Jump to content
Registration -- to join PMO ***UPDATED INSTRUCTIONS*** Read more... ×
IMPORTANT: re Logging In to PMO ***Attention Members*** Read more... ×
Poetry Magnum Opus
tonyv

Meter, Rhythm, and Musicality

Recommended Posts

I submit five poems of Edgar Bowers for examination:

 

THE ASTRONOMERS OF MONT BLANC

EDGAR BOWERS (four more)

 

These poems are all written in flawless iambic pentameter that is mostly strict (meaning, in addition to other accepted substitutions, they contain only the occasional anapest). Read each one out loud, but do not try to read them according to some preconceived notion of what iambic pentameter is or should be. Rather, read them naturally and trust that the meter is there. Notice how the musicality varies in each of the poems, how the language speeds up and slows down at various points as you read, the syncopation present in the various parts. This effect is produced by Bowers' expert handling of the language and meter.

 

Metrical poems like these, in which the meter is flawless, sound natural when read out loud. A poem in which the meter is "off" in whole or in part will sound "off" in those parts in the same way a musical composition would sound off if a drummer were to veer off and alter its beat while the other musicians continued to play in the previously established time signature. This is not only the case with iambic pentameter. The same holds true for all metrical (accentual-syllabic) poetry. I'll submit something in a different meter to illustrate this later on if this topic takes off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This topic will certainly "take off" if only with me... I have so much to learn in this arena and although i think I know some stuff as soon as I get comfortable with it, some one comes along and shows me how wrong i am. (sorry I am going to have to fix my keyboard, my i even when I shift doesn't always capitalize and i am simply too lazy to go back and hit the key harder so it will do so.)

 

Here are some things I think I do know.

 

The line is the foundation of poetry. Meter is the measure of the line in Accentual Syllabic and Quantitative Verse. The measure is in patterns of stress and unstress for Accentual Syllabic Verse or long and short vowel sounds in Quantitative Verse. There are various metric patterns that make up the line. Metric patterns carry a beat such as the iamb da DUM, anapest da da DUM, trochee DUM da, dactyl DUM da da, spondee DUM DUM, etc.... Each pattern counts as a metric foot. There are lots of patterns these are the most common ones. It depends on the number of patterns found in the line, how many metric feet are in the line. So if there are 5 da DUMs or 5 iambs the line is said to be 5 metric feet or written in iambic pentameter.

 

OK that is the basics... Now i am ready for more advanced training...... I am so excited about this exercise. No one is home and I go to read 5 poems out loud... I can't wait. I will be back later after my experience. Thanks Tony.

 

~~Tink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
OK that is the basics... Now i am ready for more advanced training...... I am so excited about this exercise. No one is home and I go to read 5 poems out loud... I can't wait. I will be back later after my experience.

 

~~Tink

Well, I'm not sure whether or not there will be advanced training. I, myself, will probably just parrot what I've learned from others. In any case, I hope that there will be a meaningful discussion. So, do tell what you thought of the poems. Had you read them here on the site before? If so, were you aware at the time that they are written in iambic pentameter?

 

The line is the foundation of poetry. Meter is the measure of the line in Accentual Syllabic and Quantitative Verse. The measure is in patterns of stress and unstress for Accentual Syllabic Verse or long and short vowel sounds in Quantitative Verse. There are various metric patterns that make up the line. Metric patterns carry a beat such as the iamb da DUM, anapest da da DUM, trochee DUM da, dactyl DUM da da, spondee DUM DUM, etc.... Each pattern counts as a metric foot. There are lots of patterns these are the most common ones. It depends on the number of patterns found in the line, how many metric feet are in the line. So if there are 5 da DUMs or 5 iambs the line is said to be 5 metric feet or written in iambic pentameter.

