Printable View
Right, Shakespearean sonnets written in iambic pentameter with proper rhyme schemes are for n00bs, real skill and a dedicated study of poetry is only reflected in non-rhyming free verse.*Quote:
Originally Posted by Haunted
That's what happens when people take themselves seriously. Sometimes it's funny, in this case it's tedious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Darnay
*sarcasm
Did I say not to study rhyming poems? You never stopped twisting things I said just to be confrontational.Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
If you don't dress yourself like someone from 400 years ago, why would you want to write like one?
Shakespeare was great, so was Chaucer. But the world keeps evolving. Rhymes belongs to a time when people wrote with a feather. Now we use ballpens, keyboards and virtual keyboards. To see what poetry looks like since the 20th century, I recommend T.S. Eliot, or Alan Ginsberg and Charles Bukowsky (sp)
There is a small handful of what I considered "Litnet Greats" who can deliver a few rhyming charmers. My comment was for those inexperienced students of poetry writing who use rhymes like they didn't know the world has changed. If you look at their work, rhymes are nothing but crutches. They write around rhymes when they really should write from their heart. As a result their stuff is heartless, meaningless and pretentious.
- - - - - -
To those whining about getting criticized for their works, they really should read this before they post: ***PLEASE read before posting your poems***. Those who are in denial, here's the gist of it:
Logos: If you are going to post your own poems here, please remember that you are opening yourself up to the criticism and opinions of others which might not agree with your own.
Scher: I would like to draw everyone's attention to the fact that unless you are willing to accept negative criticism as well as the praise offered, you should refrain from posting your work in this section of the Forum.
People who know Hill know he is a great writer AND critic and his comments are valued widely. Personally he's spot on in regards to my stuff. The person who portrayed him as "cyber bully" IS a cyber bully himself, scaring off everyone who dares to disagree with his writing.
Hill, I hope you come back, Litnet needs you! As always you can say anything about my stuff, I can take it. lol
I don't get the whole attitude against rhyme. I love rhyme in poetry! Still, this site does have some members who have what seems to be an unreasonable bias against rhyme. Hell, I wrote a rhyming poem and received a smarmy comment from our venerated hillwalker.
It takes a tonne of skill to make the rhyme fit the ideas and I wonder whether some people dislike rhyme because they are lazy and would rather not bother. Poetry can rhyme or not rhyme, both have their positive sides. Rhyme can be powerful, hence why song-writers take full advantage of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mutatis-Mutandi
Agreed. Writing to a rhyme and rhythm is difficult. I will never understand why some folks who like things a certain way have to pronounce their way as the only worthwhile way.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
No, you said not to post them here because no one would take him seriously. Hawk posted a rhyming poem a couple of days ago that you gushed over, and a skillful use of rhyme and language trumps overly obscure (to the point of being almost meaningless) free-verse poems about death and middle-class depression in my books, which is apparently what people "take seriously" around this stupid sub-forum. I'm not just trying to be confrontational, I take honest issue with what you said, you're parroting a modern sentiment which I've heard many times from the lazier "creative" writing students in my university and it always really bugs me. You are effectively closing people's minds before they even start. Statements like "no one takes rhyme seriously" inhibits growth (also, it isn't just Shakespeare who wrote sonnets, the English sonnet type is simply named after him - implying that rhyme is as dated as the feather quill suggests that you don't often read or study poetry). Learning how to employ rhyme in an effective manner is one of the most impressive things that a poet can accomplish, they're never going to learn anything if you just tell them not to try right off the bat.Quote:
Originally Posted by Haunted
Hahaha, my boyfriend just read the sentence "rhymes belongs to a time when people wrote with a feather" over my shoulder and asked (and I quote) "who the f*ck are you talking to?"
The rhyme is dead in poetry. It died in the last century.
Absolute tosh. Look at the three poets who were mentioned earlier, Allen Ginsberg and Charles Bukowski are poets whose works have little poetic merit, and weren't even necessarily trying to produce work that did. While T.S Eliot frequently used rhyme innovativel, just not throughout an entire poem. Also referencing Eliot is slightly redundant because was a classicist anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfLarsen
The reason rhyme is no longer so present is because 'rhyme is dead' but because it has fallen out of poplularity, a truly innovative poet would seek to restore it. Contemporary poets seem to either want to be Bukowski or Plath - it's lazy. Poetry can be written in many different forms but asserting that rhyme is now too unreachable is regressive and narrow-minded.
Basically, this:''Learning how to employ rhyme in an effective manner is one of the most impressive things that a poet can accomplish''
My initial response to this comment: "what does class have anything do with it! That's ridiculous." Then my mind slapped me, I realized that I need some coffee.....yup...Quote:
Originally Posted by Catamite
Anyway. Rhyme is not the problem with poetry. It is when certain poets (both on this site and in "the real world") decide to emphasize rhyme over content and meaning. A poem can rhyme or not, if it has meaning and/or aesthetic value - it is good. If not - it's not.
Well put. Empty rhymes = empty free verse. Change the adjective, not the form.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Darnay
Very well put, catamite. I'm not even going to add my two cents.
To each his own, concerning the varied opinions on whether rhyme is useful or dead or dying. It's how that. Opinion is expressed, and in a literary forum, it would seem possible that those opinions could be expressed wittly, cleverly, seriously, but never, I would hope, in a mean spirited manner. Remember to debate the issues, and not take issue with the people.
A statement of conformity.Quote:
Originally Posted by WolfLarsen
Quote:
Originally Posted by JuniperWoolf
Yes, Rhyme is fine but it is hard to acomplish well. Which is why so many are opposed to it, because Rhyme tends to emphasize the greatness or mediocrity of a poem.
And as almost everything written is mediocre, hardly anyone wants to emphasize their mediocrity.
So yes there is a point to not taking rhyme seriously, because if one uses rhyme in a peom there is a 99.9% chance it will simply empahsize the mediocrity of their poem
I must agree with Darcy, that is just a conformist statement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Darcy88
This I believe, was understood, even specifically stated. The point made was that despite the difficulty of rhyme, it should still be pursued. It should be pursued not only as a benefit to the poet, but so that old forms used for modern purposes, and do not die. And like Darcy, claiming that 'rhyming is dead' is conformity - even more ridiculous coming from an 'innovative' poet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexander III