From: Sally Miller <derbymiller>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2005 12:58:21 -0400

Perhaps we need a new category. Consulting the various dictionaries on my bookshelves, I find that in defining poetry, or trying to define it, as impossible a task as trying to define a butterfly, most dictionaries mention 1. intensity of emotion 2. meaning, sound and rhythm, and 3. beauty of expression. 4. rhyme and imagery. For years, I have been trying to understand why much of what is called poetry today is actually poetry. More than once I have been over-awed by superlative praises for this poet or that writing today and have ordered a book of the acclaimed poet's work only to find that praise-worthy as it may be, it has little resemblance to the definitions above. I have come to the reluctant conclusion that many of today's admired poets are writing mainly for other poets. Nothing wrong with that, but that's not where our children and teen-agers should start. If I were teaching, and I'm not at this point, I'd start them with what children love from the beginning
-- rhythm, rhyme, and word pictures. I'm not trying to be difficult or snobbish, I just think that we have been led astray. We may identify with some sentiments, we may admire a certain conciseness of expression, but if the qualities that define poetry are missing, what we have is something else entirely. Maybe we weren't so far off the mark when we called it "free verse." Sally Derby
Received on Mon 18 Apr 2005 11:58:21 AM CDT