Should we write poems that rhyme? And if yes, why not? ;-)

[DieterM]

I don’t write poems that rhyme. Or hardly ever. The main reason is that I find it too much hard work. My mother language is German, my second language French. I don’t even have the chance to live in an English-speaking country; on the contrary, I guess only Uranus is less anglophile than the country I’ve chosen to live in. You’ll have guessed, I’m talking about France – you know, that part of the global village that, like its national heroes Asterix and Obelix, resists so thoroughly that each time I stumble upon yet another translation made by my French clients (they insist, go figure why), I imagine their American or British partners share a hearty giggle when they read it.

So, from the start, writing a poem in English means a bigger effort for me than for those who speak, hear, write, think in English all the time. In order to find the right words that express what I intend to say, I have to rummage through online dictionaries, write down a list of synonyms, speak them out loud to see if they sound right, counter-check them to be sure they hit the exact aspect or concept or image I had in mind. Words are tricky for all of us; they can lead us down a wrong path. They’re even trickier for non-native speakers. Yet I’d never allow the fact of being a non-native speaker to be an excuse for failures or weak parts.

Thus, basically, I don’t do rhymes because they would mean a supplementary effort. They’d be an unnecessary distraction from what I really want to express. I don’t want to compose a satisfying line only to discover that its last word is impossible to rhyme with. And , last point, rules for rhyming are not the same in German and English, so an extra-extra effort would have to be made. In German, only perfect rhymes (sight-flight, madness-sadness, reign-gain) are considered proper rhymes. If you attempt to rhyme “sea” with “see” or “bent “ with “ant”, or God forbid! “bough” with “cough”, you’d be sentenced to read Coelho and Derrida and Heidegger until your brain cells have turned to jelly.

Now some members of this Forum like rhymes. Others have recently outed themselves as allergic to rhyme, which came as a BIG surprise for all of us ;-). Which made ma ask myself whether today, we should still write poems that rhyme or rather not. I’m not talking about me – I do like good rhymes but are really much too lazy to write them myself, as pointed out above.

Some further thoughts. Try as I might, I cannot fight off my linguistic heritage (for instance my reluctance to accept anything but perfect rhymes as rhymes; even alliterations, which I love and which I use quite frequently, do not sound like “rhymes” to my ears) and my cultural upbringing. I’m very Austrian, go beat me. Of course, as an Austrian with a little literacy, I’ve read turn-of-the-19th-century writer Karl Kraus, who has discussed rules for rhymes. He was a mighty strict guy. Now, Kraus stated that rhymes must convey a bigger meaning, something that transcends the pure melody of sounds and the simple significance of words. To rhyme “mother” and “brother” doesn’t add anything to the simple statement of family ties – he’d tear you apart with a witty essay if you tried to use that pair. “Mother” and “smother”, on the contrary, would be a perfect, almost Freudian match for a poem about a mother-son relationship. He’d be happy (I guess).

I have to confess that I didn’t grab all the facets and details and subtleties of Kraus’ theory, which he defended almost violently. Yet somehow, I’ve always kept in mind that rhyme, when used as l’art pour l’art, for the mere sake of rhyming, has no value whatsoever. Sometimes, it distracts from the real meaning of a poem, it distorts grammar, it overthrows readable structure. Worse: more often than not, its goal is to conceal a perfect vacuity of content.

Rhyme has to add something to a poem, another level, another understanding, another je-ne-sais-quoi.

My only attempt of writing a poem that rhymes can be found here: http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=68797
It has taken me more than a week (much longer than any of my other poems), has been fun but tedious fun, and its sole purpose was to entertain, to amuse, hence its little literary merits. The rhymes’ purpose was to make people giggle.

Now any comment, new insight, controversy, contradiction, anecdote will be welcome. What do YOU think re. poetry and rhyming?

[hillwalker]

My only attempt of writing a poem that rhymes can be found here: The rhymes’ purpose was to make people giggle.

That's the problem with rhyme - it lends itself to humorous poetry better than to serious stuff, simply because the reader is almost encouraged to guess what comes next. And finding an unusual rhyming word to surprise us is with is as much part of the exercise as expressing anything remotely enlightening.

The cause of rhyme has not been helped by William Topaz McGonagall (wonderful name) - a Scots 'writer' who strangled his creations at birth by driving rhyme through every poem like a forty-tonne truck through a garden party.

