/lit/ - Literature

Is all about the proper timing

>free verse

Man's curse

>>17686731
>he writes posts without rhyming
>he posts jokes with poor timing

>>17686778
>thinking rupi kaur = free verse

>>17686803
I'm not very good at miming

>>17686810
Maybe try rock climbing

>>17686731
feels over reels
now go fuk urself

>>17686818
Uhhmmm Wyoming?

>>17686803
Shut the hell up, stop whining.

OP you're a genius
i never knew that
poems with rhymes
are better in contrast
to rhymes with deep and personal emotion
i think my issue comes with lack of devotion
i just think its funny
when there are link ups
i dont have the time to piss in cups
and write out a scripture
about pain and suffering
to me its all just
blatent blubbering
about your life
i dont give a shit
sorry if i seem heartless
but maybe its just a bit
depressing
i just like comedy
i dont wanna lessen
all of these works
i'm sure they all have
their individual quirks
but
i just like when somethings funny
and not being fake deep
just for the money

There once was a nigger! Named Op
He went to the toilet to take a pee
But I was there and punch his head
And now I pee on him because he’s dead, the end!

>>17686731
What just is isn't justice

>>17686731
>tfw only write in pantoum bc of malay heritage
How do I git gud anons, I want to do sonnets but it always feels wrong.

>>17686731
Got a problem with that?

>>17686731
If it doesn't rhyme, it's not poetry.

>he writes poetry without criming

>>17688276
That isnt how it works.

>>17686731
>>17688276
The Iliad and Odyssey don’t rhyme.

>>17686731
>no prosody
>couldn’t identify meter/rhythm to save his life
>places stress at random reading his rhymed poetry aloud
lol

>>17686809
>thinking rupi kaur is an actual poet

>>17686731
form > rhyming
rhyming is simply childish

end rhyme is fucking cringe, anyone that still forces end rhymes in 2021 is an illiterate fedora tipping faggot. no one wants to read your shitty "night/light" couplets.

>he fornicates without sucking breasts

Bastard

Poets who only write free verse are hilarious to me. It shows a lack of understanding of the history of poetry (i have a friend who tried reading paradise lost without knowing what blank verse was and made a complete ass of herself when discussing it) and, more importantly, shows a complete unwillingness for discipline and rigor. All the poets i've known who havent written in meter dont know what it is.

>>17688957
What about the line about the morning breeze they hear whispering through the trees?

>>17689046
I don't see how you can even write poetry for any period of time and not start recreating metre and rhyme yourself half accidentally, after which you will naturally want to study the more sophisticated conventions that already exist.

>>17687948
Needs to be an actual limerick.

There once was a nigger OP
Who's dumbass opinions you see.
All his posts on the board
Make me sharpen my sword
To go lop off his fingers with glee

I have been completely unable to maintain any semblance of relationship on any level
I have been a bastard to the people who have actively attempted to deliver me from peril
I have been acutely undeserving of the ear that listen up and lip that kissed me on the temple
I have been accustomed to a stubborn disposition that admits it wished its history disassembled
I have been a hypocrite in sermonizing tolerance while skimming for a ministry to pretzel
I have been unfairly resentful of those I wish that acted different when the bidding was essential
I have been a terrible communicator prone to isolation over sympathy for devils
I have been my own worst enemy since the very genesis of rebels

>>17686778
KEK

>>17686731
homer BTFO

>>17689093
nice

>>17690078
Bars, nigga

>>17686731
Most poetry ever written doesn't rhyme. Homer doesn't rhyme, Virgil doesn't rhyme, Horace doesn't rhyme. In fact, rhyming is a crutch for brainlets with no sense of rhythm

THE POETICAL ELEMENTS ARE THREE: (I) METRE, (II) RHYME, (III) PROSODY.

FOR A TEXT TO BE POETRY ONLY METRE IS NECESSARY.

>>17690428
t. unpoetic gayboi

>>17690428


ADDENDVM: PROSE CAN BE REGARDED AS POETRY ONLY IF IT HAS PROSODY, AND IF THERE IS AUTHORIAL INTENT IN ITS COMPOSITION TO BE READ AS SUCH, EVEN LACKING METRE, AND/OR RHYME —THIS IS IN WHAT CONSISTS SOCALLED «FREE VERSE».

>>17690444


STOP POSTING.

>>17690450
Seethe harder

>>17690450
Dilate

>>17690467
>>17690455


INSIPID, NESCIENT POSTERS LIKE YOURSELVES CONSTITUTE THE CANCER THAT IS CONSUMING THE SPIRIT OF THIS WEBSITE; YOU LACK THE GENIUS TO MAKE GOOD POSTS, AND THE INGENIOUSNESS TO INSULT.

