Where I Once As A Passerby Stood

[bags123]

Where I Once As A Passerby Stood.

A melodious song from the wood
Where I once as a passerby stood
Contemplating life's riddles aloud
Overheard by the forest born crowd.

First a rustling of leaves did I hear
Then Pan's pipes became distantly clear,
and the voices of birds sang the words
to a chorus which I'd never heard

From the start to the end it was grand,
and apparently all went as planned
A melodious song from the wood
Where I once as a passerby stood.

[heinzs]

[bags123]

Thanks Heinz. I stopped into an online poetry forum based in the UK the other day,...and got torn a new A------! Rhyming is definitely out of fashion over there. It's been officially outlawed... I think they consider Robert Service the AntiChrist. Also,...I was told,..."any expression of sentiment in a poem should be expressed in very neutral terms". What a bunch of hokum!

[heinzs]

what is acceptable changes with time. The classics, though, will always remain. If Shakespeare could use rhyme and meter, then so be it. Phooey to the snobbish brits.

[bags123]

Indeed!

[poeticpiers reborn]

I dont care what the critics say.
Cant agree with modern views
which state that we : refuse.
I will write the way I choose
Prose poetry is not free verse
The very name is quite perverse.
I choose to stick with what I know
because I want my words to flow.
I use meter all the time
and don't see rhyming as a crime

[bags123]

I dont care what the critics say.
Cant agree with modern views
which state that we : refuse.
I will write the way I choose
Prose poetry is not free verse
The very name is quite perverse.
I choose to stick with what I know
because I want my words to flow.
I use meter all the time
and don't see rhyming as a crime

I think my first rememberances of anything poetic, were when my Mom would read me Dr. Suess books out loud. "The 500 Hats of Bartholomew Cubbins" was one of my favorites
From that point on I think I was hooked on rhyme and meter. Anything that doesn't employ some aspect of both I personally don't consider poetry. I think we should devise another word for this type of writing. Proseity perhaps. Just so we no longer confuse it with Poetry. Makes it easier to distinguish,...if you get my drift. Thanks Ivor.

[Bruno]

It seems you haven't yet qualified for The Shit Creek Review which is actually Australian but whose sensibility is very much like the UK variety.

I stopped writing poetry many years ago. It was for pleasure only which it has long ceased to be. It means nothing to me now but I still like to peruse how others express themselves. I never resist reading yours!

[bags123]

It seems you haven't yet qualified for The Shit Creek Review which is actually Australian but whose sensibility is very much like the UK variety.

I stopped writing poetry many years ago. It was for pleasure only which it has long ceased to be. It means nothing to me now but I still like to peruse how others express themselves. I never resist reading yours!

Thanks Bruno. I have not encountered "The Shit Creek Review" as yet. Probably for the best. Why has the pleasure been removed from writing your poetry? I for one,....would enjoy reading one of yours.

[Bruno]

I was on a site for a short time - until I begged to be executed - where this publication was often mentioned among others. Most of the forum members had or attempted to have their names "inscribed" here. It was a "go to" place to be published though not the only one. Some of the poems actually were not bad. Very few I would describe as exceptional. Most of the time the Shit Creek lived up to its name according to my own unsophisticated way of judging merit.

http://www.shitcreekreview.com/issue4/index.htm'

Whatever! You decide if you're interested to look. Every time somebody had a poem published they immediately advertised it which I find pathetic especially when a chorus of congratulations and Hallelujahs followed the announcements. Oh joy indeed! Immortality in a Black Hole is not exactly going to reflect your glory! What was once a Dragon has become a snail. Mediocrity killed the Dragon. The little people rule, those without thought who can barely write decent prose find writing "poetry" is "easier" and "stupid" becomes its own art form. It reminds me of Piero Manzoni an "artist" who canned his own poop! Most people take the path of least resistance and do it verbally instead. They call it "poetry".

I think writing poetry now is only worth it to please oneself but with sufficient talent it's still possible to appeal to others which is the reason I still like to read yours. In spite of what I said, I'm sure there are still some amazing talents out there...somewhere!