Another problem is that many aspiring writers, especially those dipping their toes into the water for the very first time, feel obliged to write in rhyme. They confuse rhyme with poetry - rather like confusing Art with nudes (but much less enjoyable). In turn, forcing a rhyme also results in twisted syntax or back-to-front writing. This produces efforts that are so painful to witness that the word 'poetry' ceases to apply.

Exploring internalised rhyme and alliteration is a better approach than the tired old template of end rhyme. That's not to say that I haven't written poetry using end rhyme myself - I do, but with discretion. My advice - read tons of poetry - then try writing free verse (which mimics the patterns of speech so is easier to handle) - then approach rhymed verse once you're more experienced.

H

[cacian]

Hi DieterM sorry do not mean to derail the post.
Je peux vous demander de traduire votre signature?

Ok about poetry and rhyming for I seem to do it naturally for some reasons and sometimes I come up with new to fit the rhym if there are none available.
I personally feel poetry to be free from any rules where the poet can just go with flow to enjoy the sounds of the words. This would mean that meaning might sit back down a level or is secondary for me.
Sometimes the beauty of langauge lies in the way words float and poetry is the only place where one can experiment just like music without words.
But that is me. Others will see it differently.
I am however terrible and writing without rhyming.
I tried but I just can't do it.

[DieterM]

@ hillwalker: Sorry, perhaps it didn't come across the way I'd have wanted it to - I do not complain about me not writing in rhymes. I'm really just too lazy for that ;-)) As for writing free verse, uhm, that's what I've been doing for quite a while now, and I'm quite content with free verse (accidentally posted a good 300 pieces on this forum, too). And don't tell my parents or friends I should read more - they hardly recognize me without a book half-covering my face, lol. Anyway, there has been that business lately concerning Rosana's poem, which I read and didn't comment on (I'm one of those lazy guys who only comment on poems or short stories they like, and even that only if there's time…), and I simply asked myself which attitude I had re. rhymes and poetry. That's the only reason I wrote this little piece above (I wanted it to be tongue-in-cheek - have I failed?). Btw, I'd love to read one of your rhyming poems, if you'd care to share! Wish you a splendid weekend, dear h.!

@ Cacian: thanks for sharing, and yes, I did notice that you were rather fond of rhymes, and that your poetry frees itself sometimes from "immediate" meaning. I hear you where the sound of words is concerned. The problem can be when one gets carried away by the flow of words to a point where grammar & structure disappear. Can leave the reader either shell-shocked or annoyed or frustrated, depending on his mood, I guess. Just an analogy: when I first came to France, you know who annoyed me most? Not those Parisians shooting their sentences like bullets at me while swallowing half of the syllables. No, it was people from the Carribean or Africa, because they'd talk just as fast but I didn't understand their accent! You know what I mean? You know you have the ability to understand because you've learned the language; yet you don't grasp because the person talking to you uses the elements in a way you still have to learn to decipher.

Oh, and now about the quote from the Hartleben-poem - I added it to my signature because it's a very short love poem, my favourite, wonderfully put into music by Alban Berg. It means "in the arms of love we blissfully fell asleep…". I'm sure you can find a translated version of this poem on the web; or try youtube if you want to listen to the song. Very short, very strange, yet every songle note corresponding a line, an image, an emotion you can find in the poem as well. Wonderful weekend to you, too!

[hillwalker]

Hi Dieter - I was merely adding to your opinion on rhyming rather than singling you out as an example of why rhyme should be handled with care. The advice was aimed at other readers who might visit your thread and have a different viewpoint. ;)

As for my own attempts at rhyme - here are a couple of oldies:

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=54915

or

http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=56125

H

PS - have just read your poem about washing powder. Love the message and the playful use of rhyme. The meter was a bit bumpy in places but that just adds to the charm of the piece.

[stlukesguild]

The obvious question... to me at least... is why do you choose to write in English if German is your "mother tongue"... the language in which you speak, write, think, and hear?

[DieterM]

@hill: thought so (re. your intention) but wanted to be sure. Just read your two examples (thanks for providing the links) and have thoroughly enjoyed the voyage!

