Misconceptions of Structured Poetry

includes a few words on free verse too

Disclaimer: This is not meant to insult free verse poets in any way. Please read to the very end.  

 

In my time here on the cafe, I've come across many poets who prefer free verse over structured poetry. Of course, there's nothing wrong with this, but I find that such a preference is often accompanied by a few misconceptions regarding structured poetry. Thought I'd address a few:   

 

1. It Takes Away a Poet's Uniqueness  

No, it doesn't. Structured verse actually allows more uniqueness by providing a variety of options for a writer to choose from. One who has mastered a structured form can easily add his or her own unique touch. Compare the elegant words of "Woodsprite" by Richard Jenkins* to the more neurotic ones of "Mad Girl's Love Song" by Sylvia Plath―both are villanelles, but both retain a uniqueness in style and expression completely distinct from one another.   

  

2. It Causes Poets to Force Their Words To the Form  

Like any craft, skill in poetry requires practice, dedication, time, and effort. Mastery of a structured form may cause one to force their words at first, but this shouldn't keep one from composing in it. Would it make sense to quit basketball after performing poorly at the first practice? Would it make sense to quit writing if your first effort produced a not-so-desirable result? Of course not. Even writing free verse for the first time can be difficult. Structured poetry, like any craft, has difficulties that one must overcome, but that doesn't make it an unworthy pursuit.   

  

3. It's Old―Most Poets Use Free Verse  

This one's somewhat true. The majority of poems composed nowadays are written in free verse. That, however, doesn't make it unimportant. Most (or perhaps all) accomplished poets of the modern age use the conventions of rhythm and meter in free verse. Walt Whitman, sometimes called the "father of free verse,"* was perfectly competent in structured forms (read "O Captain My Captain"). I doubt his free verse would have been so rhythmical if he weren't. Billy Collins, another well-known poet who typically writes in free verse, once advised poets to study the origins of poetry, claiming that it causes one to "internalize the rhythms of English verse."* Sylvia Plath also composed in structured forms. Along with the villanelle mentioned earlier, she wrote two loose interpretations of the terza rima: "Sow" and "The Pheasant."* 

  

4. Why Worry About Structure―It's the Message that Matters.  

The message does matter, but the way you convey that message is equally (if not more) important. When used properly, structured forms can enhance a poem's message. For example, in Paul Laurence Dunbar's "We Wear the Mask," the repetition (characteristic of the rondeau form) emphasizes the poem's theme of hidden emotion. Dorothy Parker's "Resume" owes much of its ironically lighthearted tone to its bouncy rhythm and rhyme. Forms such as the villanelle and kyrielle are great for emphasizing particular expressions, while forms such as the limerick and senryu are great for lighthearted verse. In short, there's a form to fit virtually any mood, tone, impact, ect. a poet is going for.

  

5. Structured Poetry Isn't Natural  

Poetry itself, whether it be free verse or structured verse, isn't natural. It isn't natural to speak in metaphor or imagery, but that doesn't make a poem any less beautiful. The beauty of any art is in how it makes unnatural modes of expression seem second nature. To master a craft is to take the craft and make it natural. Being that it's like this in every art-form, it puzzles me why anyone would use this argument against structured poetry.  

 

Author's Comment: If you choose to write in free verse because it's your preferred style, that's perfectly fine, but don't let any of the above reasons keep you from writing structured poetry, especially if you enjoy reading it. The same goes for poets who only use structured verse ... writing unstructured poetry has its benefits. Give it a try.  

 

For those who think that free verse is merely random, unorganized thoughts: It's not. Writing free verse is like playing the piano―it's easy to do, but difficult to master. Free verse offers a totally different set of challenges than structured verse: one must work to find their own form and their own rhythm and make it work to express a thought. Just as anyone can jot a few rhyming words on the page and call it a structured poem, anyone can write a few disjointed lines and call it free verse. It takes true skill to write something that gives the reader an emotional experience, no matter what style of poetry you use. 

 

* "Woodsprite" by Richard Jenkins: http://www.writerscafe.org/writing/RichardJ/1584637/ 

 

* Personally, I consider Walt Whitman one of the most musical free verse poets I've ever read … the man had a great ear for rhythm. 

 

* A link to the Billy Collins' interview: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eP9reBY7EwM

* I say "loose" interpretation because Plath uses many consonant and slant rhymes throughout.

