So in my Reading Poetry class, the topic of "shaped poems" came up. The argument in our essay read that it added a new dimension to the poetry and helped develop the visual stimulation necessary to fully appreciate the words on the page for that given poem. A number of people in the class, teacher included, seem to disagree, saying its a gimmick that doesn't add value to the poem and seems to distract from the ideas in place.
Seeing as a number of poets, poetry readers, and just plain poetic souls occasionally pass by this blog, I'm curious to hear what anyone who sees this has to say. This is, I believe, the first time I've ever called out to the people for a response, so I guess it's also an experiment on that front, as well. I wonder.
I, personally, reallly like shaped poems. I guess there are always exceptions; if they're well written, I think the shape adds to it and overall makes it more interesting. But, if the words are crappy or don't make sense, then there isn't really a need for shape, since there are bigger problems to worry about.
ReplyDeleteI did a shaped poem once or twice, and I thought it was cool. haha
I agree, when a shaped poem is done well the visual can add another dimension to the poem's content. When it's done poorly it can come off as just a gimmick, but you can say that about other poetic techniques as well.
ReplyDeleteright. on one hand, it can be argued that poetry should be powerful enough that it doesn't need that extra boost that seemingly is there just to draw attention to the page, but on the other hand, poetry is as much a visual art as it is literary. reading in general is a visual process, and as an ART, who is to say that poetry must be in straight metered lines? it is the artist's (author's) creative right to do as he pleases with the image of the words on the page to express whatever idea he wishes, and shaping the text on the page is an expression of an idea.
ReplyDeleteWho is to say that poetry MUST be anything? I consider most of my blog to be poetry in some form, but little of it adheres to modern "rules" and conceptions of poems. If you're talented enough to tastefully arrange your words into picture form- and even more so in type as Kayla has in the past!- then that skill and thought should be appreciated.
ReplyDeleteOh. Hahah, also. Poets nearly ALWAYS give their poems a shape. Just because it isn't in the shape of an object doesn't mean much. You have to choose where to end one line, where to begin another, and there's not really any such thing as incorrect punctuation in a poem. Emily Dickinson used hyphens galore to give her poems a certain look, flow and, yes, shape.
ReplyDeleteYes! I had wanted to mention that and forgot. I mean, I've spent WEEKS in class learning where to separate lines and different terms and techniques for doing so, so why must that aspect of it be conventional? You used Dickinson, I was going to mention ee cummings. He's recognized worldwide as a great and revolutionary poet, yet people still want to pigeonhole poetry into a rigid, drab, iambic pentametric encyclopedia of rehashed metaphors.
ReplyDelete