@stlukesguild: long, long story that has to do with my re-tries to write. To not bore you to death: I stopped writing for full 13 years because I was too busy being unhappy in a relationship, thus downing 'em Gin-Tonics in buckets, putting the late Queen Mum to shame. After I left that insane relationship, I had to digest all that had happened (for the record: I was cheated on in the end, and I was the one who took bags, books and dog and went out of that disaster). And things came to me… in English! Go figure why. Not in French, the language I'm dreaming in and the language I hear everyday. Not in German, my "mother tongue". But in English. I'm sure it has something to do with finding the right distance to properly work on my "story" and put it into words. It's always easier to use swear words in a foreign language because we don't have the same feeling about them we tend to have in our mother language. Not that I was writing only swear words, but the distance was the same. Then I stumbled upon some teenage poems of mine; I translated them and posted them on this Forum, and got very encouraging feedback. So I stuck to English where my writing is concerned. Maybe one of the reasons I dearly love to write in English is that I love to read in English and have always preferred English (or American) books to French ones.

[Alexander III]

The obvious question... to me at least... is why do you choose to write in English if German is your "mother tongue"... the language in which you speak, write, think, and hear?

Why did so many Greek subjects of the Roman empire choose to write in Latin instead of greek?

[stlukesguild]

So are you suggesting, Alex, that if you were to ever be inspired enough to make a serious go at being a writer... perhaps an essayist ala Montesquieu or Rousseau... or a good decadent ala Walter Pater or Gabriele d'Annunzio... that you would turn your back on your native tongue and write in English... or perhaps Chinese... because they are the languages of money and power?

[AuntShecky]

Hi Dieter! Not only did your opening post pose a pertinent question, you presented it in a winning and witty style! If you hadn't told us that English wasn't your first language, few of us would have guessed. Yours fooly envies writers who are well-versed (pun intended) in languages other than their native tongue. (Speaking of puns, allow me to veer off-topic slightly to say that one of the delightful aspects of novelists like Nabokov and James Joyce is their penchant for multi-lingual word play.) Me, it's not even a issue of poking my toes into foreign waters; the best I can hope for is that on rare occasions an exotic drop or two might splash on me! I used to love Latin when I was in school (numerous Presidential administrations ago), but lo, these many decades later, I hardly remember a word (except for the standard Crossword Puzzle clue!)

Now, to address the "To rhyme or not to rhyme question." Hillwalker was absolutely right in his implication that rhyme has gotten a bad "rep" because so many beginning poets do it poorly. Hill is also right in his observation that rhyme is a key element in humorous poetry-- in fact in comic verse, rhyme is almost a requirement!

When they hear the word "rhyme," many people immediately think of end rhyme. But that's not the only game in town: we have at our disposal several types of rhyme: internal rhyme, "eye" rhyme, slant rhyme, assonance, consonance, etc. Don't forget the jewel of Old English and Middle English poetry: alliteration. When poetry began to appear in the civilizations even more ancient than that, rhyme was extremely important, since the poems were passed down from generation to generation via the oral tradition. Rhyme was a nifty mnemonic device to help folks remember the various lines.

Does that mean that rhyme (i.e. "end" rhyme) is passé in the twenty-first century? Not necessarily. The distinguished (and wonderfully accessible) American poet Miller Williams once said that rhyme is a useful tool for poets. If you want to practice every aspect of the craft, why wouldn't a poet want to use a good tool in the poet's toolbox?

Another thing: an aspect of poetry writing which I have observed some of our fellow versifiers ignore is appealing to the reader's ear. The imagery (executed by figurative language such as metaphor and simile) appeals to the mind's "eye." The way the verse appears on the page (arrangement of lines) can also bring a more literal kind of visual appeal. But what about making one's poem sound good? This is where rhyme -- carefully done-- can contribute to the overall texture of a poem.

How do we handle the seemingly difficult feature of rhyme? As Karl Krauss,* the expert whom you quoted, points out, the rhyme can't be banal ("mother" + "brother") but rather should enrich the poem's meaning, as in ("mother" + "smother") The reason so many beginning versifiers fail to produce effective rhymes is that they grab the "easy" choice -- any old word that
sounds the same -- rather than choosing the right word. It also helps when the two end words sound exactly the same. For instance, I know that young poets gush over the fact that they love Blake -- but yours fooly has never quite figured out just how he made "eye" rhyme with "symmetry." Likewise, how could the beloved Shelley-- a genius, through and through-- could rhyme the short "i" in "wind" (short "i" in the sense of the blowing air) with the long "i" in "behind"?

