All the same, were I the professor I would not have dropped but rather emphasized the traditional forms. The stricter the form, the better the poetry: this is because the more imagination and thought has to be put into how to express one's intended meaning in the given form. Even a poor poet can produce a decent sonnet if they take the time to get the form right. The strictness drives the development of the processes of mind that allow for the construction of better poems then even in the looser forms.
Tennyson did great things in blank verse, but he didn't start there. "He mercilessly subjected his productions to the most painstaking revision.[3] He attempted various styles, and experimented with all sorts of metres. Thus he served his laborious apprenticeship and acquired a mastery of his art."
(They don't study Tennyson anymore either.)
In any case I have written several sonnets in the 21st century. They are poor poetry, perhaps; they certainly would not obtain publication in a fashionable journal. That was not their purpose, however: nor their intended audience. Addressed to the right person, at the right hour, the form is of lasting value.
3 comments:
I have managed to write a few decent Shakespearean sonnets, and basic rhymed and verse in iambic pentameter. When I tried the sestina, I crashed and burned. I will stick with the less strict forms.
LittleRed1
Plug for the Society of Classical Poets, which publishes, teaches, and encourages the writing of traditional forms of English poetry. They have guides on how to do it, regular contests to test yourself against, etc.
Shakespeare's Sonnets should be read by all young people, before they are married, or not long after. They are deeply powerful and speak to the eternal drives and quests we all face.
The academics decry turning universities into job training centers in other majors, but when it comes to their own, apparently they're all for it? Curious.
Post a Comment