>>17690450
kys

>>17690450
Take your own advice faggot.

The slime, we find, has a mind of it's own
Lock doors, close stores, and blockade your home
It's on a killstreak, so really, steer clear
April fools was last week, this time we're sincere

one day in june
he ate too much food
met his doom and went kaboom
because he forgot to go bathroom

if it hurts when pee
then doctor go see
if it hurts when poo
nothing we can do

Scientists find that time is a slime
To deny this now has become a crime
Calling it goo will simply not do
Saying it's slop is also untrue

>>17690475
If you had the genius to make good posts you wouldn't feel the need to tripfag because they would stand out on their own merit, let alone post in all caps.

>>17689083
Rhyming sounds juvenile and anachronistic in 21st century much like dominant 7th chords sound jingly and almost like a parody in themselves. Anyone with any aesthetic sense would try to avoid meter in his poetry or if he is a contrarian rhyme but in a way that does not sound like a parody of itself (Ive yet to see the latter happen)

>>17690670
I'm starting to hate this age we live in

>>17688276
Based

>>17688925
>>17688957
>Can't rhyme for shit
>Has zero rhythm
>Lacks the imagination or raw IQ to put together lmao(2!)words together that sound the same
>"N-Nooooo, stop hassling meeeee, rhyming is childiiiiiiish aaaaaaaaaaaa!"

Every time

>>17690142
>"rhyming is a crutch for brainlets with no sense of rhythm"

Hey retard, guess what? They usually go hand-in-hand! I know, shocking, right?

>>17691998
rhythmless brainlet detected

>>17690670
Why is it that any time I meet a "freestyle poet" in real life, they're always 100lb weaklings with scraggly beards sipping onions lattes? Just admit you lack rhythm and rhyme, you fucking hacks.

Not rhyming in poetry is literally "ultimate-pseud-hack" tier.

>>17690670
Mate, do you realise that meter is a different aspect of poetry from rhyming?
Meter is probably the only thing one could say makes a poem a poem.

>>17692005
Post some of your AMAZING poetry, anon. I really need something that will put me to sleep in 5 seconds flat.

Your "purple prose" should serve as a purple pill in the absence of my melatonin medication.

>>17688276
redpilled
>>17688308
yes it is.

>>17692020
Triggered as fuck lmao

>>17690484
Needs a little tightening up at the hinges, but other than that, it's a pretty decent first draft; which I'm assuming you wrote in like 5 minutes.

>>17692030
That's what I thought. You won't post your poetry because you know for a fact it's BOOOOOOORIIIIIIIIIIING as fuck and everyone would shit on it for that fact alone

The pseud likes to point and jab in the absence of a critic, but the moment a critic offers his services, the pseud is suddenly trapped and burrows himself to hide (Hint-Hint: The pseud is you, anon).

>>17691998
Rhyming is gay and for children. Not all of the best poets rhymed but they were all masters of metrics and rhythm. That's what makes poetry poetry, not faggoty ass rhyming. People that go on about how poetry has to rhyme in order to be poetry are worthless brainets (you) whose opinions mean nothing. If you want so desperately to be put to sleep, read the Faerie Queene or Pope's Iliad. You'll be snoring in no time!

>>17692050
If I want so desperately to go to sleep, I'll call up your mom, you fucking hack.

Learn to rhyme, you fucking douche. No one's impressed by your pretentious nebulous fuckery.

>>17692044
Settle down aspie

>>17692070
>pretentious nebulous fuckery
oof, big cringe right there buddy. kys my man

>>17692073
Pretentious fag (Hint-Hint: The fag is you)

>>17692083
I'll offer you the same opportunity as the other anon. Post a poem of yours that you wrote, and let's see just how RIVETING and FREETHINKING it is, Mr. Soi's-A-Lot.

But first, let me prepare my cap and nightgown. It's been a while since I've had 10 solid hours of sleep.

OK IMMA GO ALL OUT JUST THIS ONCE

I AM A MASTER OF THE CLIT
JANNY HAS A SPLIT LIP
BECAUSE OF FUCKING GENES
HIS MOM GOT NO SPLEEN
I CHOOSE TO POST ON THIS BOARD
HIGH JEWS AND JANNIES OVERLORDS
THIS LAST LINE IS FOR ALL ANONS
GET DUBS POST FREE READ THE CANNON

*drops quill*

>>17692144
I recognize your digits, and am impressed at your ability to get dubs, but your rhyme scheme fucking sucks.

You are not one of us true rhymers, and never will be unless you obtain proper rhythm.

In my eyes, alliteration, rhyme and so forth all have specific and particular usages which make them highly valuable.

