Imagery Y'all!

Like everyone else I thought imagery was the greatest part of the prose or poem. I believed that you could tell the reader everything about your creation with a few well placed words. This section didn't really each me anything except that imagery is a smart thing. Everyone knows that expressive words make the most of the writing while keeping it thoughtful and knowing. The problem is that some poems are so short that you have to put all of the imagery in two or three lines, which doesn't seem very smart or very deep. Like everything else in English, imagery is fickle and the rules every changing. There is no right way and if you can explain why you wrote the way you wrote, everything is fine and you are the greatest writer in the world for being so innovative. Poetry can be changed with an "an" or a "the" in front of "apple." Imagery doesn't have to be complex and deep, instead it could be simple and just as deep.

I was gonna do a blog post....then I took an arrow to the knee.

Now I’ve got lots of other [expletive deleted] to do so I’ll attempt to make this one as swift and painless as possible. Now in the past I’ve have not sheltered Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver from my angsty stinging arrows of adolescent criticism. But right now I should be annotating articles about Hamlet and how much he wants bone his mom right now so personal opinions must be a non factor in this one. Now in this chapter Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver discusses imagery and how if factors into the craft of poetry as a whole. The very first thing Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver does is define imagery…thanks I guess. After that Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver goes on using apples and peaches as examples for how we need to use intimate details in our poetry, because clearly something as personalized as poetry absolutely NEEDS detailed imagery or else it does not count and is detritus in the eyes of Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver. Then Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver uses a poem that’s three pages that I to be candid did not read for an example of that apple or peach or pear thing about how awesome details. After that Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver talks about figurative language and how it NEEDS to be believe able or else you suck as a poet and should just go kill yourself because Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver doesn’t approve. The last important thing Gestapo Officer Mary Oliver does in this chapter is conclude her ideas by relating them back to the purpose of literature which I can king of get behind.

shut up

I always thought imagery was my strongest point when it came to anything involving writing, but i guess i was wrong. In the past when i would make a strong effort to use imagery, i would never think of anything this author describes in the book. I simply just used words that, involved objects usually, that the reader could associate with a literal image in the head. Now usually i would try very hard to incorporate a very vivid and specific image to get the imagery across to the reader, but i understand that Oliver claims that it does not complex or specific in any way. Oliver say that it could be very simple and some what vague. Oliver does explain other devices like personification, although she kind of bangs it up a little saying its silly or even sophomoric. I find now think that imagery should be more meaningful in a poem format because of their length. Poem have to be compact a concise, making the imagery necessary to getting the point across more effectively. Oliver also talks about the figurative language being another outlet for imagery to sprout from. I also like how she makes an effort to tell the reader that there is always new forms to approach imagery with, not just the ones that have been taught to us since the 5th grade which i personally find refreshing.

The Image

In the chapter "Imagery" Oliver fully analyzes the aspects of writing that create full and appropriate images for each newly written piece. As a writer I have always thought that one day I would just run out of ways to use personification, allusion, or creative diction in order to produce original pieces. However, Oliver explains that there are always new ways to create an image through the use of figurative language. One can pollute a piece with adjectives and similes but it takes a dedicated eye for creation to use metaphors and allusions appropriately in order to create just the right image for a specific poem.
I learned a lot from the discussion of dropping articles in order to change the meaning of nouns such as the change in "the apple" to simply "apple." Through this process the writer has a much broader range of substance that they can add to their poetry. Are they referring to a particular apple or the fruit as a whole? This is a simple way to add dynamics to work that once seemed straight and narrow. In addition, I liked the section of the chapter which discussed "Universal Images" which are formed through the use of the five senses. Our world is familiar to everyone so use this fact to your advantage and describe through sensory words. It is easy to assume that everyone is has the same understand of the world as the writer but that idea alone doesn't even matter because people will take the writing as it is and use it however they may see fit.

images/personifying

No mind blowing-ness here: we all know what imagery is thanks to basic English class. I was looking forward to some new discovery about imagery that I never would have thought of before in this section, but sadly it was the same old same old. I never really thought about how awesome it is that poet can use imagery within their poems. Poems are so short sometimes, much shorter than a novel or book, so they have such a concise area to portray the overall image to the reader. Some poets do this flawlessly and I really thing this takes alot of skill. When I'm trying to write a poem, it usually takes me several lines to get my image across, when some poets can do it with just a single line! I never really appreciated how much thought and strategy goes in to poetry before. I'm a tad neutral on the personification claims, however. Yes I can agree that sometimes the personification used in poems and writing can be outrageous and are completely unnecessary. However, sometimes a seemingly unrelated object can be used to portray a whole new meaning of a person or thing happening gin the poem. Like imagery, I think correct personification is an acquired skill and in order for it to be effective, it must be really thought over to give it a full meaning.

