What is a sonnet?

'ric · Dec 27, 2007

Pardon me for butting in here, but I got a question. Earlier I posted a sonnet for critical review and it resulted in a (to me) very interesting conversation with JRH (Mr. Hoye) who claimed it was not, in fact, a sonnet. He claimed it was actually "free verse". [I disagree about that. It was, perhaps, a "nonce form", but definitely not "free verse". The difference, in my mind, between "form" and "free" verse is that when writing in a form format the text is fit to the pre-existing form, whereas in free verse the "form" it takes is dictated by the text. My particular "sonnet" displayed a very definite pattern in its presentation. But anyway, I'm not posting here to discuss that particular poem.]

My question is this: The sonnet is a traditional form that comes in various flavors: Shakesperian, Petrarchan, Spenserian, etc. Various poets at various times have offered variations on these forms (unrhymed, different line meters, etc.) If one starts messing with the form, at what point does the sonnet become no longer a sonnet? Where do you draw the line? How much messing around is too much?

I would appreciate any comments you might make here. I thank you in advance.

'ric

Deleted member 42 · Dec 27, 2007

After the sixteenth century, the sonnet is largely contingent on two things:

1. It is fourteen lines.

2. It is largely iambic pentameter, though an occasional alexandrine/iambic hexameter line is fine.

JRH · Dec 28, 2007

Ric,

My primary objection to your original poem "Sonnet" was that it did not work well as a POEM because it was not consistant in it's images or unified in it's intent, and that is a Poem's first priority, whether it be considered a "Sonnet" or not.

I gave you a link in our previous exchange. Here is another, showing a discussion on this topic at Poetry Free-For-All which covers the ground thoroughly, (although I can't speak for the qualifications of those participating). http://www.everypoet.org/pffa/archive/index.php/t-4631.html

There is NO simple answer to a how far you can deviate and still call a piece a Sonnet, other than whether or not the readers accept what you write as such.

Write on,

Jim Hoye, (JRH)

JBI · Dec 28, 2007

Christina Rossetti's In Progress broke pretty much all the rules but the 14 lines. Personally I think the only one that matters is the 14 lines, with the volta somewhere in there, usually beginning on line 9 (though Pushkin Sonnets have voltas all over the place).

Basically, keep the line lengths similar, and have a structured feel to the poem (specifically around the formation and answer to the argument) and I think you can argue that it is a sonnet. However, if you lines are all different lengths, and if you have short lines, you will have trouble arguing your case. Either way it doesn't matter, since if the poem is good, form doesn't really effect it.

veinglory · Dec 28, 2007

There are two main forms and a few acceptable variations but it is one of the more set forms and I wouldn't accept anything without iambic pentameter and pairs of rhyming lines as a sonnet.

Writer??? · Dec 28, 2007

It is my lowly, humble, and in no way authoritative, opinion that a sonnet is a sonnet if it is recognizable as such, 14 lines being for me, the first indicator. Then, I proceed to see if the rest fits the forms I am familiar with and go from in my assessment.

As a writer, I think we can all do whatever we wish and call it whatever we want. Acceptance by others on the other hand is something quite different. Would anyone call a car or truck a "horseless carriage" today? Or, buggy, or wagon (in the traditional sense)?

While 14 lines is a starting point, it is not the defining end for me. It (a sonnet) must have a rhyme pattern. It must have the form of question/statement - counter stamtement/examination from another viewpoint - answer/summation, and it must be structured in some discernable meter. I don't limit it to iambic pentameter, but it should be recognizable and consistent at least within the major points of form, i.e., the question or statement could be pentameter, the counterpoint or follow-up could be tetrameter, etc., but not a jumbled mess that jumps around, back and forth within the various parts of the poem.

Also, and I'll probably get some flack for this but, I think one should consider that the "sing-song" quality found in consistent, metered lines, as opposed to uneven, jumbled lines, is very much a part of a sonnet's character. Alter the original too much and you may have 14 lines, but you won't have a sonnet any more than a car with 4 wheels is a wagon.

Changing a traditional form of poetry is like changing a traditional form of music. It all starts with something that came about long ago. But change it enough and slave chants become blues, change it some more and blues becomes jazz, or rock becomes southern rock, etc. No one would write a Lynyrd Skynyrd type song and try to call it jazz, though it may have the same number of lines, use words, use rhymes, use notes, etc. The beast has simply changed too much to call it what came before.