In general a lot of poetry you’ll encounter will use things in the following way.

Alliteration=speed and sense of importance/rightness
Rhyme=importance and satisfaction
Sibilance=soothing and sometimes sinister


Leitmotif theory=stock phrase which produces A motif/myth that only occurs with a association with something (Homer=rosy fingered Dawn)

Myth=a poem created by narrative

Chiasma=rhyme on a narrative level

Parallelism=repetition with subtle change, whether vocal or narrative

Pentameter=speech
Tetrameter=controlled musicality/artifice
7 fold syllable=song
5-6=bursts of euphoric bliss
11=descriptive
12+ wrathful and terrible, overwhelming. (Resist the urge to produce mushy schlock, these must have more power and force on a word by word level than any of the other to justify the length.)
1-4=Sighs, exasperation, name calling, quick declarations “oh baby, my sweet, AH! My dearest, etc)
+sing-songy speech

As such, you’ll notice that in works of delayed satisfaction, of wrathful and terrible speech, the delay or lack of a rhyme fits perfectly with the sense of force being implied.

I myself like a heavily rhymed poem in which every line has tons of alliteration, rhyme and if possible multiple internal rhyme, sounds hypnotic, you can see a lot of this in Saj/Fu poetry in Arabia and in Asia, also things there are designed to sound like incantations in the west. But again in general delayed gratification is a big element, Arnaut Daniel (whom dante considered the greatest of poets ) would often write in a form in which none of the words of one stanza would rhyme, but they would all rhyme with the next stanza.

In general I agree that metrical writing his great importance but not always. The totality of ancient Semitic Poetry including the Old Testament was written without any counting of stress but vaguely word units, rather they counted the weight of concepts and extremely used repetition and parallelism. And yet these are the Gold standard from which so many poets have taken inspiration. I think what’s most important is the natural rhythm and sound.

There was studies done (I’ve looked a bit into the topic) of whether people can notice the use of meter, rhyme and so forth. The result? Normal people can hear and gain satisfaction from rhyme, and if I remember correctly alliteration. But they can’t hear meter and it doesn’t actually improve the quality of the writing. Thus while it is a blunt instrument, I prefer to use tools which people can actually hear (rhyme, etc.)

>>17692506
>Normal people can hear and gain satisfaction from rhyme, and if I remember correctly alliteration. But they can’t hear meter and it doesn’t actually improve the quality of the writing.
Fuck I'm a normie

>>17692534
I mean it’s literally fine, I think if you need a trained ear to gain basic satisfaction from a poem that poem has failed in its duties completely. I don’t need a trained ear to know I enjoy the music I like to listen to, I don’t need a trained eye to know I like the paintings I like. Etc.

Try some of my own crummy poetry out, anon. It’s meant to be said with a chanting tone and not just spoken.(much of elder poetry, and by that I mean the vast majority of poetry predating contemporaries and much of literary modernism) were Designed to be chanted.

oh thou Daimon of delusive delight
careening in your silent mental flight
fill my mind’s night with thy delusive Light
and my words with Divinized David’s Might!

give thou me the Red of the apple tree
hid deep in the orchards of En Gedi!
give thou me the White which adorns the free
as they dwell ever in eternity!

Illumine thou the dreaded Tartaros
filled with laments of oblivion’s ghosts
weeping for their now-forgotten sorrows

Illumine thou the Purgatorial Coasts
where the soul’s purple robes are paled of Shame
and are made the same as the Starry hosts


illumine thou the Firmament of Flame
where dwell seraphim and spirits of light
who ever worship the Christ’s secret name


reveal to me the mysteries of Rust,
and the long lost verses of Orpheus.
the ancient city which dwells in the Dust
seen only in the eye of Morpheus.


imbue my heart with Dawn’s own innocence,
with shining eyes lit until the evening.
in the night invite the Glowworm’s image
to enlighten the face of Erebus
which holds every star above the earth.
make my words as delicate as the dove
but ever drunken on divinity.

envelop my flesh with experience,
face and form transformed as in my dreaming
develop with deep darkness my visage,
my voice made the sounds of storms roaring thus
I may rejoice as they who know not birth.
then I may sing to the king whom I love,
Of Virgin womb, Bridegroom and Trinity.

come then! Daimon of delusive delight
with a strangeness seen not by human sight
of fiendish flowers infected with blight
fill my mind’s night with thy delusive Light
shining brighter than the empyrean height
of ultimate rewards of the Upright
fill my words with Divinized David’s Might!
fill my words with thy daimonic insight!
for then will be sacrificed as I write
I

>>17688321
>The typical ballad is a plot-driven song
https://poets.org/glossary/ballad

Those are ballads. Slightly different, not the same.

