Coffee Lounge

What does everyone think about this. It is widely believed, it seems, that a poem must be metered to provide it with, shall we say, rhythm. That said: does anyone think that rhyme can be used in lieu of meter. Sometimes, I draft a poem making sure that it has some rhyme scheme. Then I think about meter and at least try to put some pattern of syllables into the thing. What happens more than not? The poem sounds worse with a patterned meter than it did before. Why? Probably because we don’t talk that way, in perfectly syllabic metered sentences. Yes, I know we don’t speak as we do in poems either, but that point alone does not account for the loss of eloquence that sometimes occurs when meter is used for the sake of using meter.

Now non-rhyming poetry is quite different. Perhaps some rhythm must be established when there is no rhyme scheme. That said: must we count on our fingers: 5-7-5, syllables etc. to establish a nice readable flow? Couldn’t we just make certain that it sounds good? What possible reason could exist to construct a poem in such a way as it should not sound as good as it might have. Have you ever heard people like Charlton Heston speaking? (Not a big fan, just an example and there are others.) You know that confident, very intelligent sort of speech pattern. They emphasize the right words at the right times and pause at the perfect moments.

These notions cause me to enjoy reading and writing more in the style of “projective verse” rather than that of true “free verse.” As is often said. There is nothing free about it.

I am hoping to provoke many fine thoughts. Thank you in advance for sharing.