Why bother with free verse on a bush poetry site?
Posted: Sat May 07, 2016 11:51 am
The above question is undoubtedly being asked by some, so here are a couple of answers to think about.
Firstly, we tend to be ‘lazy’ with traditional poetry in that we devalue words by opting for second-best. For example, we will use a word because the stresses fit the metre or because it rhymes, not because it’s the best word available. Or we will add a word to a line simply because it makes the metre work. We compromise, allowing the metre and rhyme to dictate the effectiveness of what we’re writing. We all do it. Often. Check any prize-winning poem on the poetry page and you’ll find examples.
With free verse, however, we can choose the most appropriate word or phrase available and then decide how we want to lay it out on the page to best effect. (Heather refers to the enjoyment she finds in seeking out the best words, which is part of the “magic” that Sue describes.) If we’re using the ‘distilled’ approach to free verse (cutting back to the minimum), as is mainly happening here, then the focus is very much on making the most of the fewer words being used. This really concentrates the mind in terms of creating images and representing emotions, and forces us to think about each and every word and its placement. It’s hard, but it’s a valuable exercise because what we learn can inform and improve what we do in traditional verse.
Secondly, free verse encourages us to think outside the box, as Wendy has done with her ingenious ‘poem-within-a-poem’, and as Heather has done so well in structuring her poem about the way a piece of writing is born. That’s not to say that the same sort of thing couldn’t be done in traditional verse, but free verse is more likely to encourage experimentation. And, as I’ve said before in other threads, some of the free verse layout techniques could be carried over to traditional verse (even though they might cause apoplexy in some quarters). The use of spaces, for example. Or not necessarily breaking lines at the rhyme (as in Iceberg Rose, which I posted as homework back in January). There’s no reason why the physical layout of a poem on the page couldn’t be used as a technique in rhyming verse. As things stand, rhyming verse is often (but not always!) better suited to performance than free verse because the metre and rhyme make it easier to listen to and easier to understand. But on the page rhyming verse can be pretty boring, which is one reason it’s sometimes dismissed as doggerel. (After you’ve read 100 traditional poems as part of the judging process, all of them marching down the page in standard fashion, many of them four lines to a stanza and 14 syllables to a line, you hardly know what you’re reading!) With free verse, you’re constantly surprised. (Or baffled or annoyed, so I guess it’s a question of whether that’s worse than being bored.)
Others may disagree, but I’d argue that having a go at (and reading) some free verse sends you back to traditional verse with fresh eyes and a better understanding of how words can be put together to create an effect. Which opens up the challenge of writing better bush poetry.
Cheers
David
Firstly, we tend to be ‘lazy’ with traditional poetry in that we devalue words by opting for second-best. For example, we will use a word because the stresses fit the metre or because it rhymes, not because it’s the best word available. Or we will add a word to a line simply because it makes the metre work. We compromise, allowing the metre and rhyme to dictate the effectiveness of what we’re writing. We all do it. Often. Check any prize-winning poem on the poetry page and you’ll find examples.
With free verse, however, we can choose the most appropriate word or phrase available and then decide how we want to lay it out on the page to best effect. (Heather refers to the enjoyment she finds in seeking out the best words, which is part of the “magic” that Sue describes.) If we’re using the ‘distilled’ approach to free verse (cutting back to the minimum), as is mainly happening here, then the focus is very much on making the most of the fewer words being used. This really concentrates the mind in terms of creating images and representing emotions, and forces us to think about each and every word and its placement. It’s hard, but it’s a valuable exercise because what we learn can inform and improve what we do in traditional verse.
Secondly, free verse encourages us to think outside the box, as Wendy has done with her ingenious ‘poem-within-a-poem’, and as Heather has done so well in structuring her poem about the way a piece of writing is born. That’s not to say that the same sort of thing couldn’t be done in traditional verse, but free verse is more likely to encourage experimentation. And, as I’ve said before in other threads, some of the free verse layout techniques could be carried over to traditional verse (even though they might cause apoplexy in some quarters). The use of spaces, for example. Or not necessarily breaking lines at the rhyme (as in Iceberg Rose, which I posted as homework back in January). There’s no reason why the physical layout of a poem on the page couldn’t be used as a technique in rhyming verse. As things stand, rhyming verse is often (but not always!) better suited to performance than free verse because the metre and rhyme make it easier to listen to and easier to understand. But on the page rhyming verse can be pretty boring, which is one reason it’s sometimes dismissed as doggerel. (After you’ve read 100 traditional poems as part of the judging process, all of them marching down the page in standard fashion, many of them four lines to a stanza and 14 syllables to a line, you hardly know what you’re reading!) With free verse, you’re constantly surprised. (Or baffled or annoyed, so I guess it’s a question of whether that’s worse than being bored.)
Others may disagree, but I’d argue that having a go at (and reading) some free verse sends you back to traditional verse with fresh eyes and a better understanding of how words can be put together to create an effect. Which opens up the challenge of writing better bush poetry.
Cheers
David