>>17688321
Yeah they don’t, though they were sung and performed by rhapsodes who would stomp a staff in the pattern of the hexameter as they sung over Multiple nights to keep the rhythm and perform their show. Meter has more actual sound and effect in Greek because the language is Quantitative, in English there’s no real massive difference in the time and length between and during words. This is why the application of traditional meter stuff often completely falls flat on its face against an actual Master of English poetry. Example Milton’s Poetry’s difficulty can be seen by the writings of Robert bridges and Prince who take dramatically different interpretations of his work even down to basic syllable count due to the difficulty. Many in fact will just use musical notation for William Blake’s epic form because again, meter simply doesn’t apply.

Accentual verse in itself kinda demonstrates this because why else would they count ONLY the stressed voicing? Because the unstressed aren’t really that big of a deal in the poem, they don’t draw enough of a contrast. With all of these things being considered, I personally don’t see the problem with using either alliteration (which was how Anglos traditionally did enforce a structure on their work) or rhyme to guide and structure the poem.

>>17690428
Literally just prosody is necessary. Blank verse is good though and rhyming is for babies sometimes

>>17692009
>Not rhyming in poetry is literally "ultimate-pseud-hack" tier.
Why do I still come here why do I ever come here buck up and read a gosh darn poem for once in your life

Study on what I’m talking about.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3560350/

> In summary, rhyming stanzas seem to be perceived more positively than non-rhyming ones. In contrast, on the scale of perceived emotion, meter only had an effect in the pseudo-word stanzas. Interestingly, non-metered stanzas elicited more positive ratings than metered ones on this scale.

> A step-down analysis of this interaction showed a significant main effect of rhyme. Rhyming stanzas were judged as eliciting a more positive feeling (“felt emotion”) in the perceiver than non-rhyming ones; this effect was stronger in the pseudo-word [F(1, 16)=15.1, MSE=0.011, p=0.001, , Cohen’s f2=0.73] than in the real word stanzas [F(1, 16)=5.1, MSE=0.030, p=0.04, , Cohen’s f2=0.59]. Felt emotion, therefore, only seemed to be influenced by rhyme in a sense that rhyming stanzas elicited a more positive emotional response than non-rhyming ones regardless of the varying contents of the stanzas.

> A step-down analysis of this interaction showed a significant main effect of rhyme. Rhyming stanzas were judged as eliciting a more positive feeling (“felt emotion”) in the perceiver than non-rhyming ones; this effect was stronger in the pseudo-word [F(1, 16)=15.1, MSE=0.011, p=0.001, , Cohen’s f2=0.73] than in the real word stanzas [F(1, 16)=5.1, MSE=0.030, p=0.04, , Cohen’s f2=0.59]. Felt emotion, therefore, only seemed to be influenced by rhyme in a sense that rhyming stanzas elicited a more positive emotional response than non-rhyming ones regardless of the varying contents of the stanzas.

>>17687931
Fake deep would be funny, anon. Fake deep is the awareness that depth is an illusion cast by those who can't see that it is superficial and normally arrived at immediately. By contrast, it's either actually deep, in that, it cuts through the shit and we find some common subterranean ground in a transparent and nonbathetic way.

>>17692659
I say that because I HAVE read all types of poetry, and unless you're genuinely exceptional or have something profoundly interesting to say, freestyle poetry is downright unstimulating.

Yeah, I fucking said it. Because every something-teen year old underage faggot on /lit/ is just BURSTING with interesting and profound thoughts, right? WROOOOOONG.

Half of you guys write freestyle poetry that's literally "babby's first depression" tier. Hey dipshits! Guess what? NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOUR ZOOMER DEPRESSION! It's not interesting! I don't wanna read about it!

Woaaaaaaah, you wrote a """""""""freestyle"""""""""" poem on your tenuous attraction to philosophy? You're such a POET, bro! Damn, dude! This is DEEP as heck! Aw man, I fucking love how like DEEP and shit this is! WoooOOOaaahhhh! So DEEP, bro! I, like, can't believe you're only 16, yet you can write like you're 17! That's so crazy bro! Haha! Wow, truly freestyle poetry is the way of the future!

Lol, get fucked, zoomer freestyle fags.

>>17692681
>>17687931
Eh I’m a cold person emotionally and appeal to pathos has never done anything for me, I have never connected with that type of poetry on any emotional or intellectual level. I only really connect with older religious and philosophical heavy poetry, I think if my internal world has to be so similar to the writers or else I won’t get anything, well that’s a failure on the authors part on a rhetorical level. Though I don’t share the feeling, I can point to many old poems which do induce sorrow and experiences of Lacrimae rerum, but they all handle suffering and transience in a more universal and (in my opinion ) more aesthetic way.