ImAgErY

Oliver's chapter on imagery surprisingly didn't really blow my mind this time by mentioning something absurd about poetry or poetic devices that I have never heard of before. In past English classes our teachers have always made sure that they go over the meaning of imagery and how it affects the reader, so this section was more of a reminder to me on how to use the correct words to insert an image into your reader's mind. Imagery to a poet is probably the most important tool that he or she can use while composing their work. A poet usually has a limited amount of space to create a large image for the reader to understand, since your average poem is no more than a page, which in turn can be broken down and theorized into many different symbols and meanings.

Her section on personification though, I am also going to have to disagree with like the others have before in previous blog posts. Oliver views personification as a "silly" that one should not use that often while writing poetry. I can see where she is coming from because many nursery rhymes and fairy tales use this device for their characters, but at the same time it has been used by many famous poets to relate inanimate objects to the reader. Personification allows the author to share with others how he or she may view the rest of the world.

Woooohoooo Imagery

"Poems are 'imaginary gardens with real toads in them'." According to Oliver, imagery is the basis of making clear to the reader the overall purpose and intent of a poem. Without imagery in a poem, the tenderness and authenticity of a poem with imagery would not be present. In order to achieve imagery, says Oliver, one must include a representative image that can clearly be formed in a reader's mind. This means that instead of using only descriptive language, one must also incorporate figurative language. Probably the most interesting piece of information I found in this chapter is that "apple" is different from "the apple" or "an apple" being that when using "the" or "an" the reader is actually able to picture an apple, but saying just "apple" makes the reader visualize a number of apples, making the image blurry and seemingly unimportant. Along with her descriptions of how to accurately employ figurative language, Oliver also describes poetic devices, including personification and allusion. When describing personification, Oliver states that in order to successfully incorporate it in a poem, the author must make sure that the inanimate object makes sense. When describing allusion, Oliver includes how using allusion tends to describe the value of which an object of a poetic piece holds and what value it has within the poem itself. Overall, I've got to say that I am pretty impressed with the way Oliver has been describing how to successfully write poetry. Her points are so lucid and her tone is pretty laid-back, making the book easier and more enjoyable to read.

A Candid and Relevatory Document

I think I rather like Mary Oliver. She puts things into words so nicely and concisely.

See what I did there? Le gasp.

In “Diction, Tone, Voice,” I enjoyed how she specified and interpreted the different styles of word choice and voice (again... I can’t handle myself) found in the style of contemporary poetry rather than the dry, formal styles often associated with poetry by beginner writers.
Like Ms. Oliver states in the latter portion of the chapter, “if done well and works to the desired effect” you can do nothing essentially wrong when writing a poem but you must make it accessible, even if it to only yourself. Contemporary poetry allows for greater interpretation, easier flow, and more personality. It is a conversational, comfortable approach to reflection and communication; like the difference between a worn, stretched-out hoodie and a starchy, structured blazer.
The concept of “negative capability,” of leaving out some piece, of leaving a hole empty in the poem to invite contemplation and empathy, is incredibly interesting. It is a style that I have often adopted with out knowing. It often happens that I can’t quite put my finger on why something produces an emotion or question in me and so I explore it through poetry or art, reading and re-reading until I grasp a greater understanding of what I’m trying to find. The example of Linda Hogan’s “Workday” was a moving and powerful piece that displays the use of this quiet questing perfectly.
I was so happy that this chapter did not take that cringe-worthy turn down the path of “Elements of Style” as I was feared it was going to head.

Imagery...

