/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.10371255]

I often say that poetry should rhyme. This is primarily IRL shitposting to expose pretentious cunts. But what I really mean is that poetry should have some kind of aesthetic structure.
Rhyme is the most obvious and often satisfying one, but, it's not strictly rhyming that it needs. Rhythm/meter are also options. Alliteration, use of sounds, etc are also options.

What do you think is required for poetry? What are some good non-rhyming poetry aesthetics? What do you like in poems?

[Anonymous No.10371262]

>>10371255
caesuras

[Anonymous No.10371359]

>>10371255
The way I see it, god-tier poetic aesthetics requires a synthesis of the phonological and semantic. Rhyming can be beautiful but along with "pick a meter to write in" constitutes the crudest approach to beauty in my opinion.

As I'm writing this I'm realizing that the question of "what makes poetry beautiful" is incredibly deep and I'm way out of my element. But if I had to pick one thing:
>unexpected combinations of words and phrases
the most beautiful things are those that are novel. and the aural pleasure of hearing new sounds combines with the intellectual challenge of interpreting a new phrase => fucking sublime

[Anonymous No.10371412]

>>10371359

For me, I think structure is important for aesthetic. Word choice is good and all, and it can enhance both aesthetic and meaning, but, a lot of it for me is in the structure. It's expressing something meaningful through the limitations of a structure. it requires creativity, finding new words, new ways to say it.

My issue with non structural poetry is that it's just an essay for gay people. With no limits there's no invention and creativity required to express the thing. You just say it.

[Anonymous No.10371499]

>>10371412
I actually find that the use of structure as a method of imposing limits on word choice acts as a crutch by introducing artificial criteria for the expression of creativity.
>just an essay for gay people
kek. fair enough. but to me, the inventive and creative capacity of e.g. ee cummings is beyond doubt.

[Anonymous No.10371574]

>>10371255
>What do you think is required for poetry? What are some good non-rhyming poetry aesthetics? What do you like in poems?

metaphors, above all metaphors


Prayer

Prayer the church's banquet, angel's age,
God's breath in man returning to his birth,
The soul in paraphrase, heart in pilgrimage,
The Christian plummet sounding heav'n and earth
Engine against th' Almighty, sinner's tow'r,
Reversed thunder, Christ-side-piercing spear,
The six-days world transposing in an hour,
A kind of tune, which all things hear and fear;
Softness, and peace, and joy, and love, and bliss,
Exalted manna, gladness of the best,
Heaven in ordinary, man well drest,
The milky way, the bird of Paradise,
Church-bells beyond the stars heard, the soul's blood,
The land of spices; something understood.

[Anonymous No.10371587]

>>10371255
>poetry should have some kind of aesthetic structure.
Wow you just blew this case wide open.

[Anonymous No.10371604]

>>10371499

But it's how you express what you want to within those limits that causes creativity.

Necessity is the mother of invention. With limits imposed on you by needs of structure, you have to make the most of the space and options you have to express what you want to.

[Anonymous No.10371944]

since i'm not a scholar of poetry, if, for whatever reason, i decide to try writing it i tell myself:

it should probably rhyme. it should probably have a coherent structure. the more structure the better. correct grammar, the whole shebang. because unless you're breaking new ground, and have a carefully-selected meaning for "breaking the rules", chances are giving yourself free-reign over all mechanics is going to do you more harm than good. when you completely eliminate a concentrated, potent order of speech, just so that you can ride the wave of pretension from supposedly knowing what you're doing (when in actuality you're being a dickhead, and the reason there's a stanza here or a line break there is fucking arbitrary) the whole thing is fake. for example, i could write--

thought it
sins and transgressions
like the
tides,
fucking around aimlessly
and
it continues on and on and on
the most talentless, godless
death of all the ear
th.

i just wrote that in 3 seconds. there was fucking no thought into it at all. but if i convince myself that abstract+break rules=good, i can there convince myself that my actions are intentional: all the moves were made because of some genius inner machination, i am a poet, ya dee da.
now, on the flipside, i tell myself this because i don't know a lot about poetry (compared to someone who actually studies it, spends a lot of time with it). this is my rule. maybe in the future when i REALLY understand the minutiae of modern techniques, intellectual masturbation etc i'll give myself some wiggle-room. but for now, nah, rhyme scheme, strict meter, thought in every line, avoid unnecessarily cryptic/esoteric theme--actually do something you know to be good without all that.
what do you guys think?

[Anonymous No.10371963]

>>10371255
the most important elements to poetry is the image and the rhythm

the rhyme is nothing without the rhythm
the metaphor is nothing without the image
caesura(not sure why this'd be your favorite part) is nothing without a strong rhythmic sense to highlight it or bury it

[Anonymous No.10372021]

>>10371944

I mean I approve, personally. Work within the rules until you have experience enough to break them and know why you're doing it.

[Anonymous No.10372039]

>>10371944
the ear/th is legitmately funny and I could see it working in the right poem.

I think that when practicing poetry, its important to practice a blend of styles. I remember doing a sonnet a day for a while, and then for a second, free verse seemed impossible, felt like agoraphobia. Still, my metered works wouldn't be as adventurous if I hadn't already gotten weirder with my free verse, and my free verse wouldn't have as precise rhythm, lineation, and tone if i hadn't written so many sonnets.

[Anonymous No.10372077]

>>10372021
What rules? What experience?
I suppose some men must tell themselves that the reason they aren't getting laid is because they're still fine-tuning their masturbatory repertoire...