all I was pointing out is that when people start writing poetry without a basis in those things, they often have trouble with the flow of the poem. I don't think they' are necessary in any way, but working within a more concrete form is very useful for developing many skills associated with poetry.
I'd be in favor of some postings discussing some of the traditional structures and techniques. I believe knowledge and awareness will make all poets better, whether or not they choose to integrate the techniques into their own styles. I consider it like going to a restaurant and trying exotic dishes. You may decide chitterlings are throroughly disgusting, but it's better to decide that after you've given them a fair tasting.
I concur. An understanding of what has gone before enables you to create the future. By realising for example where punctuation should be used, you can use it to fuller effect. Conversely by knowing how and where to use it, you can effectively break the rules / convention and more importantly make a valid statement by doing so.
My point exactly... I bet a lot of free verse and prose poem writers could kick out some pretty good traditional poetry if they wanted to.
After reading this thread I went and looked at a site that talks all about Traditional poetry and Modernised poetry. This is an interesting snippet I have come across and thought that I'd share it with everyone. modernism: the sociology of contemporary poetry world (this is where I came across this information if anyone is interested in reading on further. It has quite a lot of interesting information within it.)
Wow... sounds very artistic, but why the heck would I read something like that? What is the chance it will make sense to me, and that I will be able to relate to it? I don't think it's very high for me. There's a line for me, beyond which I lose interest, and beyond which I fail to see what I'm supposed to be enjoying. I have no problem with free verse, but this modernism thing is just a little too wild for me.
On that site it goes into details about Traditional poetry as well. Here is a link. It helps all to better understand both Traditional and Modernised Poetry. Here is the link to the information and Traditional Poetry. traditional poetry today There is quite a lot of valuable information there if anyone is interested in reading it. I'm not saying you have to read it at all Etan. But some may find this information to really help them out with their writing endeavours.
Not only that, but free verse poetry has some elements that traditional poetry doesn't as easily support. For example, varying the tempo from one line to the next to signify and emphasize building or waning emotional context. The lessons may not be in only one direction. The shift from traditional to modern poetry isn't entirely because modern poets may not study all the traditional forms.
i'd read all the classic poets from earliest childhood, so have a good grounding in all the traditional forms of poetry, a lot of my own work being more or less along what one might call 'traditional' even though i don't hew to any of the standard formats [not on purpose, anyway]... as most of my work doesn't fall into any of the traditional form labels, even when rhyme is used, since i let my poems dictate their shape and sound, not some formula, i'm not sure what you'd call it or me... am i a 'modern poet' or something else?... is anyone willing to browse the 'philosetry' section of my site and let me know their take on this poetic pigeonholing thing?...
I'm being assaulted from all sides! lol But that was the point, I often find that debate can help to clarify one's own opinions, and this has certainly helped me in that regard. Yes, the lesson does go both ways, and I intend to give all links an in-dpeth look. This has been quite fun.
Don't get me wrong Etan I actually quite enjoy Traditional Poetry and read quite a lot of it. I have written Traditional Poetry as well. I think that in learning both and being able to write in both is always good for the writer. Either way you look at it, it's poetry and not everyone out there is going to be published. Not everyone cares whether they write traditional or modern poetry. Although traditional poetry does hold some qualities that just are not there in modern poetry. But neither is better nor worse than the other. And yes debates about certain topics can help out many people along the way.
*Sigh* Well, that's pretty much my feelings as of this point Torana. I do on occasion indulge in modern poetry and it can be quite fun. No disrespect to the genre/style was intended by this.
I only have one thing to say: I think that Traditional Poetry can be beneficial; however, I find that boundaries can limit creativity.
I find that the boundaries of traditional poetry give me the ammunition to be even more creative. From learning the devices in traditional poetry, my modern poetry has benefited significantly.