Meter is the measure of the line in Accentual Syllabic Verse -- this is very well expressed. I, myself, have focused mostly on reading about, learning, and trying to write in iambic meters, and I have found the following topics at the pffa to be most useful:

 

Handy Dandy Vestpocket Guide to Iambic Pentameter

Standard Substitutions in Strict Iambic Pentameter

Using the Headless Iamb

 

I think there might be many people who are under the misconception that a poem written in strict iambic pentameter must be composed of lines made up solely of five iambs each. Each of the Bowers poems I referenced above adheres to the guidelines set forth in these pffa topics. While, in addition to his plentiful use of accepted substitutions, Bowers does use the occasional anapest, he uses them quite sparingly, and I would characterize his iambics as mostly strict. Frost, on the other hand, used anapests often (sometimes more than one per line) in iambic poems, which he himself characterized as "loose." But, Frost wrote in strict iambics, too. "Acquainted with the Night," which also totally conforms to the principles set forth in the linked pffa topics, contains only the substitutions mentioned therein and even contains no anapests. I would characterize the poem's iambics as strict:

 

 

Acquainted With the Night

I have been one acquainted with the night.

I have walked out in rain --and back in rain.

I have outwalked the furthest city light.

I have looked down the saddest city lane.

I have passed by the watchman on his beat

And dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain.

I have stood still and stopped the sound of feet

When far away an interrupted cry

Came over houses from another street,

But not to call me back or say good-bye;

And further still at an unearthly height

One luminary clock against the sky

Proclaimed the time was neither wrong nor right.

I have been one acquainted with the night.

 

 

Louise Bogan's lovely poem "Song for a Lyre" is a wonderful example of iambic trimeter. The reason I'm mentioning some of these poems is because it's possible that many people don't even realize they are reading a metrical poem when they read one like Bogan's poem.

 

Whereas I might have an elementary grasp on iambics, I know much less about other meters. Till now, I have focused more on iambic meter because of its abundance in English poetry. And that has to do with the nature of the English language itself, with English being primarily an iambic language. Even so, I plan to study and learn more about other meters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry Tony I got busy again with other stuff. But I did read the 5 poems and loved them and no I had not read them before.

 

I noticed right off that #2 and #10 from Autumn Shade are both Blank Verse Sonnets. I needed a good example of a Blank Verse Sonnet for my Verse Forms article and am excited to use one of these as a great example of the form. And I see why this guy is one of your favorites Tony. His work is absolutely musical. I was struck by the differences in tempo and tone from poem to poem and find this worthy of further study.

 

I said before in another thread, there is the ideal iambic pentameter and then there is the real life iambic pentameter that sometimes jumps the tracks a bit by throwing in a different pattern for a foot or two or is simply short or long a foot. It is the dominant measure that becomes the standard for the poem.

 

Life is beckoning again so I will be back tomorrow with more thoughts on this.

 

~~Tink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if it is possible for all that partake in this forum to have a truly fruitful discussion on certain elements of poetics. We do not all have the identical set of resources to draw on, and to include all the resources or at least those parts that matter to prove or disprove a point must be nigh impossible.

Much depends on how deep we decide to go.

 

As far as I have been able to ascertain from what has been available to me, what makes 'flawless' meter would have to be defined first. In that vein, we should agree that 'perfect' meter covering an entire poem can exist only if, for example, in iambic pentameter, every line would consist of five undisputably iambic feet. It has been said by many that such a poem is almost guaranteed to be monotonous, boring, resembling nothing else as much as the tick-tocking of a clock or a metronome. You tony have already mentioned that there are other meters to be considered, and I will leave it up to you

for what you or I say is equally applicable to them as well.

 

What I am willing to concede is that: capable poets seem to be able to seemlesly include other than iambic feet in any dominantly iambic or other meter, meaning that, unless one actually scans each line and does so w/o a personal 'bias', one cannot by mere listening to say whether or not the meter is 'flawless'. By bias, I mean that many readers tend to argue whether certain given, if not all, word-syllables are or are not to be stressed and even disagree with what a dictionary suggests. Of course, this is not true for poems whose author ignores the basic tenets of metrification.