Author's Note

Something I thought I'd share ... all opinions are welcomed in the review section.
Constructive criticism is welcomed and encouraged.
Feel free to point out typos ... I'm sure there are some I missed.
Any more misconceptions you can think of? Tell me about them. I may add to this.

Reviews

[Bala Gorthi]

Your write is enlightening and I agree with every word of what you have written. As far as the soul of of the work is concerned that comes out better and beautifully in structured poetry for me. I agree with your fifth point even more.
But, for me every art work is a creation in itself with some emotion or beauty or thought. So being pro or against doesn't sound sound to me. As beings, we all are unique so I respect people's preferences equally.
I appreciate your effort for removing certain misconceptions that some have against structured work. So thank you for writing and sharing this write.
P.S. I myself love reading and writing different forms and for me, all are equally challenging and enjoyable including the free verse.

[William Liston]

It was a pleasure, Bala.
Thank you for reviewing and sharing your thoughts.

I don't believe that the soul of a work comes out better in structured poetry though ... that depends a lot on the writer and the reader. For me, it does, but for many poets, it doesn't.

Thank you for sharing you post script too. I also find free verse quite challenging.

[Bala Gorthi]

You are welcome William.
You are right.I just realise that yes, you are right. It depends on the forte of the writer and preference of the reader. Thank you for making me realise. So I have edited the word only in my review.

[...]

I always find funny when people point out on free poetry like on something what is not worth it. We have free poetry here almost hundred years . But I find it here so many old mind writers who even know who was Charles Baudeilere or Boris Vian. I try explain why i chose to write in free verse. When i wrote it in old classic rhyme style stanza. I find my writing is like poetry for kids , i lost what i want to try to say. I copy myself i was really confuse . Then I read it Sylvia Plath poems. I saw there is meaning and there is freedom . There is everything what i search for. I don't mean this is best style what you can get. But it's best style for me. Each person have own ways. We should respect that. Little open are stoned mine and try see something good in what we don't like .




Bad reviews are important like raining in New Patagonia . IRISH MURDOCH.

[Stanley R. Teater]

As a writer and avid reader of free verse I enjoyed this very much. Your points are dead-on.

[William Liston]

Thank you for stopping by, Stanley.

[Kathy Van Kurin]

William Liston,
"Misconceptions of structure.."
Your analysis of poetry was so good for me! You know the enjoyment of pondering life and trying to be in its beauty has been so nice. Getting these things on a page is rewarding and enjoyable.
The list of input you gave in this one was educational and motivational. As time goes by I can continue to learn.
Thanks so much for your teaching.
Blessings, Kathy

[William Liston]

Thank you for your kind words, Kathy. I'm glad you could find this enlightening!

[Carol Cashes]

"...it's easy to do, but difficult to master." Just told another poet on this site whose free verse poetic tutorial on how to write free verse was enlightening - and equally frightening! Many try, but I've only read a few who have mastered this "non-form" form. I will leave it to those who minds wax in more poetic language than my own. I have learned, since I've been here, how to recognize you masters of language and abstract thought. I'll be looking up the works you cite, and looking up "kyrielle" and "villanelle". Your words are encouraging to one who might want to try their hand...I will wait...and learn. Thank you for a clear and direct lecture.

[William Liston]

I'm glad this could be enlightening to you, Carol.
I agree with what you've said: only few can write free verse with mastery, just as it is with any other artform.

I'm also glad that you plan to look up the kyrielle and villanelle.

Here's my favorite villanelle: https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poetrymagazine/poems/detail/89008

Here's an example of a kyrielle: http://www.writerscafe.org/writing/RichardJ/1673658/

Thank you for reviewing.

[John Alexander McFadyen]

Ok guilty as charged,
I bow my head in shame
knowing fellow poets
look at me in scorn.
But bless me Father
for I have sinned.
I have tried and tried
to write, construct
and offer structured poetry
but I have slipped
back into the mortal
sinner's realm
of words spewed
in open emotion
upon the page.
no rhyme, no reason
simply a heart and mind
where tight form
is de rigeur.
Where my simple heart
cannot express
so freely
in the chains of form.

[J. J. Nightingale]

I hear you !!!!!.... Great Comment..

[John Alexander McFadyen]

why thank you!

[J. J. Nightingale]

You are welcome...

