poetry, meaningful words unfettered by grammar rules

Hi @Shen Friebe I will return to work on Thursday and will be spending less time at the cove, I reply but I am still digesting (I am the anthesis of an instagrammer).Your comments brought out a meaning to my words, that are there but I wasn't fully conscious of them. My original intention of referencing Fry's book was to indicating my argument wasn't to contradict him, but to discuss meaning in an all encompassing manner. Your comments though of the two way flow between technique and 'what do I have to say' challenges my underlying way of thinking of poetry. I think your comments are true, I have been able to think of an instance a few years when I moved from form to story, albeit with dubious success, a stranger who listened thought it contrivance. I am still digesting the significance of your words and will continue to do so.

Malibu barbie; firstly, I thought the first predominately image, the second more concerned with technique ( the reference to B 52 song indicating this). But both convey meanings and like reconstructing a photograph for photoshop snippets, together provide a third. Did you read Bendy's comments on the difference between intention and a readers interpretation this is so true as well.

Do I have to join instagram to read the whole poem of Malibu Barbie? I speak as a failed 'barbie' but have never intended to disparage women who found fun in these images. The universe is directing me deal with these issues again.

Another issue my post was trying to raise was: types of form convey different aspects of a theme; rhyming couplets and other narrative forms are vechicles to depict event or event sequences or talking about emotions (This is not meant to imply that a poet can't take this narrative and create an emotional sub text they do, will and should, but the sub text is below the surface), structures that use prime numbers (2,3,5,7) as principles create vehicles that go inside the emotion or mental state (they are not narrative forms). But is this just my personal experience or have I said something shared by others, this i don't know. Interested in your thoughts on this.

hi shen i will spend some time digesting your comments. I like the fragments from malibu barbie. Will reply

Interesting question, Yvonne. Thank you for considering my two cents (sorry for the late reply- I needed a few days to compose my answer and I wanted to do it properly).

Firstly, allow me to say, I love Stephen Fry. I'd marry him if he'd let me. He is definitely one of the more knowledgeable people I know of; his insatiable passion for history and literature is inspiring and his knowledge is so vast and comprehensive- I mean, he's written a number of books on Greek Mythology and the Trojans alone. Talk about being versatile...

In regards to your q. about whether or not organising a verse is primary to expressing an idea in a poem, I think it is a bit of a 'chicken or the egg' situation. I think you'll find your answer in the next poem you decide to write. You'll need to take a mental note of what it is you write first. What stimulated your creativity enough to start writing this poem? It could be emotion. Or an event that inspired you to divulge in poetry. Or a poetic technique, rhyming scheme, example of alliteration, a story or a song that ignited a spark in you, or made you want to replicate that style or experiment with it? Or, it could be both an idea and verse composition. From personal experience, I sometimes pick an idea and assigned it to a technique that was perfect for the theme and meaning of my idea. I assume a writer who thinks like Fry- once they have finally established what their idea is- will then ask themselves 'how will I express this' as opposed to 'what will I say'. Someone who asks themselves the latter question 'what will I say' will focus more on the literal descriptions they will write and the aesthetics, thus, asserting some form of meaning. This can still be effective and powerful, but so can a stylised, resonating, well composed verse. But then the next question is, which is more important? And which adds more meaning or impact to the poem?

For an example, I will take a few lines from one of my poems and ask you to determine which two lines value descriptions over technique, and which value technique over descriptions:

1. I am the Malibu Barbie in hot pink and sequins

Wearing more rings than I have fingers

2. Fingernails longer than any Hollywood marriage

And more glittery than a highway in a B-52 song

This may not be the best example, but for some reason these four lines came to my mind first (maybe because this is my most personal poem). Anyway, back to the lines: one couplet clearly focuses on particular aesthetics, while the other plays with metaphors, humour(? I guess) and contains a pop culture reference. Both contain meanings of their own, and when coupled. Personally, the latter couplet has more of an impact on me as a reader as there is some evident depth behind the lines. However, the former couplet paints a clear picture of what I may look like or how I dress. On the surface, it seems like that is all it is... or is it? I did throw in some alliteration with the words 'sequins' and 'fingers' and found that they paired together conveniently, and I also found myself almost singing the lines in my mind as I wrote them. So perhaps the verse style/poetic techniques dominated my poem as I wrote it. But it's also possible that the aesthetics did, because in the whole context or meaning of my poem 'Malibu Barbie', aesthetics are important, to a point. Ultimately, I think a lot of the time, your most favoured poetic techniques are already embedded in your psyche and come out in flashes as you write, or as you become inspired by an external influence (i.e. an event or emotional sensation).