Imagery is a tool that I have been able to use in my writing
through various mediums; poetry, prose, creative pieces of writing, etc, making
it a universal tool in the writing world that can help your readers get a
descriptive sense of where they are and who they are reading about. The most
shocking information that I gained from Oliver’s chapter on imagery was how
simple imagery can be defined. When I am writing a piece of poetry or an essay
I often think of imagery being something that must be extremely descriptive and
detailed to get a true mental image across to the reader of what I am
describing, but this imagery can be something as simple as an adjective before
a noun. Again, Oliver presented many other poetic devices that a writer could
use and she shows how this would affect a person’s writing. For instance,
Oliver describes personification and how it often times makes writing sound
silly and one should try to avoid using this device. However, I beg to
disagree, for as a writer I attempt to use personification to change a poem
into a piece that is much different than the norm while using personification.
I understand that at times it could make writing sound childish, but I think
there is a place for it in many poems. For me, I really do have “write to learn”
when I am creating poetry. I have to try many different forms and use of
devices until I find something that really comes across to me and speaks
volumes about the message I am trying to get across.

Talking in a poem

In Diction, Tone, Voice, Oliver talks about these three important aspects of a poem. She talks about how these three things work closely together in creating a good poem. She states that these three things are crucial to modern poems and have allowed poets to deviate from he more structured, formed poems to a more relaxed, easy going and friendly style that allows a poet to better connect with the reader. Diction, tone, and voice allow a poet to essentially be talking to the reader and truly get across the message and meaning of the poem.
Oliver also talks about the idea that a majority of poems focus on a dark or negative aspect of life or whatever the poet may be writing about. Before, I thought this was simply depression (which it often was), but Oliver provides the term “negative capability” for this. Oliver uses Keats ideas of negative capability to describe it as the idea that a poet is able to understand and connect with a certain topic or idea; this then leads to poets acting as the “negative” side of the subject. This then contributes to the often dark or gloomy side of many poems that poets are able to convey with an elaborate combination of diction, tone, and voice.
This chapter really astonished me. I expected a boring talk about something that we talked about like crazy in AP 11 with rhetorical devices. However, Oliver, thankfully, surprised me. She incorporated many things that I had failed to consider when looking at diction, tone, and voice and displayed how crucial these three things are and how they can be used in a poem to make a poem much better. And, to my surprise, she also included a brief section on what should be excluded from a poem. This really helped advance my knowledge of writing poetry by telling me what I should be doing and what I shouldn't. Glad I read this chapter over Imagery.

Diction. Tone. Voice.

Mary Oliver's chapter on diction, tone, and voice was at first very confusing so I decided to read the chapter once more, unfortunately the second time was just as confusing. Maybe it was all of the vocabulary words, or rather Oliver herself understood yet could not easily put into words what she knew, but I was left wondering what I had just read.

From what I did pick up, the author is very knowledgeable and meaningful when he or she decides to make a poem intimate for the reader. I've always wondered how much time it take poets to write a poem, according to Oliver, there are a lot of things to consider when trying to write a good poem. Oliver ends this little section on contemporary poems by saying that the poets want their poems to be like parables, showing the meaning of life for them. Next, Oliver talks about negative capacity, which to be honest I have no idea what she was talking about.

Oliver moves into talking about the types of poems: lyrical poem, narrative poem, the longer poem, and the prose poem. This section was pretty easy to understand and I believe I could pretty accurately identify what type of a poem is present after reading the descriptions by Oliver. I have always thought of poems as being relatively short, so when Oliver said that the Odyssey was a poem, I thought to myself, "Hmmm, you learn something new everyday."

Next Oliver describes the pros and cons to different word choices, saying that poetic diction, cliche, inversion, and information language was bad. After reading through all of these I could not imagine what other words or phrases there could be, I almost felt restricted. Even after Oliver showed us what was good to use, I continued to feel like poetry is way, way harder than what I had imagined because now I could only use certain words/phrases.

imagery

In the chapter “Imagery”, Mary Oliver goes over the basics of imagery. Initially, Oliver states that imagery is one of the key concepts of imagery that helps deepen the meaning and reveal the poem to the reader. To be quite honest, throughout this chapter, Oliver essentially repeated information that we had already known about for the most part, yet it was a nice refresher to go over the material. All of us know what simile and metaphor are by this time of the year and when Oliver goes over this section, I was quite bored (except for the part where she mentioned what an extended metaphor meant as I was not very sure as to what it stood for). The review over personification and allusion were somewhat interesting as I leant some new information.

