A place for Tradition, Rhyme, Classical Forms?

[lostlore]

Can someone recommend a publication for classical poetry?

I'm reading poetry journals online and off and am weary ... seems you're allowed to do anything at all so long as it doesn't rhyme or fit a traditional form, and this prejudice appears to be totally universal from the New Yorker and the Atlantic on down to the tiniest online poetry page.

Everything I see out there is free verse & blank verse & no tradition or rhyme at all. Where do you go with odes and sonnets and metered lines that rhyme, ideas expressed in old, old forms, is there any publication out there printing such things today?

The New Formalists appear to be just about gone, but as someone on here pointed out, they were just obsessed with form and not meaning at all ...


Thanks for the help.

[lostlore]

BTW, the goodbye message from Edge City Review is relevant here:

http://www.edge-city.com/

[JRH]

Hi Lostlore,

You might try the following list given to me by Nancy Pinard of the Antioch Writers Workshop which contains links to Publications open to "Formalist Poetry: http://www.ramblingrose.com/poetry/formalpubs.html

To be honest, my research has found that most of the sites listed as FO, (formal only), are either defunct or extremely irregular in their publication. I have been sending poems to "The New Formalist" and "Expansive Poetry Online" for 3 years with out receiving even an acknowldgement, (much less a rejection slip) during that time despite the fact thay do appear to have published periodically.

Moreover, my experience with those sites listed as FF (formal friendly), which includes Poetry Magazine and other print journals, is that that they are NOT very friendly at all, particularly if the poems are "Traditional" as opposed to merely "Formalist".

The one advantage of this list is that it is a list of links and allows you to check them out for yourself, (and you may have better luck than I have), and if you're only interested in reading such poetry as opposed to publishing it, this may give you some places to look.

I have had only 16 poems published in 47 years, and all but 2 of the publications that accepted my poems are currently defunct so it's presumed the poems involved are inaccessible for reading or verification that they exist.

The only journal which currently contains any of my Poetry is "The Eclectic Muse", which I highly recommend but which currently is printed only once a year in December (and they are not on the list I've included here).

Hope this helps.

James R. Hoye, (JRH)

P.S. Many of my poems can be accessed through my profile page on this site if you're interested in seeing the quality of the work that I've been submitting,

[Pat~]

Lostlore, I feel your pain. I've been frustrated myself finding markets for my work, which is not only more 'formalist' but frequently religious. (Now there's a fatal mix!)

On a recent trip, I read the entire Poet's Market cover to cover. (It was a very long road trip, and I had time to kill.) I made a list of markets that accept both religious and 'traditional' poetry. Here are two from that list that might interest you that specialize in formalist poetry, though I don't know from submission experience yet how good these markets are (unfortunately they only pay in copies):

The Lyric - says it's one of the oldest 'formalist' publications around (85 years); seems to specialize in publishing sonnets. Readership only about 750. Simsubs are okay; no email subs; they buy 1st rights. Guidelines by email. Submit up to 6 poems of no more than 40 lines.

Ms. Jean Mellichamp-Milliken, Editor
The Lyric
P.O. Box 110
Jericho Corners, VT 05465
Email: Lyric@sover.net

The Neo-Victorian/Cochlea - Readership only a slim 275. Accept simsubs; buy 1st rts.; no email subs. Submit 3 to 5 poems, no line limit.

Ms. Esther Cameron, Editor
The Neo-Victorian/Cochlea
P.O. Box 55164
Madison, WI 53705
Email: eacam@execpc.com
Website: www.pointandcircumference.com (http://www.pointandcircumference.com)

ETA: Neo-Victorian Cochlea is now The Redonda Review, (which just accepted 2 of my poems!) The website is still the same, though.

[lostlore]

You might try the following list given to me by Nancy Pinard of the Antioch Writers Workshop which contains links to Publications open to "Formalist Poetry: http://www.ramblingrose.com/poetry/formalpubs.html


Thanks, James, for the list---most useful. What I've been finding out there matches your experience: the FO publications are either long gone or practically so. And I don't think a single one of them were ever used in Poetry Daily or Verse Daily ... how many formal or traditional poems were ever picked up in BAP?

As I understand it, the concern of the New Formalists was purely technical---the form of the content, and not the content itself. Poetry as the sharpest most distilled form of expression, a vessel to impart meaning, was not their interest at all ... so the NF were as anti-classical as any of the "describe some moment of my experience---in free verse" majority.

In fact when you look around at what's published today, the whole idea is so completely different that you should be able to write a traditional poem or try for classical art and submit it to any of the journals who welcome "experimental" poetry, and they should welcome it as the refreshingly unique thing that it is today, hailing you the tiny minority whose work is unrepresented anywhere ... but as you might have discovered, "experimental" means only to play around in certain obvious, expected ways---certain experiments are always taboo, expressly forbidden.