Having said that, poetic technique and verse composition play vital roles in the structure of a poem. It amplifies a poet's skill, how well they execute these skills, and they add something substantial to the rhythm and style of a poem. The more impressive the writing style, the more significant the impact is on the reader as well as yourself. But to address your question about whether or not verse composition it adds more meaning to the poem, the answer is it can. Take the example of alliteration in the lines:

I am the Malibu Barbie in hot pink and sequins

Wearing more rings than I have fingers

But now imagine I voluntarily used alliteration throughout the entire poem (which I didn't, because I had other ways of generating a sense of chaos). For me, alliteration often symbolises frantic narration or behaviour, obsessiveness, over-indulgence and energy, and I use it when i want to communicate or assert chaos and extreme emotion. So it does add to the meaning of the poem. Talk about a chicken or egg paradox...

I may need to end my reply here otherwise I will just start to embody the paradox itself! I hope this provides some illumination?

Disclaimer: you may need to replace every mention of 'alliteration' in post with 'slant rhyming', which I think is a fairer depiction of the technique I am using.

I am not as poetically literate as these Jazzy Covers,but that will change soon enough. Unfortunately I haven't read them to give an accurate interpretation of what poets were trying to say.

However,in regards to meaning,theres two kinds of meaning.The readers interpretation and writers intention.

Meaning can get lost in translation,simply put one of those things could be off.And unless one poet decided to put it all their work for free in public domain,readers will not know EVERYTHING.Yes,they will pick up some things in poem,but for completion,if desire,must be DEEP digging involve.

Just cause one reader struggle for meaning of poem,doesn’t mean all will.If all did,they didn't focus on depth of meaning,thankfully,there are poetic researchers out there that may have done it for us.And still unsatisfied???All boils down to reader.

Also want to add,intention and interpretation doesn’t always have to match.Probably,biggest reason is how reader understand poem.And poet that wrote poem aren't always linear.

I like to think comprehension comes down to what interpretation reader was able to pick up.Mainly from reader page of a notebook.Unalignment could also be who the poet is writing for.One or many.Poets may be most mis understood writers.Just saying it for myself,reminder that most poets may feel same way.If they wanted to be understood,write relatable poems that are so "DEEP",totally not contrive.Tell,don't show,and publish tumbler posts as Literary Masterpieces.

Something I pick up during my poetry studies is that the biggest audience one should write is for poet themself.Mainly,that's just who the poet could be writing for the entire time.Once context is added and historical background sets scene,poem may start to make sense.However,audience might not know 100,90,even 79 percent poet wasn't writing for many just writing for one.Opposite can also be true.Depends on kind of person they are,type of content/topics,and who/what inspired them to write in first place.

"What am I trying to express?" Is the equivalent to this question "What is the point in all this?" Identical,as they're trying to make sense common,not create a demon.Sometimes,things don't make sense.Sometimes,things do.

Some poems I have written were just streams of consciousness and may never see light of day.Some pieces I written,sounded great in my head,but when I perform them,Lions may have ROAR,and others.....Crickets.....I've realize that while reader/poet or performer/audience connection might be there,its not vital.Meaning,intention is catering to either one of those people.Examples,when I perform,primarily for me.When I write,it's primarily for me.Back then,was about THEM,THEM,THEM.After being completely exhausted of writing for THEM,same THEM I never met in real life,I focus on me.Considering,I use to give a CRAP about providing a grandiose,performance,performing/

writing for me is such an UPGRADE!!

For poets you mention,might have been same thing.And vice-versa also.

Not everything needs to make sense.This is coming from the guy who try to make sense in everything.

Quite honestly,if everything make sense,great,not everything needs to though.At times,you flow.Other times,you shock.Burn,run through a tree,with no cuts or scratches.

Point being,yes,message of poem might be there.Exact message,requires alot of DEEP DIGGING.

Even then,might not get all of it,depending on where your looking.

All in all,purpose of writing anything can come at anytime.Beginning,middle or end of process and different for everyone.Techniques,form,syllable count,creates poem.They're toppings on an Ice Cream Sundae. Along with anything else written within poetic effect. Couldn't decipher what those poets could mean,as I haven't read them,which leads to two poets you tag.

Hi Yvonne

Well to start with I've only been writing poetry since January this year and I haven't read a lot and I'm also not too good at writing text but I'll give you my opinion as best I can.

I agree that the meaning is what is most important in a poem. I understand that Fry is quite romantic when it comes to poetry, and although I'm not familiar with his writing I do see his point.

I think it's completely possible to write a fantastic piece with no attention to meter or rhyme or any other poetic trick, as you said, meaning trumps everytime. But there is much to be said for traditional forms. I love to read a piece in meter or with clever rhymes. I recently read a villanelle about quarantine and I think that the form led itself perfectly to the content.

I guess grammar shouldn't be messed with too much as it's there for a reason, so we can make sense out of the words.

I don't know if this makes sense I'm not much good at this type of stuff.

Maybe I can leave you with this, this sums up what I want to say.

I could write a limerick about a corpse but the poem should contain a little black humour.