Poetry is Ordinary, Prose is Sublime

I hear no words,

I see them instead.

Musical vocals

to my ear,

lyrics are dead.

Poetry is ordinary

Prose is sublime.

Don’t call me on the phone. Write me a message. Never listen to speeches, I read them instead.

My Personal Poetry Challenge

I’m not a poet. I’m not a writer. I tell stories. (See “Why I Write.”) My technical papers and essays tell stories. Until recent months my understanding of poetry could fill a matchbook typed in 12-point font. Now my understanding of poetry might cover a paper cup, if I was inclined to scribble on a paper cup.

Soon after joining #fridayflash, comments appeared mentioning poetry in “Ghost Curtain,” “A Grave Giant,” and “Darkness Was Her Dress.” In “A Grave Giant” comments Mark said, “I’m curious as to whether you also write poetry?” No.

I write how I write (tell.) Not until I wrote “Mother Dove” did I consider rhythm and rhyme. I wanted rhyme in the dialogue supported by rhythm.

After “Mother Dove” I became curious. Could I write a poem?

I began my study with familiar poets: Frost, Whitman, Poe, Dante, Homer. I tried new sources: Ashberry, Baudelaire. Four things I dislike in poetry:

Unimaginative content.
So laden in metaphor mud, I must dissect it like a riddle.
Primary goal is constructing pretty words, nearly no content.
Very passive writing: expresses weakness, lack of confidence.

I also suspect that English is a horrid language for poetry. English is clunky and cumbersome. Listen to Italian. Beautiful. Don Quixote is a fantastic read in Spanish, the English version is digestible.

I set a goal to write the best poem I could within a week. The result is a stew of unimaginable horror dipped in toxic syrup.

Poems I Love

I’m a visual person. I draw pictures. My stories are full of imagery. This is not to say I like visual poetry, but there is something visual. I don’t hear lyrics. I hear music. The poetry I enjoy tells a story with rhythm. Yes, I see rhythm.

So few of them, I can easily list the poems I enjoy.

“Annabel Lee” by Edgar Allan Poe.

Rhyme is nice, but look at the rhythm, structure, and story. This poem is visual, active. It rolls off the tongue. Incredible.

“The Raven” by Poe.

Visual, very active. And the story is a hoot.

“Bitten” by Amy Taylor

Go read.

Done? Okay. Taylor’s style caught my interest. Her other poems are similar in structure, but “Bitten” has something special I couldn’t identify at first. The weakness: story lacks imagination, a familiar romantic vision of vampires (metaphor*.) The strengths: Amy Taylor writes bold. Look at those visuals! Rhythm and images meld together. Taylor has an ability to control pace and rhythm using a symphony of line breaks, commas, and word choices, a style throughout all her poems. So, why do I like “Bitten” over her other poems, some of them with better stories? I spent nearly a day studying Taylor’s structure.

Look again. “Bitten” visually has bite. Look at the shape. The visual layout supports the images brewing as the reader consumes the story. Notice the timing of your eye movement as you read. That’s music! This timing harmonizes with the rhythm within the words. This piece is a set of visual signatures complementing pace, rhythm, and imagery. If Amy Taylor could accomplish this same harmony with a stronger story… I would breath it in, drink it up into euphoric bliss!

Conclusion: I see poetry, same as a story

Amy Taylor asked readers to give their interpretation of “Pegasus.” I cheated, in a way. I read poetry like I read anything else. Each metaphor has multiple interpretations, too many for my taste. I saw the author’s intention near the end once I spotted a common set of metaphorical meaning. It’s like mathematics!

I see the story.

Read the first paragraphs of The Gunslinger by Stephen King. It’s active, visually beautiful, elegant prose. And one hell of a story start.

Want to write a great poem? Start by telling your story with confidence. Write well. As long as poets sacrifice quality, write with weakness, care only about form—for me:

Poetry is ordinary. Please, tell me a story.

Tell me your story. What do you hear? How do you see?

I appreciate your views even if you prefer your poetry ordinary.

When I refer to romantic vision of vampire* I mean the popular modern view introduced by Bram Stoker including metaphors for passion, s3x, violent er0.ticism. The romantic movement began with Vampyre by Pilodori.

____________________________________________________

I thank the following for inspiration, resources, and increasing my knowledge:

Ad Astra, The Bricoleur, Mindspeak, Odds and Ends and Scattered Bits

Thanks Amy, Mark, Carrie, and Megan. You write fine poetry.

shadowsinstone

Poetry actually came before the storytelling. Much like you admit to for poetry, I had to train myself “not” to rhyme or be prosey. I still fall into that trap to this day. Cheers.
http://twitter.com/adastrapoetry Amy J Taylor

The first stories were told in verse, I suppose – songs, Norse sagas, medieval epics. In fact, epics are the sort of poems I feel are supposed to tell these 'stories' (for eg. 'The Raven' is an epic of sorts – I love that too btw!).
But I rarely think of my own poetry as telling a story. To me, it's life commentary, and David's absolutely right – that's ordinary, because life's 'ordinary'. Poetry describes feelings and situations you (reader & poet) can relate to, precisely because they're common…in some way or another, you've shared them.

