Writing Meta: Why don't I get poetry?

[amanuensis1]

During insomnia night this week, I read a professional insititution's glossy creativity publication that had been given to me. The photos were pretty, the essays...not as horrible as they could have been, the poetry I thought was appalling. Schmaltz, doggerel, sentimental claptrap. Amateur pirouettes on a page, terribly proud of themselves for showing off their cut-apart structure and boring as spit. These students didn't even know how to write limericks; there was a two-page spread of them and not one of them had the correct scansion of a limerick. God. I read through the book thinking, what the hell did they reject?

Is it just me? I always admit that I don't have a poet's soul; I have no inclination to write poetry other than funny doggerel, and very little poetry resonates with me. Sometimes it does. The moments are rare, but wonderful. Is it just me, is most poetry dreadful cloying crap? Just because you're grieving or in pain, that doesn't mean you can create good art.

Comments

[venivincere]

Well... I do love poetry, and I enjoy writing it, but I have to agree with you that most of it is utter dreck, and those who profess to be poets or lovers of poetry very often can't tell a good one from verbal vomit. It takes a great deal of distillation to say the essential thing in few words, and even more to get it to rhyme and scan, if you're writing in a format that requires that. Less is more, but less doesn't mean chop your thoughts into fewer words, it means choosing the right ones, the ones that are freighted and assempled the way the subject calls for them to be.

I'm not a great poet, but I do write stuff that scans and rhymes properly, and tries to say something, probably in a way that is sick-making to many because I can't always let go of the $10 words. :-D But I'm well aware it's not for everybody, and that's OK.

If I thought that all people liked verse,
I'd be likely considered perverse.
The polite, (in my aid),
Would say, "Oh, her mind's strayed."
The uncivil would say, "It's a curse!"

Pretentious? Probably. Feel free to poke fun. At least it scans and rhymes properly. :-D

[effie-chan.livejournal.com]

Wow, did you come up with that on the spot? That's impressive.

Wouldn't you have to drop one syllable from the second to last line, though? For example the "oh" is not vital.

[venivincere]

Yes... that was on the spot.

The "Oh," is vital. If I dropped the "Oh," I would have lost the accented syllable in the first anapest foot. "Oh," in this instance, too, indicates a response, which would be expected from "in my aid" in the previous line, because a defense usually follows a question or attack and doesn't materialize out of thin air. For example, this sort of exchange would be perfectly natural: "What's this book doing out on the counter?" "Oh, Liesle left it out for you to read." The "Oh," sort of softens the response, makes it more palatable. If you leave out the "Oh," the response is more terse and less forgiving of Liesle. In the limerick, it makes sense that the polite people would soften the blow, so to speak, so "Oh," seemed a natural thing to include.

[venivincere]

I'm so rude. I forgot to say THANK YOU! *wibble*

[effie-chan.livejournal.com]

:D

thanks for your explanation by the way. I have to admit I don't personally know much about writing poetry.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

She's using anapestic feet in the opening of each line of her limerick, so, the fourth line does have the proper meter.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

And your sonnets are some of the few smile-quirkers for me when people are doing the post-a-poem thing, because you not only know the structure, you know that structure isn't enough; you actually have to say something! Awesome limerick, too--perfect scansion and rhyme and it's FUNNY. &hearts

[venivincere]

Praise, indeed -- thank you!!!