Moreover, my experience with those sites listed as FF (formal friendly), which includes Poetry Magazine and other print journals, is that that they are NOT very friendly at all, particularly if the poems are "Traditional" as opposed to merely "Formalist".
This has also been my experience, and that of others. There is a strong prejudice against classical poetry, and this prejudice is held universally by the journals---for all the claims of accepting "traditional" or "formal" poetry, you won't find a single one of them printing a single poem in a traditional form. And this is also held by the journals who tout their "eclecticism" or "diversity"---seems the louder they claim a commitment to diversity, the more hostile to tradition the outlet or venue will be. No editor wants to print something so different that all the other editors will laugh at. I'm not surprised, because this attitude matches the mainstream attitude of the times---there is a widespread prejudice and bigotry against all classical art today, just as there is this widespread talk of "inclusion for all".

But I'm surprised that there aren't any pre-counterculture holdouts left. Or that there isn't more intelligent, public discourse on this subject. Any classical revolution in poetry today won't be chronicled in the so-called "top" venues: Poetry Magazine, the Poetry Foundation, and other print journals who say that they are open to "all forms of poetry" or who say that "it is the quality of the poem that is our first consideration"---including The Atlantic Monthly and the Paris Review---are very bigoted against classical poetry. You will just collect form letters from them, no matter what your credentials.

Never has poetry been so shunned by the populace as it has today. The joke is how just about the only people who read poetry are the very academics who write and teach it, and I think the reason for this has everything to do with what is being called poetry today. Since the counterculture, the very nature of what is called poetry has changed. Before, most newspapers and magazines printed poetry, because people obtained meaning from it---it enriched their lives in a very real, meaningful way that today's poetry cannot do. And whether consciously or not, I believe that people know this. They can't be fleeced, so they just don't read poetry---they know it isn't worth their time (and it isn't), so the mainstream newspapers and magazines and web sites of today don't print it. But the shame is that people are also unaware of what poetry can do, they don't have any connection to the classics, and our civilization is carrying on without it to its peril.

Thanks for the link to your poems.

[lostlore]

Lostlore, I feel your pain. I've been frustrated myself finding markets for my work, which is not only more 'formalist' but frequently religious. (Now there's a fatal mix!)

Fatal to be sure, in an irreligious and decidedly casual world!

Thanks for the markets. Here's some markets for you:

First Things
http://www.firstthings.com/submission.php
This is a good, high-quality magazine about religion and they print poetry in every issue.

Image Journal
http://www.imagejournal.org/about/submission.asp

Christianity Today
They print sonnets and other traditional forms:
http://www.christianitytoday.com/books/features/literature.html

Finally, I liked this bit in the guidelines for the Chattahoochee Review: "Although we regularly publish the informal personal narratives that dominate North American poetry currently, we are also interested in formal poetry that is topic or theme driven. All verse formats and subjects are considered."
http://www.gpc.edu/~gpccr/submissions.php (http://www.gpc.edu/%7Egpccr/submissions.php)
(However, I'll be darned if I can find a formal poem in their back issues, or a single example of metrical and rhyming verse...)

[Pat~]

Thanks, Lostlore. I didn't know CT published poetry. And I've not tried those markets, yet. I'm looking forward to checking them out!

[lostlore]

Pat, I've just looked into THE LYRIC ... it's great! Thanks again!



Also, for light verse:

Light
c/o John Mella, Editor
Box 7500
Chicago, IL 60680
http://www.lightquarterly.com (http://www.lightquarterly.com/)
$20 US ($34 foreign) for 4 (64-page) issues, $32 for 8; "single" issue $6, back issue $5.

[LimeyDawg]

Oooo, oooo, who let another formalist in? I thought we were banned, lol. Hey Lost, post in here...puhleeeeeeeeze. I'd love to read more formal poetry.

[JRH]

Hi Lostlore,

There have always been cycles of dominance between Traditional/Romantic and Intellectual/Metaphysical Poetry. Since this cycle which I call "Experiential Imagism" first began, it's primary intent was to establish their vision of what Poetry should be by rejecting all that had gone before and adopting images, word play, and reflection based on and reflecting personal experience exprressed in a "slice of life slice format as their criteria.

Since the onset of the MFA system which embraces and propagates their point of view and has become entrenched in the Publishing World which is controlled primarily by MFA graduates and pioneers of the "Modern" movement, it has become an inbred system dedicated to perpetuating itself through the concept of Poets as Professionals who are a breed apart and sufficient unto themselves.

You're perfectly correct in saying the Public has rejected their concept and their product, but that is not to say that Poetry, (particularly Traditional Poetry based on the concept on reflecting "universal" experience to convey insight and meaning) is "dead" or has been rejected.

Look to the explosion of websites such as this, "Shadow Poetry.com", "Eratosphere", "AllPoetry" and dozens (possibly hundreds) of others, and it's obvious that the market for Poetry (and particularly "Traditional" Poetry), still exists.