 

And we must briefly touch on free verse and prose poems. As long as such work is composed in literarily acceptable English, there wiil be some kind of

stress variation. Walt Whitman's poems are said by some to posess a 'wild cadence', meaning, I presume, having patterns of longer than classic feet stress variation patterns that are repeated..

 

There is argument that it is the sense/emotion of the sentence that forces word/syllables to be stressed differently than the dictionary says it should, and the dictionary treats them as if pronounced in absence of neighbors. Specifically, which syllable in a word is stressed will certainly depend on words preceding and/or following.

 

While it is true, that English poems are mostly written in accentual-syllabic verse, there are poems that are written in either accentual or syllabic verse alone. That seems to say that musicality is not strictly due to some definitely metric pattern.

 

In the past, children were taught by English teachers that there ar such as long and short syllables, and, consequently meter was assumed (per the classic Greek idea) that there is quantitative verse, and some poets have experimented with such.

 

For me, the musicality arises due to a combination of speech features. Miller Williams (Patterns of Poetry) mentions stress level (4), duration, pitch and intonation of syllable as the more easily ascertained sound elements and then there are all those I like to lump in as vocalic echoes'; the various classes of rhyme, alliteration, assonance, consonance and some others I have no need to describe at this point.

 

I am sure glad you have brought this up, because it is important for 'wannabe poets' (I consider this a term of endearment to my fellow sufferers) to know what it is that makes poetry different from prose. Of course, there are other elements which deal more with the sense/semantics rather than the vocal part of poetry.

 

What I have just written is of course based on my limited, if perhaps educated, opinion. Bowers is good but, until we agree on 'flawless', hardly that, at least in my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, Ikars, for your interest and participation in this topic. I thought I was clear, but I'll clarify. Here's what I wrote in my post above:

 

I think there might be many people who are under the misconception that a poem written in strict iambic pentameter must be composed of lines made up solely of five iambs each. Each of the Bowers poems I referenced above adheres to the guidelines set forth in these pffa topics [links in Post #3 above]. While, in addition to his plentiful use of accepted substitutions, Bowers does use the occasional anapest, he uses them quite sparingly, and I would characterize his iambics as mostly strict. Frost, on the other hand, used anapests often (sometimes more than one per line) in iambic poems, which he himself characterized as "loose." But, Frost wrote in strict iambics, too. "Acquainted with the Night," which also totally conforms to the principles set forth in the linked pffa topics, contains only the substitutions mentioned therein and even contains no anapests. I would characterize the poem's iambics as strict ...

Most prosodists today agree that "perfect" iambic pentameter is iambic pentameter which conforms to the guidelines found in the links in post #3 above. I don't think anyone thinks perfect iambic pentameter is limited to lines which contain five feet, all of which should be iambs.

 

Although (according to the guidelines) anapests are considered acceptable substitutions for iambs in "perfect" (i.e. conforming) iambic pentameters, I also think that most prosodists today would characterize (as Frost did) lines containing anapests as loose, whereas lines that don't contain anapests are considered "strict." But either way, anapests or not, if the guidelines in the links are followed, the iambic pentameter is considered what I call perfect, that is it conforms to today's (and even yesterday's) standards. Bowers' iambic pentameters are all conforming ("perfect"). The ones without anapests are "strict," the ones with anapests are "loose."

 

Thanks for your interest and returning to this topic. I hope it can stay alive.

 

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you, Ikars, for your interest and participation in this topic. I thought I was clear, but I'll clarify. Here's what I wrote in my post above:

 

I think there might be many people who are under the misconception that a poem written in strict iambic pentameter must be composed of lines made up solely of five iambs each. Each of the Bowers poems I referenced above adheres to the guidelines set forth in these pffa topics [links in Post #3 above]. While, in addition to his plentiful use of accepted substitutions, Bowers does use the occasional anapest, he uses them quite sparingly, and I would characterize his iambics as mostly strict. Frost, on the other hand, used anapests often (sometimes more than one per line) in iambic poems, which he himself characterized as "loose." But, Frost wrote in strict iambics, too. "Acquainted with the Night," which also totally conforms to the principles set forth in the linked pffa topics, contains only the substitutions mentioned therein and even contains no anapests. I would characterize the poem's iambics as strict ...