Something that I have to disagree with what Oliver said is that one should not try personification if it is bad or silly. Doesn’t this contradict what “try try till you succeed” If one does not use personification because they feel that it is too basic or foolish, then the person is inhibiting their ability to learn. Poetry, in my opinion, is a trial and error process where you keep trying and learning from criticism and feedback. If you don’t write a personification at all, then you are not really improving your poem or your poetry skills. I personally feel that personification is very important in poetry and I only wish that I was good at incorporating it in the poems that I try to write, yet I can’t really come up with a form of personification all the time.

Diction Tone Voice

In this chapter, Mary Oliver addresses three very important parts of a poem which are diction, tone, and voice. She begins by discussing how each of these elements combine in the contemporary poem. They create a sense of friendliness between the poet and the reader. This makes the poem extremely accessible-something that was sorely lacking from the conservative types of poetry. This accessibility has allowed many people to begin reading and writing poetry who otherwise may have been frightened off by the formality of certain formed poems.
Another very interesting idea is that I had never heard of is “negative capability.” I have seen it in action many times, but I never knew there was a specific term for it. I have always thought that a lot of poetry (in my mind too much) can be sad and or depressing. Very few poems that I have read so far are very happy. This has to do a lot with negative capability, which Keats believes is the means by which a poet can fully understand/ sympathize with his/her subject. Because of this ideal, many poets view themselves as the negative force in the poem which often means that their poems will exude a negative/sad/depressing tone or subject.
I appreciated Oliver’s addition to the end of the chapter. It was nice to finally be given in layman’s terms certain things which I should avoid when writing poetry. This entire book is about what one should do when writing poetry, but Oliver has never addressed what one should not do until now. Many of these do nots are common sense, such as using clichés and inversion. But still it is very refreshing to know exactly what I should not do when I am writing (or attempting to) poetry.

what grand imagery;

Mary Oliver described imagery in a manner that I’ve always been rather used to throughout my experience with poetry and to me in particular is one of the most important and difficult things to successfully inscribe in a piece of poetry. Imagery in a poem is meant to be the detailing image that leaves a specific thought or image in the reader’s mind, igniting a possibility of symbolism and varying interpretations. Choosing specific imagery however, hasn’t exactly been something I’ve considered before reading the chapter. Poetry seems to flow out in the manner it’s thought of, not chosen specifically, which only makes my poetry feel all the more amateur (which it really is, so nothing quite new there). The use of metaphors and similes to add importance but also imagery is another interesting quality of poetry – providing the form of “magic” that poems tend to have when read and understood. Personification and other details that make poetry interesting are the things that I’ve been taught since Middle School, which is interesting because after so long of attempting to write poetry, I’ve yet to really earn a firm grasp of the subject or the different types of writing that poetry can entail.

Imagery

Imagery is, of course, an extremely important part of any literature, not just poems, but novels and other writing as well. Imagery makes us picture the characters, visiualize the locations, see the objects. What Oliver points out, though, is that imagery can be anything as simple as saying the "yellow sweater" or as detailed and precise as a description of every last stitch. I am used to calling something imagery when a particularly powerful image is conjured up or a wonderfully detailed description given, but imagery is inevitably a part of every piece of writing, and if it was not we would just see words. Thankfully, we have imagery to help us imagine the poem. Oliver discusses different ways to convey imagery, including analogies, personification, and allusions. I already had a good understanding of these terms, knew the definition of them all, and could easily recognize them, but it was at least interesting to see the examples and to see Oliver's opinion of their importance and their use. While imagery is an integral part of writing, it is not, and Oliver does recognize this, something that a poem can rely soley on, rather a strategy that improves and enlivens a poem.

Yes, that was a Muir quote.

