Equinoxe
Not a pod person
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2005
- Posts
- 13,356
Wow. Teach me that!
Well, I don't know quite how good I am or how successful my Sapphics have been, but I can certainly explain how the form works in English (or in Greek, but not in Greek).
More precisely, the form poems have standard wrappers, while each "non-form poem" has a custom wrapper (when its good). The best poems of both types are optimal (or nearly so), which in effect is something kin to a wrapper.
True. I just wanted to warn authors of form poems to avoid being satisfied just due to satisfying the formal requirements of the form.
The idea of the form poetry is healthy only under the assumption that the form is no excuse for any compromises. Instead, the form should stimulate you and force you to find poetic extra-original, unexpected solutions. I believe that in part Les'mian's originality and flights of imagination were simply necessary to achieve the double goal: satisfy the form and never lower your poetic standards.
This--among other things--means that you never insert a word just for the sake of a rhyme or to get the rhythm. Each word has to carry poetry.
Best regards,
Absolutely. The form of a poem, if there is one, must become a part of the expression and each word in a poem must do what all the words together do—it must serve the poem's meaning. A form poem which meets the requirements of the form and nothing more is no better than a non-form poem which meets the requirements of the form and nothing more, except that it may help one to get a feel for the form, which could be useful for writing poems which do more than merely meet the form.