In the end it is of course "writer's choice" to call it whatever they choose. 50 readers may agree, 3, or 4 may never agree no matter how much you explain. Who cares? What's going to matter is, will the publisher publish it.

LimeyDawg · Dec 28, 2007

http://www.sonnets.org/basicforms.htm
"A sonnet is fundamentally a dialectical construct which allows the poet to examine the nature and ramifications of two usually contrastive ideas, emotions, states of mind, beliefs, actions, events, images, etc., by juxtaposing the two against each other, and possibly resolving or just revealing the tensions created and operative between the two.

O. K., so much for the fancy language. Basically, in a sonnet, you show two related but differing things to the reader in order to communicate something about them. Each of the three major types of sonnets accomplishes this in a somewhat different way. There are, of course, other types of sonnets, as well, but I'll stick for now to just the basic three (Italian, Spenserian, English), with a brief look at some non-standard sonnets."

Those words are from the opening paragraph on that site, certainly not mine. I think the point is that there has to be some common element to name a work a sonnet. Fourteen lines seems to be one. The idea of two contrasting ideas etc. shown to the reader seems to be the other. There appear to be formal similarities in the different types of sonnets (Shakespearian, Italian, etcetera) but many of the masters worked variations within their chosen forms.

As a poet, you can vary where you see fit. However, why the need to call it a Sonnet if people don't recognize it as such? I think that is the answer to your question. If your audience ought to recognize a sonnet, and sees none in your work, you have probably strayed too far in the variation.

Deleted member 42 · Dec 28, 2007

Earlier sonnets in Italian don't have fourteen lines, and there are sonnets in English, prior to the publication of Tottels Miscellany in 1557 that don't, but the fourteen lines and iambic thing really really do work.

Couplets while common, are not required, nor is the volta or turn associated with Petrarchan sonnets. If forced to be more forthcoming, I'd add that there's a tendency for an extended metaphor or conceit, but not even that is required.

'ric · Dec 28, 2007

JRH said:
Ric,

My primary objection to your original poem "Sonnet" was that it did not work well as a POEM because it was not consistant in it's images or unified in it's intent, and that is a Poem's first priority, whether it be considered a "Sonnet" or not.

I gave you a link in our previous exchange. Here is another, showing a discussion on this topic at Poetry Free-For-All which covers the ground thoroughly, (although I can't speak for the qualifications of those participating). http://www.everypoet.org/pffa/archive/index.php/t-4631.html

There is NO simple answer to a how far you can deviate and still call a piece a Sonnet, other than whether or not the readers accept what you write as such.

Write on,

Jim Hoye, (JRH)

You are absolutely right in para. 1. That was indeed your primary objection. Obviously I didn't make clear that my question was not intended to impugn or question your evaluation of my poem. What I know of you, you appear to be a well educated man with a lot of experience in this field, so rest assured I value and respect anything you might have to say here.

However, we did touch upon the question of whether or not it was in fact a sonnet, and you did say that it was more like free verse: which got me intrigued by this question of at what point does a sonnet evolve (or devolve, if you prefer) into some new specie? (I'm here to learn, Mr. Hoye, and as so often happens with folks in my position, we sometimes go off on fugues).

I have bookmarked the link you gave me earlier, and I thank you for the new one.

As for the last paragraph, I totally agree. I am interested, none the less, about what some folks around here might have to say, whatever their qualifications.

'ric

'ric · Dec 28, 2007

JBI said:
Christina Rossetti's In Progress broke pretty much all the rules but the 14 lines. Personally I think the only one that matters is the 14 lines, with the volta somewhere in there, usually beginning on line 9 (though Pushkin Sonnets have voltas all over the place).

Basically, keep the line lengths similar, and have a structured feel to the poem (specifically around the formation and answer to the argument) and I think you can argue that it is a sonnet. However, if you lines are all different lengths, and if you have short lines, you will have trouble arguing your case. Either way it doesn't matter, since if the poem is good, form doesn't really effect it.

That Chrissy sounds like my kind of woman. I agree about the volta (and maybe a little sum-up at the end), but why 14 lines? What's wrong with 15?

Now that sounds like a slippery slope, don't you think. Maybe you're right. Let's keep it at 14. Maybe make an exception once in a while if it's a really good one.