Another pitfall is that we have to remember that end rhyme only works in metered verse. Not only does the sound of the two rhyming words (the vowels) have to match exactly, so does the arrangement of syllables. Additionally, the operative syllable of both rhyming words has to be stressed. For example, the word "egret" does not rhyme with "forget,"
even though the final syllables in both words are spelled the same. When poets goof up their rhymes (as yours fooly has done too many times to recall), it's usually because the meter is off-- too many or too few syllables or the stress in the wrong place. Trying to rewrite the line so that the syllables match up with the use of awkward syntax -- mixing up the natural word order-- is called "hyperbaton" (the strange way Yoda speaks.) Sometimes trying to fit the rhyme in a badly-written line is called "wrenching"-which (I believe)means putting the stressed syllable in the wrong place. When the reader "hears" a bad line of verse, it's the equivalent of a clang or the proverbial fingernail on a blackboard.

(Exceptions, again, in humorous verse--such as that by Ogden Nash who mixed long, long lines with short ones, but they all rhymed. Good for laughs but not for so-called "serious" poetry.)

A good reason to use rhyme (yes, in the year 2012) presents itself when you want to try your hand at a type of formal verse that requires a prescribed rhyme scheme: sonnets (of course), villanelles, heroic couplets, the various types of rondeaus, etc. In my increasingly humble opinion, I think it would be good practice for beginning poets to try to write one of these formal verses once in a while: learn how to use meter, write a line that "scans," and use apt end rhymes. I'm not dismissing free verse -- which Robert Frost likened to "playing tennis without a net" --but I wonder if writing nothing but free verse might limit the poet in the long run. Of course, "free verse" when done right is not as easy as the term sounds. Even though it's "free' (lacking meter and rhyme) you still have to create a formal structure. It's more than a few pretty descriptions presented in broken-up lines of prose. Maybe the thought of having to learn about meter and rhyme intimidates young poets. I don't know. I do know that if you want to write poetry that's any good, it takes lots and lots of hard work. (I don't mean your own personal poetry, Dieter.) Once can't just dash something off in the name of "self-expression." (And by the bye, re: self-expression: it took yours fooly mucho number of years to realize that poetry is less about the former and mainly about the latter.)

One of my handy tools is The Oxford Companion to the English Language. As you stated in your opening thread, this reference book also states how "predictable" rhyme can "trivialize" a poem.

Additionally, the Oxford authors/editors state that there is "not a large range of rhymes for words as semantically important as God, spirit, and life" (though you and I might wonder why the poet wants to write about such abstractions --"No ideas but in things" said William Carlos Williams.)

The Oxford entry mentions the fact that rhyming words in poems in earlier centuries can give us clues as to how individual words were pronounced in the past. (Which may explain the "wind/behind" and "eye/symmetry" question, if there really was that much difference between pronunciation in the 19th century and now.) Another thing the book brings up is that certain dialects may rhyme words that so-called "standard" English does not. (The example that comes to mind is the lyrics to Country-and-Western music. My spouse likes to bring up the fact that singer Loretta Lynn may be the only woman in the world who rhymes "tired" with "hard.")

And finally to close this extremely-long reply, I'm returning to your observation about other languages in your opening posts. Despite the voluminous amount of vocabulary and synonyms, The Oxford folks say that English does not really have very many matching pairs of rhyming words, especially "as compared with Romance languages like Italian and Portuguese and with Scots."

But English does have rich, expressive sounds, methinks, if we're willing to look for them and learn how to use rhyme effectively.

*I knew I heard of Karl Kraus (1874-1936) before! He's one of the featured writers in a little quotation book I have. That book's editor considers Krauss a satirist, but he really was an astute social critic bringing to light many of the sad conditions of his era. Ironically, he alienated many folks and had few personal friends. He did manage to fire off some good lines,though.


Sexual enlightenment is justified insofar as girls cannot learn too soon how children do not come into the world. --Karl Kraus

[hillwalker]

I know that young poets gush over the fact that they love Blake -- but yours fooly has never quite figured out just how he made "eye" rhyme with "symmetry."

And the not-so-young.

I was taught that in Blake's day the word 'symmetry' was pronounced in such a way that it did rhyme with 'eye'. Not being around when he wrote it I can't confirm whether or not my teachers were right (though judging by the state of most of them, some were presumably his contemporaries).

H

[AuntShecky]

And the not-so-young.

I was taught that in Blake's day the word 'symmetry' was pronounced in such a way that it did rhyme with 'eye'. Not being around when he wrote it I can't confirm whether or not my teachers were right (though judging by the state of most of them, some were presumably his contemporaries).