Most prosodists today agree that "perfect" iambic pentameter is iambic pentameter which conforms to the guidelines found in the links in post #3 above. I don't think anyone thinks perfect iambic pentameter is limited to lines which contain five feet, all of which should be iambs.

 

Although (according to the guidelines) anapests are considered acceptable substitutions for iambs in "perfect" (i.e. conforming) iambic pentameters, I also think that most prosodists today would characterize (as Frost did) lines containing anapests as loose, whereas lines that don't contain anapests are considered "strict." But either way, anapests or not, if the guidelines in the links are followed, the iambic pentameter is considered what I call perfect, that is it conforms to today's (and even yesterday's) standards. Bowers' iambic pentameters are all conforming ("perfect"). The ones without anapests are "strict," the ones with anapests are "loose."

 

Thanks for your interest and returning to this topic. I hope it can stay alive.

 

Tony

 

We both share a more than superficial an interest in what makes better poetry. This discussion can get very academic, and whether what you or I say has long reaching merit can not be judged unless our members participate, at least by letting all know they read and think about it.

 

The amount of info available on the web is mountainous and we cannot delve into all the fine details. Let me just say that the more believable tenets would be those to which a decided majority of the practitioners of the art, regardles of their erudition, would subscribe, a goal unlikely to be reached w/o a poll partaken in by such.

 

Those who write about it have their own axes to grind, and I am not willing to say anyone of them is an absolute expert. It seems that each poet will keep his own counsel. However, I prefer to be as broadminded as it is possible for me to be without thinking myself unable to comprehend that any art is a much too complex endeavou for an intelligent person to not distinguish what is and what is not believable.

 

All the so called rules seem to have been tested by the success of those who demonstrably use them. That does not mean that they all use all the same rules at all times.

 

I hope we can come to some agreement of what is useful in making us better practitioners of poetry, even though it seems like a difficult and frightening a task.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tony,

 

I read your Iambic Pentameter at http://www.poetrymagnumopus.com/index.php?showtopic=2358

Since I couldn't reply to that thread, I will post my questions regarding scanning here. Hope it is ok.

 

First off, good stuff, Tony. A handy reference to the use of meters. After reading your helpful guide, I'm trying to apply what I've learned to a sonnet and done a scansion on one of Barrett Browning's sonnets. There are still areas I'm not quite sure. Please help.

 

But only three in all God's universe (unscanned version)

 

 

 

 

But only three in all God's universe

Have heard this word thou hast said,---Himself, beside

Thee speaking, and me listening! and replied

One of us . . . that was God, . . . and laid the curse

So darkly on my eyelids, as to amerce

My sight from seeing thee,---that if I had died,

The death-weights, placed there, would have signified

Less absolute exclusion. 'Nay' is worse

From God than from all others, O my friend!

Men could not part us with their worldly jars,

Nor the seas change us, nor the tempests bend;

Our hands would touch for all the mountain-bars:

And, heaven being rolled between us at the end,

We should but vow the faster for the stars.

Scansion

but ON/ly THREE/ in All/ god's U/niVERSE (universe, can I emphasize a bit on VERSE?)

have HERD/ this WORD/ thou hast SAID,--/himSELF, /beSIDE (is F3 an anapest?)

thee SPEA/king, AND/ me LIste/ning! AND/ rePLIED (not sure about F3, is it an amphibrach or iamb?)

one OF/ us... THAT/ was GOD/,... and LAID/ the CURSE

so DARK/ly ON/ my EYE/lids, as TO/ aMERCE (F4, anapest?)

my SIGHT/ from SEE/ing THEE/,--that IF/ I had DIED, (F5 – anapest)

the DEATH/-weights, PLACED/ there, WOULD/ have SIG/niFIED (can I stress a bit on the last syllable in signified?)

less AB/soLUTE/ excLU/sion. "NAY"/ is WORSE (again, F2, stress on the 3rd syllable of absolute?)

