My First Ode

[AlfredtheGreat]

Yeah, i don't know if the iambic pentameter is perfect but I tried.


To think of greatness chained upon the wall
A victim of changed principles, now dead
To think of the accomplishments that fall
Under the trees of time covered in lead
Eons pass before judgement is hand’d down
According to history we all sleep
On our beds of crushed spirits rest the dreams
Of time gone by so we will soon all frown
And wait for when the night will start to creep
When that time comes we will vanish it seems

[hillwalker]

The first four lines scan well enough :


To think of greatness chained upon the wall
- / - / - / - / - /
A victim of changed principles, now dead
- / - / - / - / - /
To think of the accomplishments that fall
- / - / - / - / - /
Under the trees of time covered in lead
- / - / - / - / - /

though that last line makes absolutely no sense whatsoever unless I'm missing something. Of course, it rhymes. Perhaps that's all that concerned you when you wrote it.

Then your poem implodes -


Eons pass before judgement is hand’d down
/ - / - - / - - / - / [11 syllables]
According to history we all sleep
- / - - / - - / - /
On our beds of crushed spirits rest the dreams
- - / - / / - / - /
Of time gone by so we will soon all frown
- / - / - - - / - /

why hand'd down btw? - the archaic use of an apostrophe is normally to shorten a word by one syllable so it fits the meter, but in this instance you haven't ahortened it at all. And what's that last line supposed to mean???

It then gets back on track for a while before finally giving up


And wait for when the night will start to creep
- / - / - / - / - /
When that time comes we will vanish it seems
- / - / - - / - - /

I'm concerned on two levels by this attempt.

Firstly - anyone who reads this out loud will realise immediately that the iambic pentameter is far from perfect so I'm amazed you don't see it for yourself.
Even in the last 3 lines where you have squeezed in an extra 'will' into each line to make up the syllable count (a classic sign of desperation) you still stumble with the rhythm.

Secondly - you have a very rigid idea of what constitutes poetry judging by this piece. Calling this an ode to begin with sets the alarm bells ringing. How many poets write odes in the 21st century?
Struggling to use archaic forms, trying to squash your thoughts into strict metric strait-jackets (and failing), and the general lack of sense in what you have written all demonstrate a failure to grasp what poetry is supposed to be.

I suggest you try reading some poetry - preferably post-1930s to present day - you will probably be shocked at how much it has changed from the days of Keats and Wordsworth.
Poems don't have to stick rigidly to meter or rhyme any more. And it takes a good deal of craft to write in a formal style - not something one would try to master before refining one's abilities.
And, of course, they generally are expected to make sense - which is where your work falls down most.

I'm assuming you don't conduct your day-to-day conversations in such convoluted language. Why not write a poem in normal English that conveys a message your readers might be able to understand? Otherwise, on the basis of this exercise, you are wasting your time and that of the reader.

H

[AlfredtheGreat]

Thanks bro. It was just for fun nothing serious.

[blank|verse]

Alfred - I think this is a decent effort to write in what can be a tricky form. Ok, it's not perfect, and the second half loses its way a bit, but I always say that anyone who wants to write poetry should be conversant with as many forms as possible, even if they choose to write in free verse for the rest of their life.

And, if it's any consolation, hillwalker is wrong in a number of cases (sorry, hill, but you are :)).

1. For example, the first line scans as he says, but most others are wrong:

A victim of changed principles, now dead
- /- - / /-- / /
To think of the accomplishments that fall
- / - - -/-- - /
Under the trees of time covered in lead
/- - / - / /- - /
But the main point about blank verse or iambic pentameter (IP) is that IT SHOULD NOT FIT THE METRICAL PATTERN PERFECTLY in every line. I've never read a poem in which this happens (although there may be some out there). The strength of the line, and why it has lasted hundreds of years and been used by the greatest writers in the English language, is its flexibility.

Here's a useful article (http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/jul/06/featuresreviews.guardianreview19) written by the former Oxford Professor of Poetry James Fenton on IP. Here's an extract:

The iambic pentameter owes its pre-eminence in English poetry to its genius for variation. Good blank verse does not sound like a series of identically measured lines. It sounds like a series of subtle variations on the same theme.
The key to writing well in the form is the feel, for want of a more accurate word. It's got to sound natural and unforced. That's the tricky part. It's a bit like a time signature in music - it's always there and can be felt, but the music (particularly classical) doesn't count out every beat - unless it's done deliberately for a good reason. Otherwise it is felt but not heard.

2. 11-syllable lines of IP are perfectly acceptable. They even have a name - hendecasyllabic lines. IP originated from the Italian endecasillabo - guess how many syllables those lines had? Shakespeare's Sonnet 20 uses NOTHING BUT hendecasyllabics (but does so for a reason, of course... or several, one of which is 'look no hands'!). I might even suggest that 9 syllables in a line is acceptable in this crazy, modern age... but one step at a time, eh?

So keep going; the way to improve it to be harder on yourself. If you know the line's not perfect - change it until you're happy with it. You might go insane in the process, but that's the joy of poetry!

And also, you should be aware that an 'ode' in the proper sense has certain formal requirements, in the same way a sonnet does; although the word has become synonymous with 'poem', particularly those dedicated to someone or something, this is inaccurate.

Phew. Keep writing. :)

[hillwalker]

And, if it's any consolation, hillwalker is wrong in a number of cases (sorry, hill, but you are :)).

That's ok b|v - that's why I write most of my stuff in free verse - I just ain't got no rhythm :-)

H

[AuntShecky]

I agree with previous repliers re: the use of contemporary language. As a rule, try to avoid archaic expressions, except when the occasion calls for them, such as in humorous verse.

Also, please take heed to the previous comments re: meter and rhyme. Rhyme is fine, but whenever you wish to use it, never let the rhyme take precedence over meter and especially over meaning.

Please read this poem which, like yours, repeats the phrase "To Think"
http://www.poets.org/viewmedia.php/prmMID/21927

It is not, by any stretch of the imagination, an "ode," but certainly the subject matter is pretty darn serious. Also note the poet's effective use of anaphora and other forms of poetic repetition.

Here is a definition of an "ode" from The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Literary Terms, edited by Chris Baldick:

"An elaborately formal lyric poem, often in the form of a length ceremonious address to a person or abstract entity, always serious and elevated in tone."

There are two types of odes using classical models, from Pindar and Horace. The Pindaric ode has an extremely three-part structure, originally written for a performance, corresponding to dance movements of a chorus. The English adaptation of the Pindaric ode is a "looser regular ode with varying lengths of strophes" such as those written by Abraham Cowley and "followed by John Dryden, William Collins, and William Wordsworth in 'Ode on Intimations of Immortality' (1807.)"

English odes which follow Horace's form are more literary and reflective. The most famous Horatian odes in English were written, of course, by Keats in 1820: "Ode on an Grecian Urn" and "Ode to a Nightingale."

Recent postings on poetry, if you are interested:

"Don't Sweat the Syllables"
http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?p=967672#post967672


"Jumping the Shark"
http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58269

and the old manifesto (Please take it with a grain of salt!):
http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35382

Good luck. Keep writing and especially reading.


PS: Thank you, Blank Verse, for providing the link
to James Fenton's Master Class.

[Jerrybaldy]

just keep writing. as you said its just fun.