>>17688338
Am I wrong in thinking that English is one of the more flexible languages for verse as far as syllabic stress is concerned? I don't know many languages, though.

>>17692087
Anon, it's really not that hard to rhyme;
The truth is that I've simply not the time
To waste with such a worthless prole as you,
In fact, I think I'd rather eat my poo:
If you could taste it, doubtless you would too.
"But poetry must rhyme!" you hissed and sneered,
Well take it up with Homer, drag him back
Ex Tartaro, nay drag him by his very beard:
Tell he, who taught all Greece, how much a hack
He was who dared not write in rhyme; add Virgil
too, Horace, Ovid, all antiquity;
For that they though the mind of man did fill
With endless thoughts of such nobility
As render there their immortality
Means nothing, in light of such iniquity
As not to rhyme, without which faculty
A poet needs must never poet be,
According to you, though not to me.

>>17692733
B8 but blank verse is a thing

>>17692746
More or less, it’s why you’ll see so much variation in syllable stresses even with someone like Shakespeare’s work being performed. You’re not gonna see people doing a monotone pentameter throughout the performance. It’s very based on the relationship of a word in between other words also. And a lot of people don’t like to admit it but, due to simply people having more breath from breathing in, the first syllable is almost always stressed or semi stressed. Due to nothing but the fact that you have more breath when beginning a new line. This is why they’ve been able to produce bots which can auto-scan Latin poetry but attempts for doing this in English are still pretty rough.

>>17688295
based department is ringing

>>17689108
Based Aes poster

>>17686740
No it's not.

>>17692756
Anon,
It's really not that hard to rhyme
The truth is that you've not the time
To waste with worthless proles as you
In fact, I'd rather eat my poo

"But it must rhyme!", I hissed and sneered
"Well witness Homer's thin veneer!"
You try to prove and then endear
That all your points are less than clear

"Tell he, of Greece, how much a hack
He was, who dared, to write with lack
To Horace, Ovid, of antique!
Though mind of man they did complete!"

With endless thoughts you wear me down
As rendered here by pointless sound
Means nothing of inequity
You are not them, don't speak for thee

A poet needs as poets be
According you, thou wants to be
You are not Homer, don't make me laugh
I just handed you your ass

By the way, I want to clarify that I wrote this all in like literally 5 minutes and blew you out of the water as far as rhyme, meter, and rhythm. The reason it took so long to post the actual reply was because my brother called me to say he brought home turkey wraps, so I went down to meet him, ate them, and then came back up here to take you to school. Don't bring up the Greeks unless you can write like them, you absolute idiot. Your poem just proved that you can't, and won't do rhyme poetry because, to no one's surprise, YOU LACK RHYTHM.

>>17692939
>>17692756
Wouldn’t it be better if you both posted a poem you wrote at a prior point (assuming you have them.) when you both were trying with all of your effort and produced your best? It would be easier to measure the quality.

>>17692964
Very well

>>17692756
Hey, retard. Post the best poem you've ever written. In reply, I'll post one of my most mundane poems, and then we'll measure which one's better. Spoiler alert: I'll win.

>>17692606
>though they were sung
all poetry was. the idea that poetry isn't to be sung or at least performed in some way is from obsession with the written word and probably why metre has broken down. metre, in general terms, is still present just not in the simplified form commonly described (i.e. reducing everything to stressed-unstressed patterns).

poetry notation should be based in the particular phonology of a language and musical notation. also there are many voice 'effects' that can change this entirely so they should be notated as well or it should be left to the feeling of the performer.

>English is claimed to be a stress-timed language. That is, stressed syllables tend to appear with a more or less regular rhythm, while non-stressed syllables are shortened to accommodate this. For example, in the sentence One make of car is better than another, the syllables one, make, car, bett- and -noth- will be stressed and relatively long, while the other syllables will be considerably shorter. The theory of stress-timing predicts that each of the three unstressed syllables in between bett- and -noth- will be shorter than the syllable of between make and car, because three syllables must fit into the same amount of time as that available for of. However, it should not be assumed that all varieties of English are stress-timed in this way. The English spoken in the West Indies,[91] in Africa[92] and in India[93] are probably better characterized as syllable-timed, though the lack of an agreed scientific test for categorizing an accent or language as stress-timed or syllable-timed may lead one to doubt the value of such a characterization.

>>17690670
Rhyming is a modern thing, you retard.

>>17689093
i say OP as op like operation not the alphabet O.P

>>17692984
>all poetry was. the idea that poetry isn't to be sung or at least performed in some way is from obsession with the written word and probably why metre has broken down. metre, in general terms, is still present just not in the simplified form commonly described (i.e. reducing everything to stressed-unstressed patterns).