[William Liston]

We poets are a special breed -
to each his unique way.
Some splatter thoughts upon the page
to get across their say,
and others spew with mocking wit -
a quick, amusing read,
and others throw their throbbing hearts
upon the page to bleed.

What matters most, of all of this -
we capture shades of life,
expressing love or bitter pain
or hatred coaxed with strife;
for every poem's like a star
that yearns to beam its hue,
and stays unique because of those
like You and You and You!

[John Alexander McFadyen]

Applause!.........

[Phill Oz O'fee]

Most poets today write free verse, which is open to pattern and is recognized as nonconforming and rhymeless verse. If you are looking for free verse examples, then Walt Whitman is your guy. He is known as the father of free verse English poetry. (And other examples are the King James Bible version of The Psalms and The Song of Solomon)
Other various forms of avant-garde poetry related to free verse are surrealism, concrete, and language poetry.
Formal poetry or metrical verse follows “rules” regarding stanza length and meter or rhyme patterns. There are several traditional, commonly-known types of formal poetry.
I believe if it’s good – the composition will succeed or fail by the merits of the written work. Both styles are ‘gems’ in their own right.
That's for the share William ... !

[William Liston]

Thank you for sharing your insight, and I agree, both styles of poetry are "gems" in their own right.
Your words are much appreciated.

[CAPOLAVORO]

Hi William. I really like how you try and educate us about the importance of knowing structured poetry more and be aware of its good side in improving our skills and techniques as aspiring poets. I think you discussed all of them very well and I do not have anything to add. As for me, I am afraid to try structured poetry before because I am afraid to commit mistakes as I believe it should be perfect and all. Then I realized, free verse is just the same as that. It is just all about knowledge, passion and commitment that one pours out into poetry. Poetry deserves to be discovered and studied more and more from history to present. :)

[William Liston]

It seems that you've grasped the purposes of this write quite well.
Thank you for reviewing and sharing your thoughts on poetry ... they're greatly appreciated.

[CAPOLAVORO]

You are very much welcome. :)

[mattavelli]

William, I agree with everything you've said here. 
I think there are two kinds of poets. One writes for himself. The other writes for the reader. I think they disagree a lot. Haha

[William Liston]

Thank you for reviewing Matt.
I think you forgot about the one in the middle. Personally, I'm a bit of both: By writing poetry, I am able to both satisfy myself and the reader, which in turn increases my overall satisfaction.
Which type of poet do you consider yourself? I think I know the answer, but I'm curious as to what you'll respond with ...

[mattavelli]

You see, that puts you in the second group. 
We take thoughts we think witty and lay them out pretty and hope that the readers agree. 
Meter, rhyme, repetition, those are bits of presentation, gifts to the readers. Sure, I write as a hobby, for the fun of the making, but always for the readers. Besides, playing picky with syllables is an excuse for being slow. Haha

[keith]

wow, could you have a higher opinion of yourself?
writings are a 'gift' .... no no no they are but offerings ... offerings of one's message not mandate
you may choose to w***e yourself by managing your words only for the audience but know that some refuse to play such infantile games
Haha back at ya ...

[mattavelli]

Agh, a troll, let's hide. Haha

[William Liston]

I don't see how focusing/practicing skills such as rhyme, meter, rhythm, etc. can be considered "[whoring oneself] ... for the audience."
If I were a singer who practiced keeping my notes in tune or a sculpter who practiced keeping my sculptures even and symetrical, would it be "whoring oneself the audiece" or simply "improving one's skill." I think most would agree with the latter. Why would studying/learning the techniques in poetry be any different?

[keith]

well, it appears that your defensive nature has caused you to respond to a comment not directed to you
there are a few hints within my comment ...
"Haha" ... "writings are a 'gift' " ... "managing your words only for the audience "
all references to the comment by the bobblehead
your commentary is well written, somewhat biased ... but you did give free verse a shout out!
no sir, my comment was far from being an insult to you or your offering

catering to a specific order and targeted audience is whoring ... not much more than cookie cutter crap

[mattavelli]

Rage on! Haha
You make my rhymes feel so dirty.

[William Liston]

Hahahahahahahah

[J. J. Nightingale]

angry buddha guy..... I AGREE TOTALLY !!!!!!!

[mattavelli]

Really, an infantile w***e?

[J. J. Nightingale]

LOL...................