This latest installment of “blow my mind daily” seems to be a pretty strong continuation of the free verse section of the book. The change to a less formal diction to me was a great shift in literature in general, not just in poetry. If I would have had to start out writing my poetry in Terza Rima and using the diction of a Phoenician philosopher, I would have never wrote a poem. I also thoroughly enjoyed the part about Keats saying that the poet themselves must be wholly empty so that they may experience what is around them and allow empathy to fill them. I think this is a strong indication of his respect to diction and tone, because empathy is going to affect one’s tone so that they may curve their words to what the poet wants the audience to feel. As Oliver said, “If a poem sounds a certain way, it’s because the poet wanted it to sound that way.” I enjoyed the thought of inverting a line and after some consideration I do plan on doing that and being successful with it at least once in my life, I feel as though that is a good goal for someone who enjoys writing poetry as I do. This section gives great insight to how a poet should construct not only the form of the poem but the word usage and how even the choice of word placement and how the words would flow together hold a very strong impact on the work as a whole. When you tug on one thing in nature, you find that it is connected to everything.

Free Verse for the win.

I read the chapter on free verse/verse that is free. To be perfectly frank, I am writing about the free verse chapter because I already knew nearly all of the stuff in the formed verse chapter. I mean, I knew a lot of the free verse stuff, too, but I did learn a couple things.

For instance, the origins of free verse were always a little obscure to me. I had generally gathered the impression that free verse was what a poet did in a time crunch when they couldn't pull together a brilliant sonnet, or something the poets crapped out because they straight up did not feel like writing in a certain stressed-speech pattern. As it turns out, it was developed as a way to deviate from the norms, to push the "approved" subject matter to the background and write poetry about anything and everything that came to mind, in any particular way the poet desired. Walt Whitman and William Carlos Williams wrote multiple poems that are perfect examples of such a technique, and Whitman is often considered a pioneer of free verse.

I have always personally enjoyed writing in free verse because when one is writing something, it is generally because they feel strongly about the subject or they have a wonderful idea, and such feelings or thoughts should not be repressed by a rhythmic pattern or meter.

As I read further, I got this lovely tidbit of information thrown at me: free verse still follows a form. Um, I'm sorry, WHAT. Oh my God, the illusion is shattered. It's like the guy in the Mickey Mouse costume at Disney World taking his mask off while he's still on duty, and little childhood me finds out he's just a person in a suit instead of an actual singing, dancing giant mouse--the very foundations of what I once believed have just been annihilated.

Free Verse

Before I read Oliver's section on free verse poems I never really understood them, and typically thought that they were always the lower level poems that could not be put into a structure or rhyming scheme by their author. But as i read on i learned that free verse can offer the author, as well as the reader, a lot more than than your typical poem can.

The free verse poem allows the author to get their point across however they want because they are not held back by any "poetry rules" that authors in the past have had to deal with. I've noticed while reading in class there is often more symbolism and underlying themes in free verse then there is in structured, rhyming poems. The Red Wheelbarrow is the perfect example of this. Even though it is shorter in length than normal poems, and has no rhyme, there are tremendous amounts of underlying themes about how everything can rest on something as simple as a wheelbarrow.

Apperantly W is a f$cking vowel

Within this chapter Mary Oliver discusses the importance and prominence of sound found within poetry. Now I will try and keep my personal opinions on Mary Oliver’s guide to writing poetry in a way that she approves of to myself and stick strictly to discussing her somewhat farfetched ideas on how awesome consonants are and apparently the letter w is vowel. The first topic that Mary Oliver discusses is the principle the words that sound different have different pronunciations and connotations, I was especially thankful for this section of the chapter because my lowly diminutive non Mary Oliver approved of brain could have never figured out on its own that “slow down” and “hurry up” could possibly SOUND different. The next thing that Mary Oliver goes on to rant from her soapbox about is vowels and constants because everyone who is trying to expand their knowledge of poetry like being told {expletive deleted] they learned in third grade. Then Oliver delves deeper into something that no one ever really thought need any more attention with stuff like somewhat constants, semi vowels, heartbroken owls, loose bowels, W is vowel now because she said so. Next Mary Oliver goes on to explain how different words that share a similar meaning are actually used in different situations thanks Mary Oliver never would have figured that one out on my own. The last thing I noticed while leafing through this chapter is some ramblings about double LLs or something.

