During a recent discussion over at Poets On Fire, some posters expressed doubts as to whether English-language poetry written in syllabics possesses a music of its own. I'd argue it certainly does. I've been writing in syllabics for over a decade - the form gives me room to play within a musical structure that I can follow, challenge and mould as need be.
The key point for me after so long using syllabics is that I now find an additional syllable jars just as much as a misplaced stress would in metrical verse. The use of syllabics doesn't consist of number-crunching. These days I can't imagine having to count syllables to work out whether a line fits into the form - my ear's been trained to tell me.
I've no time for pointless arguments about the supposed superiority of metrics, syllabics or free verse, but I am convinced all three offer us their own music.
DISPLACED They called her aloof, impractical, clumsy, plain. It was, they
say, difficult for her not to fall in love.In spite, that is, of the first
coughs...
I concur. I don't feel free verse describes well what I normally do, but I suppose that's what it tends to fall into. Occasionally I turn to syllabics and have always worked with an even number of syllables, a way, I think, to generate iambic runs without dogged exactitude. Arguing that one form is superior to the others is pointless, I agree, but I do think versatility among these uses of rhythm is a great asset.
ReplyDelete