A Modest Proposal (Meter Discussion)

[ellajam]

Thanks Milo - how do I move the thread to the discussion forum? I.e. is there a way to move the contents of it?

Erthona - thanks your comment. Of course I'm open to critique - but I wanted to check I was receiving factually accurate critique. You originally wrote "The first stanza is in common meter. Alternating lines of iambic tetrameter and iambic trimeter." What I was humbly questioning was whether it does in fact alternate "lines of iambic tetrameter and iambic trimeter". It doesn't seem to.

In any case, is there a way, Moderator, to move the thread, lock stock, to the more appropriate forum?

I'm very keen to learn more about meter etc.

Oh my, two mod warnings, you're in trouble now, son Talk about getting off on the wrong foot. Fucking around with metre in Serious is like fucking with people's emotions.

Ha, two mod warnings is either a ban or a welcome to the club, and lacan's still here.

[milo]

But Milo, and Billy, and Erthona: isn't Common Meter defined not simply as 4-3-4-3, but rather 4 iambs, 3 iambs, 4 iambs, 3 iambs?

That's what it says in the first four dictionaries I looked in. In fact Common Meter is often defined as Iambic Tetrameter / Iambic Trimeter.

So, by definition, Common Meter is 8.6 8.6.

Which would mean Amazing Grace, the Lucy Poems, et al are not, strictly speaking, "perfect common meter"?

You seem to have some confusions on what defines iambic tetrameter/trimeter, what makes it go wrong and what is simply normal substitution.  Rather than try to compress a level 300 English course into a paragraph, why don't you call out the lines in "Amazing grace" that you feel are not common meter and i can then go through them.

[Leanne]

Now that this is not in the Serious Workshop, I can quite happily say that I enjoyed the poem itself and its premise -- however, rhyme and meter are bedfellows by necessity.  You mention a metronome rather derisively, as if keeping a beat is a bad thing.  Metric poetry turns easily into song, and I've never heard anyone say that a drummer should just play whatever beat he feels like.  Meter is your drum.  It does not have to always stay the same, but any departures must be clearly deliberate and not just the sign of someone who hasn't practised enough.

Because I have occasionally written metered poetry, and have been known to rhyme once or twice, I have left a few resources around the site explaining how and why it's done.  So has milo.  Sometimes, if we're very fortunate, Erthona imparts wisdom also.  You may find this thread on narrative poetry to be of some use, for even though your poem is not a narrative, the same metric principles apply.  Additionally, milo's Basic Metric Exercises thread is certainly worth a read and a bit of practise.  

The tetrameter/trimeter alternating line combination that you refer to is called a hymnal stanza or, as has been pointed out, common measure.  Amazing Grace does indeed fit that perfectly.  On a related note, iambs may also be headless, i.e. missing the unstressed syllable (generally only one on a line or we won't still call it iambic), which would change the syllable count that beginning poets always seem so hung up on.  There are many permissible substitutions. It is not the entire syllable count that matters in meter so much as the number of stressed syllables -- naturally stressed syllables, that is, not squished up together so that we have to force them to fit.

As to the Rime of the Ancient Mariner, Coleridge is well known for metric deviations and mixed meter in his poems.  He was a master of using meter to control pace and mood.  Nothing was accidental and nothing was due to ignorance.  There are, therefore, stanzas in the Rime that are not hymnals -- but there are enough in perfect tetrameter/trimeter to consider this his dominant meter and those stanzas alone are quoted as examples, like this one:

He holds him with his skinny hand,
'There was a ship,' quoth he.
'Hold off! unhand me, grey-beard loon!'
Eftsoons his hand dropt he.

Thank you for continuing this discussion, which should be valuable not only to yourself, but to others who may be making the same missteps.