H

Yeah-- I addressed that, with the Oxford Companion reference. The editors of that book say that rhyme helps us determine how words were pronounced
in earlier centuries. (Still-- that great "vowel shift" was back in medieval times, right, shortly after Chaucer?)

[zoolane]

I am personal do not enough about poetry to really comment but to point would be more challenge to rhyme poem?

More alliteration one?

And no I am not offer to try.

[Mutatis-Mutandis]

Rhyme is just like anything else: it's good if done well. I do think there is one advantage to using rhyme, though, and that is forcing someone to think of their writing as poetry. If you're writing a poem in rhyme, you can't just write a piece of prose with weird line breaks. You actually have to think about your writing in a different way. Will you produce good work? Maybe not, but it could be a good practice technique.

[YesNo]

As a reader, I love to hear poetry that rhymes, full of alliteration, metered rhythm and other sound effects. However, I expect all poetry, and prose, to be successful communication, that is, to be intelligible, whether it rhymes or not. I have noticed in reading free verse that too often poems written in this style don't mean anything. Such poems are no better than poorly written rhymed poetry.

[Alexander III]

So are you suggesting, Alex, that if you were to ever be inspired enough to make a serious go at being a writer... perhaps an essayist ala Montesquieu or Rousseau... or a good decadent ala Walter Pater or Gabriele d'Annunzio... that you would turn your back on your native tongue and write in English... or perhaps Chinese... because they are the languages of money and power?

That is a silly question, If I ever decide to apply myself with utter seriousness it shall be circumstances which decide what language I write in, not me.

[cacian]

The obvious question... to me at least... is why do you choose to write in English if German is your "mother tongue"... the language in which you speak, write, think, and hear?

His Stluke
Why not write in a different language? You should try it. It is a great experience.
One can chose to write in any langauge they wish because that is the only thing free left for one to do without having to be told to follow rules laws and other hefty routines of life.
Language should not be a barrier on the contrary the more different languages the more incentive there is for one to write. I find a greata motivation to write in English.
I know it is not correct and not up to a native speakers standard but that is part of the fun to be able to experience different prospectives.
A bit like dyslexia one is aware it is beyond's one's control but by making 'innocent errors' it means others like your self get involved and showing the correct ways. Poetry is also about interactions between people not just for reading.
I did all my studies reading writing and speaking in French now I chose to write in English because it helps me develop my language methodologies.
My poems are not perfect and they are not written by native speakers but there is room for those whose English is a second language.
It is a different notion and it is good for someone who wishes to read non native writers why not?
Why limit myself when I can stretch.
A poem should be free from rules and regulations.
One should be able to jot down words without they are being reprimanded for it.
I do not fancy vilanelles anymore becaue I find them tiresome and undecipherable. They have been around too long.
There is more to creation then sticking to a four sided frame.
Not following a rule is following a rule an own rule that is.
I seek positivity in everything that is better then optimism.

[DieterM]

It's funny to see we have a side-thread going on here that hasn't got anything to do with the main question I've asked, and which was whether we should still try to write rhyming poetry or not. I wish to thank above all Aunt Shecky who has yet again given a long, well thought answer (I don't remember if I've read it somewhere in one of your posts or not, but can it be you've been a teacher? I always find your posts very didactic and structured… I mean it as a compliment) and provided enough interesting material to mull over during the long and cold winter that seems to knock on my windows already. Of course, what is nice (and what I had been hoping for, too) are other, shorter answers like zoolane's, Mutatis' and YesNo's because they offer personal views on the subject.

To all of you, yes, I've found it challenging to try and find rhymes. I've found it a very good exercise, too. But it did take some of my momentum and some of the immediacy of my writing process. Is that a good thing, a bad thing? I haven't made up my mind yet. Oh, I'm sorry, too, but I have to correct my own, initial post by confessing that I've done another rhyming piece once, which I've posted on this Forum (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showthread.php?t=65402) as well, so that'll make two. I don't know if I'll repeat the deed; it has to feel right, you know, I have to sense that it's necessary for a poem.

And I have the feeling that there's one thing we agree upon, here: it's what a poem does to us as readers that matters most. Some poems achieve a reaction within us by using rhyme; others by using great content in thin form; others combine both form and content and make us ask why their authors aren't published and rich yet ;-)

As for the side-thread, which includes posts by Alexander III, cacian and stlukesguild, I didn't take the latter's first intervention as a personal or nasty attack, but rather as a question born out of curiosity (and as I'm quite curious myself, I didn't mind at all), that's why I tried to answer as honestly (and shortly) as possible. His question, even if it hasn't got anything to do with the subject at hand here, is a pertinent one, too. I did blog in French before and had, let's see, three reactions in three years? Is that why I started blogging in English? Because I wanted a bit more feedback? Surely that is part of the answer, yes. Did I succeed? Hell, yes, I did get much feedback, advice, help, on my blog as well as here.

