Does rhyme sound false to the modern ear?
Does rhyme sound false to the modern ear?
A bad or mediocre poem with rhyme will sound ridiculous, a good poem with rhyme wont. I have yet to find a Shelley, Keats or Byron which sounds ridiculous due to the rhyme.
I know I am simplifying the whole question, but in essence I think that is the answer.
Outside of what we consider "literary" poetry, the modern ear not only tolerates rhyme but actually expects it. Try recording a popular song without rhyming lyrics and see how far you get (for that matter, you can forget about a purely "instrumental" song without any lyrics at all.)
When was the last time you heard a rap tune that didn't
rhyme?
Advertising jingles and slogans --the lifeblood of the economy of the Western world-more often than not use rhyme in their jingles, even though the marketing claims might not be 100% "true."
So I must disagree with the position that the "modern ear" considers rhyme to be "false."
From a literary standpoint, many esteemed contemporary poets continue to use rhyme; as Miller Williams says, rhyme is just one of the tools in the writer's toolbox.
The trick is to use rhyme intelligently; that is, by avoiding making the line serve the rhyme rather than the other way around, that the rhythm and meter are not sacrificed in order to make the end-rhyme "fit," by avoiding "wrenching," and other cardinal sins of prosody. '
By all means, rhyme can be appropriate when it adds rather than detracts from the overall effect of the verse.
Last edited by AuntShecky; 07-25-2011 at 03:10 PM.
Like I said before, a good modern poet can. I am not well read on contemporary literature, but examples off the top of my mind are: Pier Paolo Pasolini and Richard Wilbur. And I also believe Yves Bonnefoy uses rhyme.
So yea, it's just a stylistic choice; much like free verse. With free verse it is much the same, it requires a technique and that is what makes it sound ridiculous or good.
I agree with AuntShecky. The modern ear does not consider rhyme to be false, but rhyme must contribute to the meaning of the poem.
Often when I see rhyme that is not done well (to my ear), the real problem is with the meter or the message. Fix these and the rhyme becomes acceptable.
Rhyme is not a technique, it is a force of habit.
The question got me to lug out The Oxford Book of American Poetry. I am a champion of rhyme, and find excellent examples of it in this wonderful anthology. I love rhyme schemes such as may be found in "Round" by Weldon Kees:
Flaps like a worn-out blind. Cezanne
Would break out in the quiet streets of Aix
And shout, "Le monde, c'est terrible!" Royal
Cortissoz is dead. And something inside my head
Flaps like a worn-out blind. The soil
In which the ferns are dying needs more Vigoro.
There is no twilight on the moon, no mist or rain,
No hail or snow, no life. Here in this house
and so on. The anthology gives an interesting portrait of rhyme in American verse. It often dictates the voice of American sonnet, so it seems. One of my favourite American poets is Claude McKay, and he uses rhyme always. W. H. Auden (strange to think of him as an American poet) brings rhyme into "In Memory of W. B. Yeats."
I love rhyme and cannot write a sonnet without it. Perhaps my over-fondness of rhyme is one reason why I pen more sonnets than any other kind of verse.
"I never can be tied to raw, new things." --H. P. Lovecraft
A dam you edited your comment, mine makes less sense now; you crafty fellow.