from GOD/ than FROM/ all O/thers, O/ my FRIEND!

men COULD/ not PART/ us WITH/ their WORLD/ly JARS,

NOR the/ seas CHANGE /us, NOR/ the TEM/pests BEND;(F1, trochee?)

our HANDS/ would TOUCH/ for ALL/ the MOUN/tain-BARS:

and, HEA/ven BE/ing ROLLED/ beTWEEN us/ at the END, (most uncertain, F4 amphibrach, F5 anapest? any other ways of scansion?)

we SHOULD/ but VOW/ the FAS/ter FOR/ the STARS.

 

 

 

 

Other person suggested the last four words "us at the end" in L13 as one foot, the reason is "at" and "the" can be contracted or weakened as "t" and "th". But I'm not so sure since they were not written that way, besides we (I) normally won't say it like that instead I feel more comfortable to say "between us" and "at the end". The question is can other metric foot (consisted of triple syllables) be used beside "anapest" in iamb pentameter?

 

I also find sometimes, words may not sound with the same degree of stress in scansion as they are marked in the dictionary.

 

 

Any help will be greatly appreciated.

 

Lake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i sympathized with lake. i write poems, but when i try to invert meter i lose meaning to what i want to mean. how do you prevent that from happening? i can write simple form of meter poems. but it gives no satisfaction or merit of something that would give me pleasure as to something i gave effort for others to indulge in.

 

 

 

victor michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Lake,

 

I'm excited that you're into this, and I'll try to help to the best of my ability. I'll start off by addressing a few points you brought up.

 

I myself don't acknowledge the existence of amphibrachs in iambic pentameter. Apparently they exist in other meters, but in my opinion, they do not belong in iambic pentameter. As for other metrical feet besides the anapest (and just for the sake of illustration), I'll mention the dactyl. I suppose a dactyl might work so long as it's not followed by an iamb. If it were followed by an iamb, you'd end up with three unstressed syllables in a row which doesn't conform. It would seem to me that a dactyl should be followed by a trochee:

 

/ I was the / BOY that / the GIRL / had LEARNED / to LOVE /

/ dactyl / trochee / iamb / iamb / iamb /

 

But I have never seen a line of Iambic pentameter scanned to include a dactyl, and I don't think anyone would scan the line that way. Dactyls are usually used in poems that are predominantly dactylic. This same line would normally be scanned as such:

 

/ I was / the BOY / that the GIRL / had LEARNED / to LOVE /

/ iamb / iamb / anapest / iamb / iamb /

 

I think including dactyls and other such feet in the scansion of iambic pentameter just muddies the water. Of course, I could have also written the line to avoid the odd metrical foot:

 

/ I was / the BOY / the GIRL / had LEARNED / to LOVE /

/ trochee / iamb / iamb /iamb / iamb /

 

I'm also of the school of thought that the dictionary is the final arbiter when it comes to assigning stress to words. You're right that the stresses aren't always of the same magnitude; even the dictionary shows primary and secondary stresses as is the case with the word "universe" in the poem you've scanned. My dictionary shows "universe" with a primary stress on the first syllable and a secondary stress on the third syllable. Stresses can be subtle, and they're often not discernible, but the nature of the English language is such that they are nevertheless there. The lines in a metrical poem are modulated. The voice can get louder or softer, faster or slower, depending on the music (the language, expressions, and syntax) that the poet has superimposed on the underlying beat (or meter). That's why some people get even more specific and use a numbering system (1-4 with one being the weakest and four the strongest) when they scan poems. Let's try that with my lines from above:

 

/ I was the / BOY that / the GIRL / had LEARNED / to LOVE /

 

/ 4 2 1 / 3 2 / 1 4 / 2 3 / 1 4 /

 

Yet the music would be different with the omission of the dactyl:

 

/ I was / the BOY / the GIRL / had LEARNED / to LOVE /

 

/ 4 1 / 1 4 / 1 3 / 2 3 / 1 4 /

 

But even assigning these numeric stresses does not alter the initial scansions of the lines. The metrical feet are still as we initially noted. We're just showing more variation in stress, getting more specific, so to speak.

