Everyone I know, except for my language arts teacher who is in charge of the Writer's Club at my school, says that peoms aren't poems until they rhyme. I really don't understand that. i haven't written a good rhyming poem, and I think my poems are fine without them rhyming every two lines. Does anyone else have anything to say on the topic?2/22/2007 #1
|Midnight In Eden
They're often people who are quite ignorant of the fact that poetry can be free verse and some of the best poetry is free verse.2/23/2007 #2
Poetry is hard to define but it does not require rhyme.
|To Be Ascertained
Poetry is anything that isn't written in continuous prose and has similar syllables in each line or verse. It doesn't have to rhyme, but depending on what style of poem you're writing it does, like Limerics, for example.2/23/2007 #3
I very much disagree, I think poetry without rhymes is indeed poetry. Everyone has their own opinion, though.2/24/2007 #4
To the contrary, I don't know too many people who do say it's not a poem unless it rhymes! Plenty of good poems don't rhyme--and plenty of bad ones. I have a habit of finding the bad ones.3/02/2007 #5
A major part of poetry is the sound. The point of rhyming is to improve the sound of the poem. It also forces one to work at writing the poem--i.e., none of that emo nonsense, "My girlfriend broke up with me, I cut myself, pain, pain, pain". It's a lot harder to write that in rhyme.
For every good poem you can name that doesn't rhyme, I guarantee I can name three good ones that do.
On that note, I'm fine with form poetry that doesn't rhyme--Haiku, Tanka, some Ghazal forms, Sestinas, the like. You still have to think in order to write them. I don't care for freestyle because more often than not, it's just an excuse to be lazy. Some truly profound thoughts have been expressed in freestyle, I'm sure. I just can't recall reading any. :-)
Also--sure poems are fine without rhyming every two lines. Rhyming every THREE lines is a much more interesting convention, if I may say so myself. :-)
|Writers block anon
Personally, I think that poetry can be as free or as regulated as the author wishes it to be. I don't think there should be rules and regulations ALL of the time- (I'm not saying that rules are a bad thing. They are really good, but sometimes you just get people who are sticklers for rules and they foce them onto everyone else which isn't a good thing :( )4/19/2007 #6
Am I making any sense? Pleases someone tell me...
you're making perfect sense.4/22/2007 #7
Honestly, I dont think poetry even has to be poetry to be poetry.
Now before you kill me for that ambiguous statement; I swear I will explain. I've read some poetry that reads like prose, it's words nicely put together, but there's no flow or pizaaz. I've also read prose that makes me feel like I've been crucified by the beauty of a sentence so masterfully put together that it must be poetry.
Just a thought.
And my friends tease me by saying 'you know, Jo, I'ts just not poetry if it doesnt rhyme.'
Gets me EVERY TIME6/08/2008 #8
yeah, a lot of people think poem must have rhyme but I think the rhyme isn't important if there's an interesting "plot" behind.6/25/2008 #9
|Alexis of Dreams
Sometimes rhyming destroys the essence of the poem. I don't know but for me rhyming only sounds good if the author is able to string his or her words really well that the rhymes compliment it. If it doesn't it might sound really bad. I go for rhyming and free verse alternately but I've become more inclined to free verse lately.8/12/2008 #10
I personally hate it when people insist that poems have to be rhyming/ have a certain number of beats in a line. Poems are about expressing how the person feelings about something, or how they see something, and through poetry, enables others to share their feelings.
I often end up trailing into freestyle with my poems (see Everest on Fire), but only when it compliments the poem to do so. I do object to meaningless drabbles (unless for humour. There, in poetry, you can get away with almost any nonsense) , poems that annialate the whole point of poetry.
And I agree with Alexis. If ryhming will destroy the essence of the poem, or if you want to startle the reader, change the tone etc, then 'going off the beaten track' is fine, and people need to see that.8/15/2008 #11
Yeah, it's not about the rhyming, just about the sound of the poem. Sometimes it doesn't really rhyme, but the sounds just fit together so nicely you'd think it does.11/22/2008 #12
I agree with you, AStrang!
It really is just the sound of the poem.
For me, I think rhyming is better for children because of the sing-song sound it makes
while free-style is better for more mature things.11/22/2008 #13
Yeah I used to really enjoy rhymes when I was a kid. Now most of them just sound silly or forced :(
And it's easier to put feeling into the poem when you're not trying to make it rhyme. Not that it doesn't sometimes work, but I always find it easier without.11/23/2008 #14
i agree! poems don't always rhyme.11/27/2008 #15
I know what you mean. I was telling people just the other day that I was a poet and the girl (Peg) said "It must be a hard job. I wish I could rhyme like that." I've argued with people about it before, also. I do often rhyme, but I, just as often, do not rhyme. It all depends. I don't think it should be a big deal whether or not the poet wants to. However they find it better. People say song lyrics are poems(which they are a form), and not all of them rhyme, so yes. I agree with you.6/14/2009 #16
i write better stuff in free-style. rhyming is like restriction that you have to follow throughout the poem, like a prison. you can't freely express your feelings in rhyme, because you have to change the words and the sentences to fit the rhyming scheme which is going to sound forced out and two-dimentional. i'd rather stick to free-verse, but sometimes you feel like writing a poem that rhymes.9/28/2009 #17
Structure is only a prison if you don't know how to manipulate it to your advantage. Some of the greatest poems ever written are so highly regarded because they use the constraints of the structure to their own advantage to help communicate their message.
As long as the people who say that poetry has to rhyme are not involved in poetry themselves, I think we can leave them to their ignorance.2/02/2010 #18
I couldn't have said that better myself. (:3/17/2010 #19
is it a crime
to write a poem
without a rhyme?
they say no pain,
to un-ryme is lame.
what about meter?
does it matter?
can you count the ways
i love thee?
in my patter?
nay i say!
count not your words.
let your poem
find its own way.
your meaning will be heard.
judge not the rhyme,
lest ye be judged...7/02/2010 #20
Poetry is mostly about thoughts and feelings anyway. Those do not have restrictions. Why should poetry?
Even for people who right fiction. What is there was a rule that all pieces of fiction can only have so many chapters or words? Or that a story is only a story if it is about puppies? Do you know how boring stories would be?
If all poems rhymed it would be a dull, dying art.
Also, if all poems rhymed it would be hard to take a poem seriously.
It would also make it harder to write them. If every poet had to rhyme, things would start to get confusing. They would have to start making up words that worked or shorten them to the point of confusion.
I mean listen to rap. Most of them are that way.7/17/2010 #21
I agree, if every poem known to man was rhyming, poetry would become very worthless and uncreative. Alot of famous poets wrote freestyling and in other formats that never rhyme and if they do, they do it very cleverly.10/22/2010 #22
I agree, if every poem known to man was rhyming, poetry would become very worthless and uncreative. Alot of famous poets wrote freestyling and in other formats that never rhyme and if they do, they do it very cleverly.10/22/2010 #23
|Forum Moderators: MokikaStyle|
|Membership Length: 2+ years 1 year 6+ months 1 month 2+ weeks new member|