Free Verse

While reading the chapter on free verse I felt like I was back in middle school learning about poetry. The things discussed on free verse were roughly the same as what I have already been taught. Free verse is poetry that does not have to follow any specific poetic devices. Rhyming, for example, can be found in these types of poems but does not necessarily have to follow a certain structure. Mary Oliver talked about how free verse developed as a product of its time. People were moving west and poets wanted to attract more regular people. This new type of poetry sounded more like talking, and less like teaching. The average person had an easier time understanding what poets were trying to say. The poem, The Red Wheelbarrow, is a good example of free verse. It sounds like talking and does not follow any rhyme schemes. The purpose of the poem is create an image and let the reader decipher its meaning. That's what I got from reading this chapter.

Free Verse

Before reading Mary Oliver's chapter on free verse, I had a few preconceptions about what a free verse poem actually is. Firstly, I thought free verse poems was a poets way of writing when they were too lazy to actually make the words rhyme. Obviously I'm wrong with that thought. Secondly, well I really didn't have any other thoughts on free verse because I've never really understood them. This is why I chose to read Oliver's opinions and expert thoughts on what this kind of poetry is all about.

This relatively new type of poem has grown parallel with the modernization and switch to democracy of our culture. No longer are poets restricted by periods, strict rhythm, and stanzas that make structural sense. The exciting proposition of free verse poems is that poets are just as the name entails, free. Maybe it's not exactly that the poets is free, Oliver does accept that free verse poems have to look and feel like a poem. The poem can become "fluid" and "organic", straying away from the accepted view of poetry.

As Oliver uses examples and continues to convey her point of view of poetry and poems, I'm realizing more and more just how complex poetry can be. On the surface might be a ten word poem but by looking deeper and deeper into its meaning, that ten word poem can become extremely complex. The structure, sound, line length, stresses, punctuation, etc. all help to add dimension and mystery into poetry, part of the reason poems are so intriguing.

Free Verse Ayyyyyy

Before reading the chapter on Free Verse, I was completely convinced that I had been a pro at free verse. Whenever handed the task of writing a free verse poem, I accepted graciously and began writing…freely, and without care. However, reading Oliver’s rendition on free verse I learned that there is a little more to it than writing whatever I feel like writing about. While Oliver makes clear that there isn’t a particular rhythm, design, tone, etc. that must be used in every free verse poem, there must be some incorporation of the traditional poem features. Considering that there aren’t any set rules when it comes to the literal structure of the poem, Oliver is sure to include that there must be some sort of premise/explanation mentioned in the poem near the beginning which, by the end of the poem, is thoroughly explained and clear to the reader. Essentially, every free verse poem must maintain the same idea and focus throughout. Throughout the chapter, Oliver is sure to remind the reader that there really is not a particular way to write a free verse poem. While it is free from the rules of the traditional poetry including metrical prose, it may choose to incorporate a meter somehow; or should I say the poet may choose to. Any free verse poem can be accomplished if the poet so happens to accomplish setting up a premise and explaining it throughout. This poet can also accomplish free verse by writing through their own rhythm that doesn’t necessarily have to be like any other written form. It’s incredible that while free verse is free of restraints other forms of poetry are confined to, it is still bound by having some sort of rhythm and complex structure, thus making it poetry and not just words scrambled on paper.

Free verse minus the free so really just verse..

Once again, mind blown. How can something that is called "free verse" actually have rhythm/structure? I NEVER would have guessed. See, when I write poetry for class, I usually use free verse. And, well I'm not the greatest poet in the world, I kind of just write "freely" and don't really worry about the structure, like just placing sentences that say what I want them to say together. Now I'm pretty sure I've been doing it completely wrong, and I'm pretty sure what I have been writing isn't really poetry at all, more like whatever's in my head written down on a page. The free verse I think of is more like a journal entry or a place where you write down anything, but according to this woman, there is SO much more. Why does everything in poetry have to be so complicated? First the letter sounds and structure of the words, now free verse actually has patterns and such! Its like everything you thought you knew about poetry, like how it is up to the interpretation of the author and the reader, went out the window. But oh well, its interesting enough I guess, and I assume that when I write my free verse poems I might put a little more thought into the actual mechanics behind it.

