I am a poet, I am not a poet. I think the former some times and the latter others. But most of the time in my life I do not think about poetry at all. And it is this last bit that led me to read the book How Poetry Works.
More interestingly free verse, he claims, has only a shocking value (as poetry) for people whose ears are well-versed (ha!) with the sounds of metric forms, almost expect it. I differ. As someone who is not a very good writer, does not care too much about getting work published, I only write free verse as a medium of self-expression, and as a connecting hook to the authors whose writing fascinates me.
The author Phil Roberts has a very interesting agenda in this book. He wants people to realize and think about what poetry is supposed to do. In the most scintillating times, print was expensive, and poetry was mostly to be read by one person for the benefit of many. And thus the way poetry evolved was the way it sounds. Of course with print becoming more accessible many times more people can access poetry, but now poetry is something read. And many times read in formats such as the internet and computer screen, where glancing, scanning, and “speed-reading” are the ideals and norm.
I am glad I live in today’s time because I will not have read the book or be able read poetry. Or have the system, discipline, or motivation to write poetry. But this is something to think about. I know most of my readers will take it as an offense when I say it, but many times more people will watch movies over read a book. And the idea is simple: someone is reading and enacting the book for them, naturally so much more interesting. But, many of us who read books before we watch the movie version of it, will often come back dissatisfied and read the book once again in an attempt to appease the author (and the book).
Most poetry, Mr. Roberts claims, is in the sound form. It is in the sound form that they take form, over meaning and syntax. I will not say songs, only because I am not sure about the technical differences between songs and other metric forms of poetry. But most poetry is to be read aloud. And slowly.
Of course I knew of the rhythm and understand syllables. But most poetry is in sound form? My first reaction was of disbelief and disdain. These fantastic authors want to go back to times of queens and barons? I went back and read some of the poems I have liked recently, and many of them are in very systematic stress or metric format. I went to read my own poems and lo! I was writing in metre too (or at least was trying to use metres for effect) without meaning to or wanting to. [I am sure now that I will think more about these things writing poem will get more difficult for me]
I am glad I live in today’s time because I will not have read the book or be able read poetry. Or have the system, discipline, or motivation to write poetry. But this is something to think about. I know most of my readers will take it as an offense when I say it, but many times more people will watch movies over read a book. And the idea is simple: someone is reading and enacting the book for them, naturally so much more interesting. But, many of us who read books before we watch the movie version of it, will often come back dissatisfied and read the book once again in an attempt to appease the author (and the book).
Most poetry, Mr. Roberts claims, is in the sound form. It is in the sound form that they take form, over meaning and syntax. I will not say songs, only because I am not sure about the technical differences between songs and other metric forms of poetry. But most poetry is to be read aloud. And slowly.
Of course I knew of the rhythm and understand syllables. But most poetry is in sound form? My first reaction was of disbelief and disdain. These fantastic authors want to go back to times of queens and barons? I went back and read some of the poems I have liked recently, and many of them are in very systematic stress or metric format. I went to read my own poems and lo! I was writing in metre too (or at least was trying to use metres for effect) without meaning to or wanting to. [I am sure now that I will think more about these things writing poem will get more difficult for me]
More interestingly free verse, he claims, has only a shocking value (as poetry) for people whose ears are well-versed (ha!) with the sounds of metric forms, almost expect it. I differ. As someone who is not a very good writer, does not care too much about getting work published, I only write free verse as a medium of self-expression, and as a connecting hook to the authors whose writing fascinates me.
No comments:
Post a Comment