 

Now, with the Browning poem, it looks like you've done a good job. "Universe" has been addressed, and your scansion of L1 is fine, but I might suggest it could also be scanned like this:

 

But only three in all God's universe

/ but ON / ly THREE / in ALL / GOD'S U / ni VERSE /

/ iamb / iamb / iamb / spondee / iamb /

 

Yes, in L2, the third foot is an anapest. Line three scans as follows:

 

Thee speaking, and me listening! and replied

/ thee SPEAK / ing and / ME LIST / ening AND / re PLIED /

/ iamb / { pyrrhic / spondee } / anapest / iamb /

 

Note the pyrrhic/ spondee "double iamb" in F2/F3, and as you can see, the line conforms. It has four iambs and an anapest when the double iamb is taken into consideration.

 

Line four scans as follows:

 

One of us . . . that was God, . . . and laid the curse

/ONE of / us THAT / was GOD / and LAID / the CURSE /

/ trochee / iamb / iamb / iamb / iamb /

 

I like your scansion of L5 -- F4 would be an anapest if scanned as such -- but I might scan a bit differently:

 

So darkly on my eyelids, as to amerce

/ SO DARK / ly ON / my EYE / lids AS / to aMERCE /

/ spondee / iamb / iamb / iamb / anapest /

 

I like your scansion better if the line is taken by itself, but to me, it flows better this way when I read it together with the lines before and after. Yes, the word "as" is promoted, but don't forget about modulation; the line is pretty fast at that point.

 

In L6, the last foot is an anapest, as you've noted, and yes, the last syllable of L7 is stressed. The dictionary shows the first syllable of "signify" with a primary stress and the third syllable with a secondary stress. And in L8, "absolute" is stressed per dictionary one of two ways: with the primary stress on the first syllable and the secondary stress on the third syllable or vice versa. Either way is fine! But yes, to answer your question directly, F2 in L8 is an iamb. (F1 in L8 could also be a spondee.)

 

Line nine, I would scan as follows:

 

From God than from all others, O my friend!

/ from GOD / than from / ALL OTH / ers O / my FRIEND /

/ iamb / { pyrrhic / spondee } / iamb / iamb /

 

Again, your scansion of the line is totally fine if the line is taken by itself. But when the line is read together with its preceding and following lines, the pyrrhic/spondee double iamb makes sense.

 

F1 of L10 should probably be a trochee (again, the context), and L11 would scan as follows:

 

Nor the seas change us, nor the tempests bend

/ nor the / SEAS CHANGE / us NOR / the TEM / pests BEND /

/ { pyrrhic / spondee } / iamb / iamb /iamb /

 

For me, L13 is the most problematic. I don't particularly like it, because it technically scans with six stresses using the normal rules:

 

And, heaven being rolled between us at the end

/ and HEA /ven BE / ing ROLLED / beTWEEN / us AT / the END /

/ iamb / iamb / iamb / iamb / iamb / iamb/

 

I suspect she's shortening "heaven" (heav'n) or treating "being " as one unstressed foot (which I refuse to do):

 

/ and HEA / v'n being ROLLED / beTWEEN / us AT / the END /

 

This is no good in my opinion. "Being" is properly BEing, and this is just trying to hammer the line into the pentameter mold. At best, it's a line of hexameter, perhaps an Alexandrine if I can make the leap to accept that there's a caesura after "rolled." But that's not to detract from the poem. In any case, it is what it is: a lovely poem.