[lacan123]

Leanne, thank you for such a balanced and informative reply - that begins to make sense of it for me. I am, obviously, brand new to the idea of meter and when I discovered two days I was not only accidentally doing it but doing it wrong, I did a quick look-up in dictionaries and came away with my rigid ideas about the relation of iambs to syllables; various reputable sources do specifically equate meter to syllable counts. But your explanation - especially in the third paragraph - makes sense of that. I will take your advice and look at the material you and milo have on the site over the weekend.

Thank you again for such a generous and informed response.

[shemthepenman]

Leanne, thank you for such a balanced and informative reply - that begins to make sense of it for me. I am, obviously, brand new to the idea of meter and when I discovered two days I was not only accidentally doing it but doing it wrong, I did a quick look-up in dictionaries and came away with my rigid ideas about the relation of iambs to syllables; various reputable sources do specifically equate meter to syllable counts. But your explanation - especially in the third paragraph - makes sense of that. I will take your advice and look at the material you and milo have on the site over the weekend.

Thank you again for such a generous and informed response.

seriously, does it really matter what you call it, in this case. The poem was relatively amusing, at best. and metre and feet and perfection are all just out dated philosophical concept from the 16 hundreds that people who know everything about it and are good at it promote to make themselves feel special (anyone who is an expert in poetic metre is like a champion tiddlywinks player; or even worse, the fellow that knows about the champion tiddlywink player). The fact is, literally no one else gives a fuck and a poem is not won or lost on this social construct. The idea that metre or rythme or rhyme makes a peom is just absolute shite. Revolt!

[Leanne]

Don't mind Shem, he hasn't taken his happy pills today. Also, he's been sniffing paint.

[Leanne]

In terms of meter: do it or eschew it,
don't do it, screw it up and have a cry
when other people call attention to it --
there's nothing you can't fix if you just try.

[shemthepenman]

Don't mind Shem, he hasn't taken his happy pills today.  Also, he's been sniffing paint.

Oh fucking hell Leanne, I was being all rebel and revolutionary :/

[Leanne]

As you very well know, this is a serious discussion. As such, it will inevitably deteriorate into ridiculous verse and something about bottoms... but give it a chance for a couple of hours at least

[lacan123]

Did you just write that Leanne? If you did, you're my poetic guru. That was what I wanted to do: write high-flown twaddle. By twaddle I mean stuff that isn't personal. I feel the world has enough poems that are chiefly about the misery and importance of the person writing them.

Shem; clearly meter, feet &c are a bourgeois instrument of oppression and will eat themselves.

[milo]

Leanne, thank you for such a balanced and informative reply - that begins to make sense of it for me. I am, obviously, brand new to the idea of meter and when I discovered two days I was not only accidentally doing it but doing it wrong, I did a quick look-up in dictionaries and came away with my rigid ideas about the relation of iambs to syllables; various reputable sources do specifically equate meter to syllable counts. But your explanation - especially in the third paragraph - makes sense of that. I will take your advice and look at the material you and milo have on the site over the weekend.

Thank you again for such a generous and informed response.

seriously, does it really matter what you call it, in this case. The poem was relatively amusing, at best. and metre and feet and perfection are all just out dated philosophical concept from the 16 hundreds that people who know everything about it and are good at it promote to make themselves feel special (anyone who is an expert in poetic metre is like a champion tiddlywinks player; or even worse, the fellow that knows about the champion tiddlywink player). The fact is, literally no one else gives a fuck and a poem is not won or lost on this social construct. The idea that metre or rythme or rhyme makes a peom is just absolute shite. Revolt!

I am afraid you are about 100 years late for that revolution and, while it was needed at the time (after 400 years of imprisonment) now, we are kind of over it and people realize that rhyme and meter are just additional tools for writers to make their poetry more enjoyable.  You might as well argue over learning about cubism because you aren't a cubist!

[Leanne]

Did you just write that Leanne? If you did, you're my poetic guru. That was what I wanted to do: write high-flown twaddle. By twaddle I mean stuff that isn't personal. I feel the world has enough poems that are chiefly about the misery and importance of the person writing them.