Even the success of Poetry.com shows how deep the interest in having, (and providing), such a market is. (and don't forget that "Song Lyrics" are simply a specialized form of "Lyric" Poetry, and have maintained their popularity over the years)

Cycles always change in time and this one will, too, as long as there are people like those here, and elsewhere, that badly want to express themselves and are willing to develope the self-discipline and craftsmanship, necessary to doing that job well. (The counter-culture does exist. It simply has not yet found or developed the print outlets necessary to express itself).

A simple exchange like this and the obvious correspondances in points of view show the evidences that there is desire and need for a change.

Thanks for bringing this up.

Jim Hoye, (JRH)

P.S. My Critical views on most aspects of Poetry and Songwriting can be found at http://www.shadowpoetry.com/cgi-bin/spmb/ikonboard.cgi?act=SF;f=10
posted by JRH, and I think you'll find that they closely parallel what you've expressed here.

[LimeyDawg]

Right, and if you want to see the other side of the coin, where the damage to poetry and poems is propogated by people setting themselves up as gatekeepers of what is and is not poetry, I can suggest a site...

[Andrew]

I don't know (sorry) but neither do I care--most of what I write rhymes--its just me. I like all expressions though and the new creativity is great--but the more classical approach is more fun for me to hear, read and write. Isn't it a challenge to approach an idea in a kind of 'Poe' way? Do what you like and enjoy it--I suspect your work is very good.

[dolores haze]

I'm not a poet, but I am a poetry reader. I love odes, and sonnets, and things that rhyme, and as a result, I don't buy any new poetry - I have a hard time finding the thing that I love in the bookstore. Perhaps you all should get together, and start your own classical poetry journal. I'll be your first subsciber. Good luck finding a market for your work. I just KNOW the readers are out there - waiting. I'll be checking out all the sites linked in this thread. Thanks for expanding my universe.

[Norman D Gutter]

lostlore:

Greetings, and welcome to the ranks of AW formalists. I think we have more per capita here than other on-line poetry communities, maybe Eratosphere excepted. Others have given you a good list of the poetry sites/mags that are formalist friendly. I have had a few formal poems published in Poesia ( http://www.indianbaypress.com/index.php?pages/welcome ), though a new editor (working under the former editor-publisher who is still the publisher) rejected my last batch. You might try them.

I agree with what Jim Hoye says about formal poetry and current trends. I also think the editors tend to shy away from formal poetry not only because of the pre-disposition against it that results from their education, but also because formalists often fall into the trap of thinking that rhyme and meter are enough. "It rhymes, and the meter is pretty good; it must be finished." And so poems sometimes go out with poor wording, lack of imagery, metaphor, and other poetic devices, because the poet has stopped learning the craft at rhyme and meter (and often just at rhyme, not bothering to learn meter). When an editor gets 100 poems submitted for every 2 that will be published, and when the large majority of the formal poems are not very good, I doubt if they give the good ones a fair shake.

My 2 cents. Collect 'em for a while and buy something at Starbucks.

Best Regards,
NDG

[William Haskins]

norman,

thank you (thankyouthankyou) for laying some of the blame at the feet of the poets themselves, many of whom, quite frankly, just don't write very compelling poems.

i'm fine with attacking the establishment (and do a bit of it myself), but the assumption that all formalists are created equal (and are thus persecuted equally) is specious indeed.

[Norman D Gutter]

...I am a poetry reader. I love odes, and sonnets, and things that rhyme, and as a result, I don't buy any new poetry - I have a hard time finding the thing that I love in the bookstore...I just KNOW the readers are out there - waiting.
Dolores:

That's kind of my attitude. If I like to read well-crafted poems with rhyme and meter, I figure there must be a couple of million other people out there who are like me. It's a question of finding them.

NDG

[BrokenSword]

It's been my fearful experience to run across the lines of battle that involve formalists and fv and without doubt, the bias is strong and quick! Being one that thinks writing is a challenge, I know first hand how much better poetry is when one has formal training behind their fv entries. I used to 'teach' poetry and we never intro'd fv until long after forms were learned and rooted deeply. There is so much that formal poetry can teach a poet that most of the typical 'bad habits' that I routinely see in modern poetry (fv) are eliminated almost as a byproduct. I do not see any good reason why ANY poet should not understand and have at least tried formal poetry. To not even 'go there' is, imo, just plain laziness and does no honor to the art/craft of poetry. I have much more respect for a poem/poet who can explain the terms and how to use them while noting which devices work and why. Sure, this is the mechanics but if you don't know them how can you ever find out how best to use (or not) them?

Anyway, the modern age of poetry is all about prose with linebreaks and even decent fv is rare. Since everyone is doing it, how hard can it be, right? The standards are lowered with the justification that we poets need to reach our audience, which of course means we have to taaaallllkkkk slower, and use words which are monosyllabic (that one all by itself would get me the glazed over eyes of many a modern reader). It's a 'lowest common denominator' world and it doesn't look like it's going to change anytime soon, imo. Pity.


Michael aka BrokenSword

[JoNightshade]

This is not a paying market, but if you just want to find yourself in a nice literary journal, I recommend Bellowing Ark. (www.bellowingark.org)