 

Tony

 

 

/ but ON / ly THREE / in ALL / GOD's U / niVERSE /

/ have HEARD / this WORD / thou hast SAID / himSELF / beSIDE /

/ thee SPEAK / ing and / ME LIS / tening AND / rePLIED /

/ ONE of / us THAT / was GOD / and LAID / the CURSE /

/ SO DARK / ly ON / my EYE / lids AS / to aMERCE /

/ my SIGHT / from SEE / ing THEE / that IF / i had DIED /

/ the DEATH / weights PLACED / there WOULD / have SIG / niFIED /

/ LESS AB / soLUTE / exCLU / sion NAY / is WORSE /

/ from GOD / than from / ALL OTH / ers O / my FRIEND /

/ MEN could / not PART / us WITH / their WORLD/ ly JARS /

/ nor the / SEAS CHANGE / us NOR / the TEM / pests BEND /

/ our HANDS / would TOUCH / for ALL / the MOUN / tain BARS /

/ and HEAV / en BE / ing ROLLED / beTWEEN / us AT / the END /

/ we SHOULD / but VOW / the FAST / er FOR / the STARS /

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Victor,

 

Thank you for your sympathy. I probably won't write a lot in meters, but I do want to know how it works so that I can appreciate the metered poems better. This needs practice for sure.

 

Regards.

 

Lake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you so very much Tony. It really helps!

 

I compared my scansion with yours and realized what my problems are.

 

Trying too hard to put it in a strict iamb pentameter.

Still not very familiar with other kinds of feet.

Should've read it naturally, read it in the context.

 

But I'm glad I got the secondary stress right and caught the anapest. From your example, I've also learned how to divide syllables ( I thought I knew, but I didn't) in a disyllable, multisyllable word. I'll come back to read it again as well as the discussions on this thread above my post, which I hadn't had the time to read yet. This stuff really needs practice.

 

Thanks million!

 

Lake

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

hi lake, tony, waxwings, tinker,...

 

 

i am surprissed no one has continued this conversation further in awhle.. i for one do want to learn but i use online dictionaries and they differ on sybllaic stresses. as for the longest word memtion for metered poetry i am clueless. the word doesn't even stick in my head. i have veen working on 3 meteric meteed and 4 metric meter stanzas and also working only longer metered poetry the last week and ir is very tiring mentally. but i am enjoy the challenge lol. it iw actually very fun playing with words in eight stanzas of 5 line placement in each stanza. i changed word so many very beautiful expressions.im stanzas but i had o change sentences so the story makes sense lol.

 

these two poems stood out for me,

 

But only three in all God's universe (unscanned version)

 

 

 

 

But only three in all God's universe

Have heard this word thou hast said,---Himself, beside

Thee speaking, and me listening! and replied

One of us . . . that was God, . . . and laid the curse

So darkly on my eyelids, as to amerce

My sight from seeing thee,---that if I had died,

The death-weights, placed there, would have signified

Less absolute exclusion. 'Nay' is worse

From God than from all others, O my friend!

Men could not part us with their worldly jars,

Nor the seas change us, nor the tempests bend;

Our hands would touch for all the mountain-bars:

And, heaven being rolled between us at the end,

We should but vow the faster for the stars.

 

 

 

lake this very good example to use not going to learn anything in relogious meaning nor was i intended to. this poem really sounds clicking wise crisp to read aloud and the sentence structureis smooths and follows simple pattern and it flows like listening toa river when read aloud lol.

 

 

 

Acquainted With the Night

I have been one acquainted with the night.

I have walked out in rain --and back in rain.

I have outwalked the furthest city light.

I have looked down the saddest city lane.

I have passed by the watchman on his beat

And dropped my eyes, unwilling to explain.

I have stood still and stopped the sound of feet

When far away an interrupted cry

Came over houses from another street,

But not to call me back or say good-bye;

And further still at an unearthly height

One luminary clock against the sky

Proclaimed the time was neither wrong nor right.

I have been one acquainted with the night.

 

 

wow tony this is a gem. this is oine of the most beautifully written poems that i have ever read when read spoken aloud. it fliwed was smooth sounded so fun and simple yet had a great short story that emerged that i enjoyed. i enjoyed exploring metered poetry when the sentence structure has meaning and shows a great story as each line carried the story and also each line could hold its own.

 

two very beautifully written poems.

 

 

 

victor

Edited by Larsen M. Callirhoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.