Shem; clearly meter, feet &c are a bourgeois instrument of oppression and will eat themselves.

Yes, I just wrote it, and yes, it took me a couple of minutes -- or, if you look at it another way, it took me several years. It doesn't happen overnight. Of course, high-flown twaddle is a lofty goal (and possibly my new favourite term) and you will find plenty of it around here -- it's our most popular kind of twaddle. If you haven't already, you should probably join the Pig's Arse. (Yes, that is every bit as disgusting as it sounds.)

[lacan123]

Well I love it. It both refers to and performs the thing whereof it speaks.

I'm going to tattoo it on my face.

[Leanne]

Be honest -- you only want a new tattoo to cover up the one of the naked dwarf you got after that dodgy pizza last June.

[lacan123]

Freakishly close - I'm a dwarf called June with a pizza tattooed on my dodgy face.

Pleased to meet you.

[billy]

yes, but can you explain common meter please?
and can i have some of what shem had...not the anal part of course.

[Erthona]

This notion that an in depth understanding of meter is somehow optional is a serious error (I know nobody seriously thought this, but every now and again I get in a get up on the soapbox and pontificate mood, so...). The why is it is the quickest and best route to understanding the rhythmic components of poetry. All poetry (and yes it is an absolute and I stand by it) should have a rhythmical component to it. The rhythm, cadence, beat, meter, et al., is the basic energy that drives the poem. Have you read a syllabic poem that has no rhythm? Even in syllabic poetry there is an effort, often an unconscious one, to impart an underlying rhythm to the poem. I once knew a fellow who only wrote syllabic poetry. He never seemed to write or even be aware of the rhythmic quality. Even though his content was often very interesting I have never found anything more consistently boring than his poetry. He was a great guy, very intelligent, but his poetry was soulless. The rhythm in a poem is it's soul. One who is not knowledgeably about rhythm often mistake free verse as having no rhythm. This is thought because the person cannot recognize the subtle rhythm in the poem. It does not matter if a reader recognizes it, it is unnecessary. However an aspiring poet cannot remain ignorant of it. In just about any field of endeavor there are going to be these sorts of things one must learn; things that cannot be learned out of a book, but only through repetition, practice, critique and reevaluation. I am very grateful for what formal poetry (metrical poetry) has taught me. This is the thing, rhythm is necessary to poetry, without it poetry becomes dull, boring, drab, dry and soulless, regardless how exciting the content: to learn about rhythm, start with meter. All of this could be wrong. It just so happens in this case it isn't. Learn your parts well, the first recital is Tuesday 4pm at milo's house. Don't forget to bring your Whitman, Dickinson was last semester. 

Consider this your Erthona infarted wisdom for the day

Say, aren't Erthona and wisdom mutually exclusive? Hush maybe they won't realize that.
(Pay no attention to the man behind the fourth wall.)


Dale

 

[lacan123]

Until Leanne joined the discussion I wasn't sure anyone could explain common meter.

Some of your pdf's are very good Billy - I'm going to look at them over the next few days.

[Leanne]

To write a common measure verse
is really not too tricky
a poet cannot do much worse
than this insipid quickie

[rayheinrich]

...  I feel the world has enough poems that are chiefly about the misery
and importance of the person writing them. ...

No, not enough, not yet, or, for that matter, ever and ever!

As long as there's a tiny little crack of a fissure inversely wedged between
misery and import, there's some of us out here trolling in the hinterlandishness
of consequence that are willing to rise above our various assorted, mixed, and
somewhat contradictory æsthetics and sundry principles to supply you with the
mortar that forms the much-denied buttock of your arrogantly poeticized
world-viewishness.

Ha! Take that you superficially erudite phallocentrists; the fundamentally
crucial importance of bottoms is one that even Leanne* wouldn't deny!

*Though, come to think of it, Leanne has never been that much of a bottom denier.
Actually, come to think of it again, she's pretty much always embraced them.