Free Verse, except cross out the free

Oliver once again proves to me that she
has a lot of knowledge about this whole poetry thing. Although it
seems to me as though she writes this book almost like a poem and in
a slightly cryptic manner, it is obvious that she knows what she is
talking about. I wish that she would make it slightly more clear and
maybe provide more direction as to how to actually write a free verse
poem. But, she obviously knows what she is talking about and does
have a lot of information to provide on free verse, even with just a
couple pages.
In the chapter “Verse that is Free,”
she gets rid of a lot of misconceptions about free verse poetry. She
states that it is “fluid” and that is not actually “free” and
has a “design.” When I first heard this, I was kind of shocked,
but, upon examining Oliver's examples, it was very obvious. A poet
cannot simply write some words down and call it a poem. There has to
be thought and meaning behind it. Just like she stated in her other
chapter on sound, it has to sound good and be enjoyable for a reader.
William Carlos' poem has meaning, it has a good sound, and is truly
an enjoyable poem. Carlos put a lot of thought in writing and had a
certain “design” in mind even though it is free verse.
I think Oliver does a great job getting
the idea across that free verse isn't just some words shaped into
stanzas and that it truly has thought and meaning behind it. It still
requires planning and effort. This chapter really helped me better
understand this crucial element of free verse and understand other
key elements of free verse and add to my ever-growing knowledge base
of poetry.

The Frame

It seems that everyone so far has written their responses concerning "Verse That Is Free" so I'm going to be different and speak about the chapter "Some Given Forms."

Sometimes I feel that writing poetry in free verse is a display of laziness. In a society were every aspect is "instant," "on demand," and "faster than ever," we have allowed this mantra to worm its way into our writing style. Gone are the epics scribed in memorable verse, few are the sonnets penned in thoughtful meter. I think because of "organic" poetry, generalized poetry has become more mushy and of less substance. Just like how cameras have become so readily available to people of little experience with photography resulting in a flood of pictures with poor composition.

True, free verse does give us the freedom and flexibility to say more exactly what we want to say but often times amateur free verse results in a sloppy mess of oddly spaced sentences and single words.I myself am guilty of the easy way out. But...
"Art consists of limitation. The most beautiful part of every picture is the frame."
— G. K. Chesterton (Don't ask me who this guy is. Obvious he was somebody. It was just a quote I remember seeing that I felt is entirely appropriate for my point). By choosing to construct your poem in meter or verse, you are forcing yourself to spend time analyzing and editing it. You are forced to view it through a microscope and not from your peripheral vision.

these verses run freely, good sir !

Mary Oliver once more bewilders me in her control of poetry and the mechanisms that she recognizes while writing poetry in a particular style. Prior, she surprised me with her use of tone and specific lines, and even more now when speaking of free verse poetry in specific. She defines free verse poetry as “fluid” or “organic”, which made me wonder how something with no specific scheme could exactly be declared as “fluid” and transitional. “Free verse is not, of course, free. It is free from formal metrical design, but it certainly isn’t free from some kind of design. Is poetry language that is spontaneous, impulsive ? Yes it is.” (Page 67)

I never really considered free-verse poetry to have a specific metrical design that kept it moving - only believed it to be a writing of verses of perhaps a specific length but with no certain specifics in its creation. Oliver’s divulging words once more make me consider the makings of a poem and the necessary pieces that need to go into each. She touches on tone and content and provides examples (though many of them small) that show the basis that is needed in the construction of a strong and well-done free verse poem despite its size. Depth is the question and the manner it can be surpassed through time and the variation of interpretation between individuals. She also discusses the importance of punctuation (such as enjambments) or in some cases, the lack of - something that has been a question of mine for quite some time - all of these I never originally understood before.

When Oliver was talking about how a change in the established pattern manipulates the reader, I was recalling how I had felt as I read poetry and was able to switch my view of the situation in the poem. I really value having one or more poems that exemplify the topic that Oliver is teaching the reader about. This chapter makes the reader understand that structure in every poem, even the free verse ones, is key. Structure makes the reader see the different parts of their work and it allows for transitions. Oliver explains every time of rhyme very easily so that a reader with any kind of poetry background can fully understand rhyming, even the Spenserian Stanza, a lesser known kind of rhyming. This chapter helped me fully understand why each stanza was set up as it was for the sonnets and other types of poetry. I liked how Oliver explained the significance of patterns and showed how very different poems could get the same kind of point across. It would seem that even the most rebellious of poets would have to write in the same uniform pattern even if they believed that they were different. It is much like the idea that a writer composes something "completely different" than anything else in the world, when in fact all writing, whether prose or poetry, is intertwined within a large web. It is very easy to see how some people could get bored with this unanimous writing, but it also would help others who aren't as poetry savvy.

