06-02-2014, 12:05 PM
WJ,
I’m working nights with brain-dead oafs (4)(a)
who live to smoke on break; (3)(b)
they’re rough and tumble friendly folks, (4)(a)
but I just can’t relate. (3)(b)
I don’t hack darts or throw my fists(4)©
or scrounge for strange between my shifts,(4)©
I write and sing and cry inside instead.(4) (x)
This starts out as common meter (CM) Alternating lines of iambic tetrameter, and iambic trimeter, with an xyxy rhyme scheme. This is what you do in the first stanza, however in the second stanza you leave out the lines of trimeter, and add an extra line of tetrameter, with the first two lines as rhyming couplet. This is jarring when read. It can be used for that purposefully, but I do not think you are doing so here. Example (of jarring, because what is expected does not happen):
Out in the West Texas town of Lampasas (pronounced Lamp-pass-us)
There are girls with very big hats.
One expects the second line to read "There are girls with very big asses." when that does not happen it is jarring. In this case it is used to comedic effect, so it is used in a positive way. However, when it occurs without intention it is disruptive to the poem, and as CM is one of the easiest meters to master (nice alliteration dale), it also makes the writer appear as though he does not know what he is doing. Of course in my book, not looking good is a very far second, to not being able to control what one is writing. QDS comment about loosing "my" is incorrect. The first line of the second stanza is perfect iambic tetrameter as is the second line. Reading it as free verse, which is what this looks like in the second stanza, and I assume QDS was doing, I can understand his comment. The last line is an unrhymed line of IP (iambic pentameter, or five feet of iambs). Whether or not this was intentional, I think it is safe to say it did not achieve the desired results.
Breaking from an established pattern in a poem, or anything else actually, will always create a jarring effect. In poetry it will disrupt the reading of the poem either at the conscious or unconscious level, unless it has been made obvious that doing so was for a specific effect. Even when not noted at a conscious level, it will disrupt the poem, and the reader will recognize this at some level, even though they are unable to explain what was wrong.
Sorry, in a bit of a rush,
Dale
I’m working nights with brain-dead oafs (4)(a)
who live to smoke on break; (3)(b)
they’re rough and tumble friendly folks, (4)(a)
but I just can’t relate. (3)(b)
I don’t hack darts or throw my fists(4)©
or scrounge for strange between my shifts,(4)©
I write and sing and cry inside instead.(4) (x)
This starts out as common meter (CM) Alternating lines of iambic tetrameter, and iambic trimeter, with an xyxy rhyme scheme. This is what you do in the first stanza, however in the second stanza you leave out the lines of trimeter, and add an extra line of tetrameter, with the first two lines as rhyming couplet. This is jarring when read. It can be used for that purposefully, but I do not think you are doing so here. Example (of jarring, because what is expected does not happen):
Out in the West Texas town of Lampasas (pronounced Lamp-pass-us)
There are girls with very big hats.
One expects the second line to read "There are girls with very big asses." when that does not happen it is jarring. In this case it is used to comedic effect, so it is used in a positive way. However, when it occurs without intention it is disruptive to the poem, and as CM is one of the easiest meters to master (nice alliteration dale), it also makes the writer appear as though he does not know what he is doing. Of course in my book, not looking good is a very far second, to not being able to control what one is writing. QDS comment about loosing "my" is incorrect. The first line of the second stanza is perfect iambic tetrameter as is the second line. Reading it as free verse, which is what this looks like in the second stanza, and I assume QDS was doing, I can understand his comment. The last line is an unrhymed line of IP (iambic pentameter, or five feet of iambs). Whether or not this was intentional, I think it is safe to say it did not achieve the desired results.
Breaking from an established pattern in a poem, or anything else actually, will always create a jarring effect. In poetry it will disrupt the reading of the poem either at the conscious or unconscious level, unless it has been made obvious that doing so was for a specific effect. Even when not noted at a conscious level, it will disrupt the poem, and the reader will recognize this at some level, even though they are unable to explain what was wrong.
Sorry, in a bit of a rush,
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.