Now do I write in English because it has become THE international language forced upon us whether we like it or not? I don't think so. I've always loved that language, I've always loved English literature. And there are things you can say or write in English that you can't express in, say, German or French as succinctly and still with as much impact and force. Hm, anyway, maybe I should lie down on a couch, doctor, and tell you all about my childhood and my dreams… lol

Whatever – I'm glad we have not only one, but two debates going on here. That's why I love this LitNet space. Which, do I have to underline the obvious, happens to be… in English.

[xtianfriborg13]

That's the problem with rhyme - it lends itself to humorous poetry better than to serious stuff, simply because the reader is almost encouraged to guess what comes next. And finding an unusual rhyming word to surprise us is with is as much part of the exercise as expressing anything remotely enlightening.

The cause of rhyme has not been helped by William Topaz McGonagall (wonderful name) - a Scots 'writer' who strangled his creations at birth by driving rhyme through every poem like a forty-tonne truck through a garden party.

Another problem is that many aspiring writers, especially those dipping their toes into the water for the very first time, feel obliged to write in rhyme. They confuse rhyme with poetry - rather like confusing Art with nudes (but much less enjoyable). In turn, forcing a rhyme also results in twisted syntax or back-to-front writing. This produces efforts that are so painful to witness that the word 'poetry' ceases to apply.

Exploring internalised rhyme and alliteration is a better approach than the tired old template of end rhyme. That's not to say that I haven't written poetry using end rhyme myself - I do, but with discretion. My advice - read tons of poetry - then try writing free verse (which mimics the patterns of speech so is easier to handle) - then approach rhymed verse once you're more experienced.

H

I've been reading your comments from other posts and, God, I love your insighful replies! I really learn a lot reading your comments. Thanks!

[stlukesguild]

cacian- Why not write in a different language? You should try it. It is a great experience.

Is it?

I find a greata motivation to write in English. I know it is not correct and not up to a native speakers standard but that is part of the fun to be able to experience different prospectives.

Again... is it a great experience... for the readers? I could certainly put my high-school German to work and write some rather juvenile and grammatically incorrect poems that I doubt would have any merit whatsoever.

The strongest work by most artists is that achieved by employing the tools and techniques with which the artist is most intimately acquainted... and has the greatest degree of mastery. There are exceptions. Samuel Beckett became a masterful writer in French... but then again he wrote and spoke French fluently... but then again, Beckett formally studied French, wrote a famous essay on Proust, and spent much of his life living, speaking, and writing French.

One can chose to write in any langauge they wish because that is the only thing free left for one to do without having to be told to follow rules laws and other hefty routines of life.
Language should not be a barrier on the contrary the more different languages the more incentive there is for one to write.

And you have made formal surveys proving this? Why would I be more motivated to write just because I could speak 7 or 10 languages than if I could only speak one?

A bit like dyslexia one is aware it is beyond's one's control but by making 'innocent errors' it means others like your self get involved and showing the correct ways.

But do dyslexia or grammatical errors add to the merits of your writing? Many would question this.

My poems are not perfect and they are not written by native speakers but there is room for those whose English is a second language.
It is a different notion and it is good for someone who wishes to read non native writers why not?
Why limit myself when I can stretch.
A poem should be free from rules and regulations.
One should be able to jot down words without they are being reprimanded for it.

You seem to be equating incompetence... awkwardness... clumsiness... or a lack of proficiency with freedom and mastery, proficiency, dexterity and virtuosity with constraint and limitation.

It's funny to see we have a side-thread going on here that hasn't got anything to do with the main question I've asked, and which was whether we should still try to write rhyming poetry or not.

Honestly... I believe that AuntShecky's response said most of that which I would have to say. I don't see any "shoulds" in art. If you believe that rhyme has merit and purpose in your writing... toward that which you aim... then it is fine for you. If not, not. Rhyme is just one tool in the toolbox. If you feel the need or desire to use it... by all means do. Being "contrarian" myself, I suspect that the minute someone suggests that "You can't do X" or "X is outdated" that is when "X" is likely to become quite attractive to me.