"Diction, Tone, Voice"- Megan Burch

In Mary Oliver’s “A Poetry Handbook,” she has a chapter called ‘Diction, Tone, Voice,’ in which she goes into great detail describing these things. The definition of diction is word choice, whereas the overall effect of the diction of a piece of writing is called tone. “The term voice is used to identify the agency or agent who is speaking through the poem, apart from those passages that are actual dialogue.” The persona is the voice, or speaker of the poem. The author states that an intended formality and metrical construction were part of the reason why American poetry had a sense of formality. Negative capability is an idea of Keats that the poet should be a “negative force” or sorts, allowing himself to understand the subject of his poem.

The lyric poem is most popularly used today and it is slightly brief. This type of poem is brief, concentrated on purely one subject, with a single voice, and will impose a natural musicality. Mary Oliver uses personification to describe this poetry: “It is not unlike a coiled spring, waiting to release its energy in a few clear phrases.” Poets still do write longer poems with a central idea, and poets have more recently started writing prose poems. These poems are too recent to have developed a tradition, so there is no set definition. The author also goes over poetic diction, The Cliché, Inversion, informational language, syntax, and variety versus habits. She states that when a poet has been writing for a long time, then they can go on to more complicated work.

Free to Verse

Oliver speaks on free verse poetry in her chapter "Verse that is Free." Here she carefully explains how free verse poems are not spontaneous or random, but are still carefully thought upon. They are simply casual poems that are meant to give the reader a sense of conversation between them and the writer. This conversation is a song with rhetoric and lesson non-the-less, only lacking in structured rhyme scheme. Oliver discusses tone and content of free verse poetry as these qualities are very import when presenting such a piece. Free verse allows for possible shifts in tone or even the lack of a distinct tone if one so wishes to write that way. It also relies heavily upon content as the conversation must latch on to the reader and keep their attention through the entire piece. The author finally analysis Walt Whitman's "Leaves of Grass" and William Carlos' "The Red Wheelbarrow." She explains how Whitman used long lines, repetition, and adjectives to compensate for the lack of rhyme. These techniques strengthen the piece as a whole without the use of direct rhyme. She describes Carlos' piece as "true free verse" as it is only four two-line stanzas it captures the reader as it uses simple words to describe a simple scene. The careful placement and even the lack of words makes the poem very cryptic and perhaps sets it up for "scrutiny," but the essence of the heavy objects and natural setting extends beyond the tangible. They develop place for the reader's imagination to take hold as the words still flow like song without any rhyme at all.
I like free verse but struggle to keep it consistent throughout my whole piece. I like to add slant rhyme of some sort just because it makes me feel more comfortable with my work as a whole. I hope I can use some of these suggestions that Oliver shares and apply them to my own poems in order to produce stronger free verse pieces.

Give Forms and Junk

In this chapter Mary Oliver gives the reader a few forms through which to construct their poetry such as sonnet, couplet, and terza rima. And with this continues her one woman campaign to tell people the “proper” way to express the labyrinthine like emotions and feeling expressed through halfway decent poetry. In this chapter Mary Oliver tells us exactly how often we should rhyme and to what length our stanzas should be, and quite frankly I find that this mechanical inhuman approach to writing absconds with some of the flaws that allow poetry to be humanly flawed and relatable. Now maybe my unhinged blogger rage is spawned from me lacking the necessary brain goop to write a half way decent poem, but still I disagree vehemently with Oliver’s perpetual idea that if you write poetry outside of these set guidelines that it ultimately fail at trying to convey the emotion it is trying to put forth. But now time to hop off my soap box and now to discuss the actual chapter. Oliver does offer helpful advice to someone one looking to write poetry in this fashion (even if she does sound somewhat like a nagging Jewish grandmother). Offering a very succinct description of each form and how rhyme, meter and stanza length factor into each form. So even thought I will probably continue my idiotic adolescent angst fueled rejection of these techniques I could see someone potentially using them to create something profound.