Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[MadocComadrin]

Reading and analyzing poetry can improve your writing by showing you how elements of literature work in a "more bang for your buck" fashion. That is, you have a lot of potent uses of the elements of literature that describe both concrete and abstract things jam-packed into such a small space in such a web-like manner that analyzing them will really show you how to describe the concrete (eg. a scene) while giving abstract ideas (eg a mood, a perspective, etc) without the reader being overly conscious of it.

Remember, a whole short story or book can be a combination of prose and poetry; that is, mix in poetic elements into the story to really tie things together and give important actions/places/monologues/dialogues that extra umph.

For actions and settings, try to write as concretely as possible. See here: http://grammar.ccc.commnet.edu/grammar/composition/abstract.htm
It sounds like common sense for actions and settings, but some words are more abstract than they appear at first glance. I'd say there's one exception: use something somewhat abstract when you want the reader to fill something in themselves.

Also, since you're a good essay writer, you've probably heard this a million times, but stay away from passive--especially for setting descriptions. Passive slows everything down and will make your setting seem dull--regardless of how much detail you throw in. I'm no more than an amateur writer, but if I have time, I might be able to throw together a quick example of a setting using too much passive compared to a similar one using more active verbs (or find a good example somewhere else :3).


 

[LordBucket]

Reading and analyzing poetry can help you with your writing

I advise disregarding this. The primary elements of poetry, rhyme and meter are not especially useful in non-poetic works, and attempting to apply them needlessly can result in a great deal of time spent creating something that feels very unnatural.

Analyzing poetry to improve one's writing would be like watching motorcycle races to learn how to drive a car. There may be similarities, but they require different skillsets, use different tools, and skill with one does not automatically convey skill with the other.

[MadocComadrin]

While I agree that rhyme isn't as useful in non-poetic works, subtly adding in meter can add a bit of sound or texture to writing. Likewise, poetry uses a lot more than rhyme and meter. The fact of the matter is, while present in most forms of poetry, if you consider rhyme and meter the main part of any poem, you've missed pretty much everything (such as imagery, alliteration, symbolism, good diction (or diction for a specific purpose), and many other elements which can and are used both in prose and poetry).

[LordBucket]

if you consider rhyme and meter the main part of
any poem, you've missed pretty much everything

I take it you're one of those people who ramble out stream of consciousness gibberish and think it's poetry?

poetry uses a lot more than rhyme and meter.

This is simple, this is easy
You might even call it cheesy.
Even though it's not too keen,
It's still a poem on your screen.

you've missed pretty much everything (such as imagery, alliteration, symbolism, good diction (or diction for a specific purpose), and many other elements which can and are used both in prose and poetry).

Any annoying asshat can babble out bubbly bits of pointless, pretty prose. Yet neither this, nor colorfully vivid rays of light shining luminescence from your screen in the shape of this text into whatever portions of your soul may be reached through your eyes...constitutes poetry. More sadly still, is it likely to enlighten in the manner intended? Probably not.

Imagery? Check.
Symbolism? Check
Good diction? Subjective, but check.
Diction for a specific purpose? Most definitely check.

Still doesn't make it a poem. And in no case is "analyzing" any of this likely to help one become a better writer.

[MadocComadrin]

I take it you're one of those people who ramble out stream of consciousness gibberish and think it's poetry?

No, in fact, I think people who spout any flowery prose and claim free-verse should be shot on sight (or sound).

Still doesn't make it a poem. And in no case is "analyzing" any of this likely to help one become a better writer.

And I'd call the "poem" you posted nothing more than a petty piece of trash, which is just as petty as the prose you posted. Neither of them have anything to analyze. (Except the cynical tone in the poem, which is blatantly obvious and thus, still quite petty seeing as it's the only thing that serves a purpose).  If you're going to provide evidence as a counter to my point, do post something with a little depth.

The fact of the matter is, poetry from successful (as deemed by literary academia) poets will be chalk full of interlacing elements. Prose will as well, but the density is much greater in poetry (which makes analysis helpful). Certainly, there will be some things you can't use in prose that you can use in poetry (mainly rhyme and meter), but most elements can and do overlap (even meter in the rare occasion).
Likewise, many works which employ mainly prose never use it exclusively (ie. there are subtle inclusions of poetic text), especially novels and short stories.

[Galick]

This is annoying.
Can you two please stop fighting?
I'd prefer no flame wars.

Yeah, I'm really not that big a fan of poetry to be honest.  I understand how you could probably use it to improve writing, but, I flat out couldn't bear to slog through any poetry other than one of the old epics or ballads.

Generally, my writing depends on the characters more than my scene setting skills.  I'm horrible at that, but I'm decent/good at writing from a point of view or arguing a point.  If I ever wrote an actual story, it'd be character driven more than anything just because it's my strongest skill.