Andrey's questions about poems (split from the intro thread)

[Achebe]

Also, before I forget: rayheinrich mentioned the sound and the rhythm, the musical aspect of reading poetry aloud. Well, as someone who's been listening to music half his life, to me singing is musical; reciting a poem with a speaking tone isn't. You never see/hear someone telling a poet: "Jesus Christ, that was a horrible voice. Let this guy/girl do the reading." or someone telling a singer "Your voice stinks, but that was a great song. Here's your fifty bucks." I think I get the 'rhythm' part, but the 'sound' part ... not really. I suppose the logic here is: anyone can read poetry, no matter how good or bad the voice is. Well, where's the music in that?

Can't even begin to comment on that.  If a colour-blind man sees only shades of grey, does that make the sky less blue to others?

Your reply has to do with a physical perception, a condition no one can do anything about (supposedly). My concern here is with the sonic/musical aspect of poetry. I really don't know how you can connect these two dots.

What's a 'physical perception'? Language, music, and colour are sensory perceptions that are processed in different areas of the brain. The causes are physiological in both cases.
What are we trying to argue here? The possibilities are: i) Nobody can appreciate poetry. This is obviously untrue, so I won't bother to argue this one. ii) Andrey can't appreciate poetry. Why? This seems to be what the discussion has been about so far. iii) Andrey can't appreciate poetry. Can you please help him? Fair enough, and leads on from (ii)

Let's look at the first - why can't Andrey appreciate poetry?
It could stem from three causes:

1. You're autistic. This is not meant as an insult. You may be gifted in music (though we are yet to see any evidence of that), but face difficulties in understanding the written word and more generally, verbal communication. So far, you've been reasonably articulate, so it may be that you're on the mild end of the spectrum. (Note: Edited)

2. You haven't read good poetry, or have started with poetry that is meant for people who already have an appreciation of the basics.
The roots of poetry lie in oral traditions, in epics. At its most basic, poetry is about sonics and rhythm. Rhyme adds an extra layer of rhythm to the lines. Why do we like it? Because it's elemental, it's hardwired in our brains. Rhythmic poetry is something that our brains respond to. If you don't like the basic sing-song rhythm of https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-a...tail/50259 then your brain is wired differently, and just like some people can't see the colour blue or can't smell certain scents, you will not get poetry. There's nothing you can do or discuss.
Now note the above example - it's a basic Elizabethan song, sung by peasants. Nothing fancy.
But if you now move to https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems-a...tail/45217
It's harder to appreciate, but the rewards are greater. The rhythm and rhyme scheme are more complex, and the last line almost sounds like it's being piped through a flute.
Of course, if you've read The Wasteland's Fire Sermon and are coming back to this poem, then you will have a second level of appreciation of this line, though not one that Spenser intended:

They gathered some; the violet pallid blue, 
The little daisy, that at evening closes, 
The virgin lily, and the primrose true, 
With store of vermeil roses, 
To deck their bridegrooms' posies 
Against the bridal day, which was not long: 
      Sweet Thames, run softly, till I end my song

As a note: it's easy to write like this today, because we have learned the tricks of the trade. But no one does it, the same way that no one tries to run the 4 minute mile anymore, or conduct research on optics with prisms.

3. You are not here to actually have a discussion, but an argument, and waste everybody's time. I am not saying that you necessarily are, but that it's a possibility. In that case, I'd recommend you watch this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hnTmBjk-M0c