I mean I agree, although the song universally is more a kind of chanting more commonly across culture and time periods than straight up singing.
I believe fussell is the one who says all meter is partially real and partially imagined when it comes to English poetry and broadly speaking I agree with you that the composition of a poem should be based around musical composition and the inherent elements of the language itself. I think though the value of any meter system and the like can be found or rendered null by particular poets. Example the work of Robert bridges in syllabics, or here’s Spenser’s quantitative verse.

“Unhappy verse, the witness of my unhappy state,
Make thy self flutt'ring wings of thy fast flying
Thought, and fly forth unto my love, wheresoever she be:
Whether lying restless in heavy bed, or else
Sitting so cheerless at the cheerful board, or else
Playing alone careless on her heavenly virginals.
If in bed, tell her, that my eyes can take no rest:
If at board, tell her, that my mouth can eat no meat:
If at her virginals, tell her, I can hear no mirth.
Asked why? say: waking love suffereth no sleep:
Say that raging love doth appal the weak stomach:
Say, that lamenting love marreth the musical.
Tell her, that her pleasures were wont to lull me asleep:
Tell her, that her beauty was wont to feed mine eyes:
Tell her, that her sweet tongue was wont to make me mirth.
Now do I nightly waste, wanting my kindly rest:
Now do I daily starve, wanting my lively food:
Now do I always die, wanting thy timely mirth.
And if I waste, who will bewail my heavy chance?
And if I starve, who will record my cursed end?
And if I die, who will say: "This was Immerito"? “


So I think a lot of this really does come down to poet, his skill and the performer in question.

>rhymefags forever btfo

>>17693015
So...is this supposed to mean something? Or is this just another lazy attempt to lash out at your own mediocrity? Speak up, man! Has my penis got your tongue!?

>>17693015
>>17693051
Mallarme has beautiful poetry, most of it rhymes. Perhaps not the best poet to use in this debate.

>>17690428
Metre is not necessary either

>>17692648
>>17690428
>>17690446
what's "prosody"

>>17692506
>The result? Normal people can hear and gain satisfaction from rhyme, and if I remember correctly alliteration. But they can’t hear meter and it doesn’t actually improve the quality of the writing.
So? Poetry is not created for the average person.

>>17693068
What is then?

>>17692567
>fill my mind’s night with thy delusive Light
>and my words with Divinized David’s Might!
This sounds ridiculous anon

>>17692666
I see in that figure that the difference is neglibile in both as they're both within the other's confidence interval.

>>17693055
>most of it rhymes.
I know, but that's precisely why I think he's a good example. Because no one can deny his ability to rhyme beautifully, he cannot be attacked for being "lazy" or "not a poet" for sometimes choosing not to rhyme. He shows us that rhyme is a poetical rhetorical device among others. A major one, true, but not a criteria for defining what constitutes poetry or not, good or bad. Another example of the limitation of the rhyme can be found in Mallarmé with his infamous "ptyx". Another poet that could be used in the same manner is Baudelaire with his prose poems.
>>17693051
>is this supposed to mean something?
Yep. This is part of "Un coup de dés n'abolira jamais le hasard" by Stéphane Mallarmé, one of the most praised poet of the Western world, and as frater said, a poet that mostly used rhymes in his poems but knew we could stray away from it. I doubt you're arguing in good faith but if you are you can look at the whole text here: https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Un_coup_de_d%C3%A9s_jamais_n%E2%80%99abolira_le_hasard_(1897)

>>17693090
Lines probably so I guess form

>>17693087
That’s well and good. I would rather the blunt methodology that produces the higher technical quality if we’re just judging by if it’s superior on a basic level of satisfaction for the average person. If we’re not doing that then this because a discussion 100% about taste and nothing else, at which point since we can’t point to anything as a standard we can’t really argue anything. Example an anon here said they found the Faery queene boring and tiring, I consider it one of the best works ever produced. No real way to reconcile that if we kick out the normie and make this about just our own particular subjective tastes. Example I couldn’t care less for Whitman but I’m not a fool, I understand he’s technically a good poet and his work appeals to people though.

>>17693092
Why is asking for the poetic spirit to fill the blankness of the mind with aesthetic light and the words with the same power as Holy Spirit filled and transmuted king David particularly ridiculous?

>>17693122
I find it hard to believe anyone here truly believes that rhyme is always good or always bad, the doctrine of delayed rhyme, poem as rhetoric and this stuff as rhetorical tools is pretty old. I think they’re more saying that its very lack is more a symptom of the average modern poem which is just chopped up prose, example that other guy isn’t arguing against Homer and the like he’s saying people can’t write like them. Which is fair enough.