Thanks so much for including me in this, I feel I learn a lot about being a poet from hearing readers' responses.
markkerstetter

Well stated Amy. Occasionally I write a narrative poem, but for the most part the strength of poetry does not reside in storytelling. The strength of a poem is a discrete moment, a very particular moment that situates a state of mind/emotion or one's orientation to a particular thing in the world. This moment may (does not have to, but may) be very small and mundane.

Poems do not need a profusion of metaphors, meter and rhyme, or “literary” language to do their work. They don't need to be beautiful or exciting or energetic if the moment doesn't merit those qualities. A poem need only be true to the moment it is dedicated to. Practicing poetry is constant attendance to the world.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

That's what I need, more training. I can't get away from bad rhyme or blabbering on. Later this year I'll give it another shot at writing a poem free of toxic sewage.

Thanks, Carrie.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

Look at Dante, Milton, Poe, and Frost. Why are these household names? Why do their poems capture us? Why do we hold onto them?

Frost's “Dust of Snow” describes a singular moment. Does it not tell a story? Is it's strength in the moment or the telling? Is it the confident writing? The movement?

Setting personal preferences aside, the tickle of pretty words or personal interpretation, what makes a poem truly great? Are they not the same qualities that make prose great?

Practicing martial arts is constant attention to the world. Working astrophysics is constant attention to the world. Writing is constant attention to the world.

Thanks, Mark. I will give these points thoughtful consideration.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

Fantastic response! Yes, before writing verse, rhyme, rhythm allowed easier passing of knowledge. Although, my memory doesn't work that way. I remember better by seeing it.

Can moments- 'life commentary' -tell stories?

Thanks Amy, and for letting me poke at your poem.
markkerstetter

I was speaking of my own approach to poetry. Yes, the poets you mention tell stories, and certainly the stories they tell are a part of what makes them good. Some of my favorite poems tell stories. But there's a whole world of poetry produced in the modern era that does all sorts of things other than narrative.

The question 'what makes a poem great?' – wholly apart from subjective experience – is difficult for me to answer, my brain just doesn't work that way. I can justify my preferences, but in the end that's all they are. Poetry isn't science.

I doubt the writers you mention are quite the household names you suggest, and if you asked someone why they like Milton the answer you're likely to get will be, “huh?”

I take your point that anything done well is constant attention to the world. I'm with you all the way there. By the same token, any activity, including poetry, can be done poorly and thus blindly.
http://twitter.com/adastrapoetry Amy J Taylor

The moments (or little 'life commentaries') themselves, if you wish to see them that way, are both tiny 'stories' and parts of much larger 'stories' (or lives!). And you don't need to fully understand the 'big story' in order to share the little experience…because, as a poet, I'm just trying to 'affect' you with an instance.

For me, that's what makes a poem great – did you FEEL when you read it? Did you read it over, because you wanted to FEEL THAT SAME FEELING AGAIN? Then it was a 'great' poem! I don't care if what you felt was the 'correct' thing to feel, just that you did!

So, you're welcome; poke all you like! The best thing about poetry is that all interpretations/opinions differ…& look at the result of those differences – discussion, debate, thought, inspiration, and hopefully, growth as writers. Isn't that what it's all about?
marcnash

I'm caught between the two, even though I don't actually read any poetry. My prose shares poetry's approach to metaphor, precise language splicing and rhythm. It's not overly concerned with telling stories. Does prose have to tell a story? That's a whole other debate.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

More specific: “household name” status of prior decades no longer exists due to increase in media. Mickey Mouse may stand alone. We must look at recognizability relative to others. If we extrapolate since 1950s, it is fair to say that these authors and their best known works follow the recognizability curve. Terms like “Milton” or “Paradise Lost” still show up often in movies, TV, secondary schools, and casual conversations.

I chose these authors, because I recognized them years before I started reading any literature. These names are recognizable among non-readers.

If someone wants to argue these names aren't highly recognizable…

At iRoSF, Rusch in “What's Louder than Noise” makes the point that it's now impossible for any writer to become a household name.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

Thanks. Yes, another debate. Some enjoy slice-of-life writing. I think it makes for a great exercise, focusing on the events, getting it just right.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

Thanks for your input.

Mark makes two interesting points. “Poetry isn't science” and many modern poets don't bother with stories.

Amy's points: “Little stories” and feeling.

Is there science in poetry?

Why don't more modern poets include stories? Even “little stories.” I suspect poets of older generations also practiced poetry without narrative.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

Thanks for your input.

Mark makes two interesting points. “Poetry isn't science” and many modern poets don't bother with stories.

Amy's points: “Little stories” and feeling.

Is there science in poetry?

Why don't more modern poets include stories? Even “little stories.” I suspect poets of older generations also practiced poetry without narrative.
http://www.dracotorre.com/blog/ David G Shrock

Nearly forgotten Lord Byron. Thanks to @KateSherrod for reminding me. Note to future me: Review.
http://www.wordwebbing.com netta

I agree that poetry needs to tell a story. I have not been a big fan of poetry – I have developed a passion for flash fiction, which to me, is very similar to poetry. Word placement on the page is important, and I think a lot of flash authors forget this.

My favorite poet is Frost. And you hit it right on the head with the reference to King's Gunslinger. It's the rhythm of the words coupled with story and vision – that's what makes any piece of writing memorable.