...as for myself, writing poetry is like trying to resurrect the dead. Without further will or interest even one's talent - assuming one had any - fades "gently" into that final twilight where even dawn remains as dim as night. It means nothing to me. Whatever ceases to gratify is no longer required and that means anything and everything...according to a not so recent discovery.

[bags123]

I think writing poetry now is only worth it to please oneself

I'm my own worst critic. It's a rare occurence for me to be completely satisfied when I write,....but I find I'm less satisfied if I don't. I checked out your link,...and it doesn't look like my cup of soup. Which poet are you among those listed?

[Bruno]

Which poet are you among those listed?

..heh, heh! I hope that was a rhetorical question

[bags123]

I'm not really into rhetoric.

[ailill]

I really liked the flow of this piece..

reading some of the other comments.. I have to agree with what some of the others say... there is timeless poetry.. and poetry which is currently in vogue.. What is the difference? I think the timeless poetry captures both spirit and form of a piece.. It is innovative.. transcending.. rich with meaning..
I also think the idea of the modern anti-rhyming movement was meant to free some of that 'spirit' captured by form.. allowing creativity to drive a piece instead of the piece being tied to form..
I mean if i am so worried about the 'laws' of a certain form then it can hamper some of that creative voice.. and flow.. Thus, the original idea behind the movement..
However, like anything, once a movement 'traditionalizes' it establishes 'laws' and then its back to where it started... laws and form cutting off drive and spirit..
in this case anti-form and anti-rhyme driving off the driving spirit of rhyme...
again, the timeless rises above all these rules and anti rules.. thus the reason for its timelessness..
therefore as writers we have to decide, do we want to be hampered by what is currently in vogue? Or do we want to be trendsetters? Creative? Sources of inspiration?
I feel if a piece expresses itself in a certain 'form' and it flows well in that 'form' be it rhyming, free style, whatever then we have done what we set out to do.. inspire, be creative, etc., etc.. and thus who really cares whether the piece is rhyming or not rhyming? A reader should look at the ideas it expresses, how it voices itself, etc., etc... rather than policing the piece with rules encyclopedias or anti rules encyclopedias..
and as a reader.. I liked the flow of this piece.. how it voiced itself.. so in my book it is good...

But another thing... who really cares what I think? That is the other trap that we need to avoid.. an audience shouldn't always have to determine a piece..
and you aren't going to please everyone..
some readers may like your poem.. others may not..

However, if you have inspired one reader.. then you have been effective..

again.. good poem!

[bags123]

I really liked the flow of this piece..

reading some of the other comments.. I have to agree with what some of the others say... there is timeless poetry.. and poetry which is currently in vogue.. What is the difference? I think the timeless poetry captures both spirit and form of a piece.. It is innovative.. transcending.. rich with meaning..
I also think the idea of the modern anti-rhyming movement was meant to free some of that 'spirit' captured by form.. allowing creativity to drive a piece instead of the piece being tied to form..
I mean if i am so worried about the 'laws' of a certain form then it can hamper some of that creative voice.. and flow.. Thus, the original idea behind the movement..
However, like anything, once a movement 'traditionalizes' it establishes 'laws' and then its back to where it started... laws and form cutting off drive and spirit..
in this case anti-form and anti-rhyme driving off the driving spirit of rhyme...
again, the timeless rises above all these rules and anti rules.. thus the reason for its timelessness..
therefore as writers we have to decide, do we want to be hampered by what is currently in vogue? Or do we want to be trendsetters? Creative? Sources of inspiration?
I feel if a piece expresses itself in a certain 'form' and it flows well in that 'form' be it rhyming, free style, whatever then we have done what we set out to do.. inspire, be creative, etc., etc.. and thus who really cares whether the piece is rhyming or not rhyming? A reader should look at the ideas it expresses, how it voices itself, etc., etc... rather than policing the piece with rules encyclopedias or anti rules encyclopedias..
and as a reader.. I liked the flow of this piece.. how it voiced itself.. so in my book it is good...

But another thing... who really cares what I think? That is the other trap that we need to avoid.. an audience shouldn't always have to determine a piece..
and you aren't going to please everyone..
some readers may like your poem.. others may not..

However, if you have inspired one reader.. then you have been effective..

again.. good poem!

There's no excuse for not obeying the rules! That's what I was taught in Catholic School.