Again I really think it’s a question of context and use, the flavor of what you’re writing and the like.

>>17693125
>Why is asking for [...] ridiculous?
I said it *SOUNDS* ridiculous. I'm not talking about the semantic content but about the sound. MIND NIGHT LIGHT MIGHT. Sounds like a parody.

>>17693122
My whole point isn't that "freeform poetry" is inherently bad. My point is that YOUR freeform poetry is almost INEVITABLY bad, and that hacks often use freeform poetry as a crutch to ward off genuine criticism by saying "well, poetry, like, comes from the heart, man".

No, dude. If you're not a hack, fucking make a rhyming poem and make it sound fucking good. Otherwise you're just a hack hiding behind your shield of arbitrary feel-goodisms (which is 90 percent of all free poets out there).

>>17693125
>I would rather the blunt methodology that produces the higher technical quality if we’re just judging by if it’s superior on a basic level of satisfaction for the average person
Good for you, I don't care about modern democratic populist standards.

>>17693152
Retard. 99% of ALL POETS are garbage. Has nothing to do with rhyming. Rhyming is just not popular today. If it were, you'd get as many shit rhyming poems and you'd probably say they're hacks for trying to use rhyming to hide the lack of poetic talent.

>>17693147
Oh you mean due to how common the rhyme is. I think it comes off nice to the ear and appropriate to the aesthetic. But fair enough, I understand if it sounds bathetic with the amount of rhyme. I try somewhat to mirror the way gypo music has a ton of rhymes littering each and every line, something like 3 or 4 rhymes or more per line isn’t uncommon.

>>17693155
Yes that’s all well and good but that renders the topic even more Democratic since there’s no hierarchy possible among us here other than our own personal tastes. We can’t even actually argue the point since it’s just down to personal taste.

>>17693162
No, when I see a failing rhyme poet, I think to myself "that man has no rhythm".

When I see a failing freestyle poet, I think to myself "that man has no balls".

You can learn rhythm, but you can't grow a pair of balls.

>>17693163
>even more Democratic
No, people can argue the best they can and their success will probably be determined by their rhetorical skills, knowledge of aesthetic philosophy, expertise in poetry, etc., which creates a hierarchical standard and a more intellectually stimulating discussion.

>>17693186
Go ahead, all I see is largely arguments concerned with ones personal aesthetic taste. And if we are to argue in terms of aesthetic philosophy, ought we not consider the thoughts of folks like Nicholai Hartman who says that ones aesthetic taste derives from the conceptual and ideal values the consumer of the art has, which determine if they even fully enjoy the art piece in question. At which point again we’re back down to questions of taste. As for expertise in poetry, we need not compare our own, Milton and Homer and Virgil make fine enough arguments for unrhymed poetry as does Dante, Edmund Spenser and Chaucer for rhymed poetry.

But I mean, go ahead. Give me your best arguments for why dante and Chaucer were wrong or for why Milton or Virgil is wrong and why it isn’t a question of a particular poet, his talent and the particular tastes of the consumer of the poetry.

>>17693152
Alright I see your point. But poetry has parted way with the "obligation" of rhyme for more than a century and great poets have experimented a lot with form. As such I don't feel it's fair to immediately condemn someone that tries to write poetry in their style because he likes their style and want to emulate it or to draw from it. We cannot write about fin'amor or epics for all eternity, poetry is something alive and in its time. Here I'm talking about someone who genuinely tries, and who is putting effort in his work and who pays attention to form. I personally feel it's harder to write a good poem with a freer form than, say, a sonnet, because as the writer you must be able to justify everything in the form and this gives you a lot more responsibility.
I think you're right about some people seeing this form and thinking it's easy and basically chopping uninspired prose and calling it poetry. But make no mistake, if these people were to make poetry that rhyme, it would most certainly be the same poem you've read a thousands times about how fragile are roses and how beautiful are sunset or shit like that. Something I wouldn't read either and that is only technically better than your generic Kaur poem. Too much rigidity to form can ruin poetry, just look at 18th century France which is poetically a desert with only a few poets (poems?) worth mentioning because they all told us about the same shit in the same way.

>>17693207
>But I mean, go ahead. Give me your best arguments for why dante and Chaucer were wrong or for why Milton or Virgil is wrong and why it isn’t a question of a particular poet, his talent and the particular tastes of the consumer of the poetry.
? You were the one saying rhyming is more important than meter ("I think what’s most important is the natural rhythm and sound. ") and as one of the argument you brought up was that the average person likes it more. I AM of the opinion that it's a question of a particular poet (AND TIME/CULTURE) and that it's irrelevant what the average person thinks. Your other argument about OT was better, but I replied against your bringing up that study to support your view (which now you seemed to have changed and believe it's a question of the poet and the "consumer of the poetry" <--- this is not the average person btw)

>>17693255
>? You were the one saying rhyming is more important than meter ("I think what’s most important is the natural rhythm and sound. ")

Yes in general when considering what’s better it becomes a question of averages, but ultimately these are just tools and if we disregard the majority it comes down to personal and individual taste and particular consumers.

>and as one of the argument you brought up was that the average person likes it more. I AM of the opinion that it's a question of a particular poet (AND TIME/CULTURE) and that it's irrelevant what the average person thinks.

And I disagree when talking in a general context, we generally should consider the average person unless we are to consider our own particular tastes king. But disregarding the average person it comes down to the skill of the poet, his style and so forth.


>Your other argument about OT was better, but I replied against your bringing up that study to support your view

Nah, the point is that in general these are devices but their usages are case dependent and will have different uses, but if we are to speak in generalities the average person will probably enjoy more often the rhymes. And if we disregard the average person it becomes a question of individual likes.

> "consumer of the poetry" <--- this is not the average person btw)

And I consider that a bad thing! I dislike that poetry is an incestual ground where only poets read poetry and write poetry for other poets to consume. This problem doesn’t exist in music nor does it exist in prose so I do not see why it should exist in verse.

Read my posts throughout, I’ve consistently said that in general the person will probably prefer rhyme but in particular it’s a question of the poet, rhetorical agendas and so forth.

>>17693289
>we generally should consider the average person
>And I consider that a bad thing! I dislike that poetry is an incestual ground where only poets read poetry and write poetry for other poets to consume.
Disgusting. Also you're misrepresenting everything. Poet =/= reader of poetry =/= average person. Take your bullshit plebification of art back to r*ddit.

>>17693314
uh oh. you lost the exchange, anon. just accept it and bow before based frater

>>17693314
Never used Reddit and poetry was the common man’s entertainment in the ancient times and even not too long ago as recently as the fireside poets and even more recently. I mean fine you’re free to not want more people to read poetry and you’re free to have it have no appeal to the common person. I simply disagree and believe the Bulk of poetry(not our own personal ones but the ones published for money.) ought to appeal to the common man in some regard in terms of beauty. Gustav Moreau appeals to the common person as well as the harsh critique, why shouldn’t poetry?

>>17693329
>poetry was the common man’s entertainment in the ancient times
> the Bulk of poetry(not our own personal ones but the ones published for money.)
So now we're talking about plebe poetry? Are we trying to find the formula to sell the most books? Or are we talking about timeless poetry that survives over centuries? Because the common man's poetry was limericks-tier, not Dante. Most great poets were writing for aristocrats and sophisticated readers and critics. This entire exchange disgusts me because you're either supporting commercialisation of art by setting plebeian standards to quality or you're being insincere in your rhetoric. Both disgusting.

>>17693350
>So now we're talking about plebe poetry?

The common rhapsode’s bread and butter was Homer.

>Are we trying to find the formula to sell the most books?

Unless you believe there’s an objective standard beyond All possible questions of particular taste, there is only the question of the common man.

>Or are we talking about timeless poetry that survives over centuries?

Do you think Shakespeare was unpopular? Do you think people hated Chaucer? Were Ovid and Virgil hated?

>Because the common man's poetry was limericks-tier, not Dante.

Dante’s popularity is the only reason we can even speak about him, anon. I am not arguing for the creation of mass production bottom tier works, but the average person can enjoy Bach or Beethoven and the average person can enjoy Homer or Dante. Dante himself according to inferno wrote partially for fame and for the common man reader.

>Most great poets were writing for aristocrats and sophisticated readers and critics.

Again the question of great comes down to great according to who. I would say the greatest poets didn’t pay much attention to critics, the standards of their time the common man or anyone else and simply abides in accordance with their own inspiration and what they personally consider the best. But which authors do this best are something we can argue above because it’s nothing more than a question of taste again.

>This entire exchange disgusts me because you're either supporting commercialisation of art by setting plebeian standards to quality.

I am 100% in support of capitalism, the commercialization of art and the production of all Art whether low, medium and high. But I am of the belief when speaking in generalities and in accordance with my own taste that High Art should be as appealing as low art is to the average person(and much more so) if he gives it the chance.

>>17693393
>common rhapsode
Not a plebe. Rhapsodes were participating in very high-profile contests. The average person in Greek was not a rhapsode nor listening to rhapsodists. Even Hesiod had many servants. Didn't read the rest because you continue arguing in bad faith and wasting my time.

>>17692835
Says the brain rot

All poetry is shit