I also agree with you about all different lengths. You'd need a $!,000/hour lawyer to argue that one. Can't like that. But what's wrong with short lines. They're easy on the eyes. And didn't ee write one once that was just the rhyme words?

Finally, I'm a tad confused by your last sentence. A "form" is just an identifiable shape a poem is cast in. A good poem is a good poem, whatever form it may take. My question is, on, say a hypothetical poem, is it a sonnet or is it something else? How do I tell?

'ric

'ric · Dec 28, 2007

veinglory said:
There are two main forms and a few acceptable variations but it is one of the more set forms and I wouldn't accept anything without iambic pentameter and pairs of rhyming lines as a sonnet.

Okay. Can't argue with you there. I even kind of like it: It's clear, concise, and draws a definite, easily identifiable line.

Yet, I dunno. Can't we loosen up here a bit. Have some fun....

'ric

'ric · Dec 28, 2007

Writer??? said:
It is my lowly, humble, and in no way authoritative, opinion that a sonnet is a sonnet if it is recognizable as such, 14 lines being for me, the first indicator. Then, I proceed to see if the rest fits the forms I am familiar with and go from in my assessment.

As a writer, I think we can all do whatever we wish and call it whatever we want. Acceptance by others on the other hand is something quite different. Would anyone call a car or truck a "horseless carriage" today? Or, buggy, or wagon (in the traditional sense)?

While 14 lines is a starting point, it is not the defining end for me. It (a sonnet) must have a rhyme pattern. It must have the form of question/statement - counter stamtement/examination from another viewpoint - answer/summation, and it must be structured in some discernable meter. I don't limit it to iambic pentameter, but it should be recognizable and consistent at least within the major points of form, i.e., the question or statement could be pentameter, the counterpoint or follow-up could be tetrameter, etc., but not a jumbled mess that jumps around, back and forth within the various parts of the poem.

Also, and I'll probably get some flack for this but, I think one should consider that the "sing-song" quality found in consistent, metered lines, as opposed to uneven, jumbled lines, is very much a part of a sonnet's character. Alter the original too much and you may have 14 lines, but you won't have a sonnet any more than a car with 4 wheels is a wagon.

Changing a traditional form of poetry is like changing a traditional form of music. It all starts with something that came about long ago. But change it enough and slave chants become blues, change it some more and blues becomes jazz, or rock becomes southern rock, etc. No one would write a Lynyrd Skynyrd type song and try to call it jazz, though it may have the same number of lines, use words, use rhymes, use notes, etc. The beast has simply changed too much to call it what came before.

In the end it is of course "writer's choice" to call it whatever they choose. 50 readers may agree, 3, or 4 may never agree no matter how much you explain. Who cares? What's going to matter is, will the publisher publish it.

I agree whole-heartedly. Couldn't of said it better myself. The comparison to music was a nice touch. Well writ.

You know, I realize that my question here is ultimately an exercise in futility because you can never get everyone to agree on anything (except maybe trivialities, and even that is questionable). But it can be entertaining and, who knows, even educational, don't you think?

'ric

'ric · Dec 28, 2007

LimeyDawg said:
http://www.sonnets.org/basicforms.htm
"A sonnet is fundamentally a dialectical construct which allows the poet to examine the nature and ramifications of two usually contrastive ideas, emotions, states of mind, beliefs, actions, events, images, etc., by juxtaposing the two against each other, and possibly resolving or just revealing the tensions created and operative between the two.

O. K., so much for the fancy language. Basically, in a sonnet, you show two related but differing things to the reader in order to communicate something about them. Each of the three major types of sonnets accomplishes this in a somewhat different way. There are, of course, other types of sonnets, as well, but I'll stick for now to just the basic three (Italian, Spenserian, English), with a brief look at some non-standard sonnets."

Those words are from the opening paragraph on that site, certainly not mine. I think the point is that there has to be some common element to name a work a sonnet. Fourteen lines seems to be one. The idea of two contrasting ideas etc. shown to the reader seems to be the other. There appear to be formal similarities in the different types of sonnets (Shakespearian, Italian, etcetera) but many of the masters worked variations within their chosen forms.

As a poet, you can vary where you see fit. However, why the need to call it a Sonnet if people don't recognize it as such? I think that is the answer to your question. If your audience ought to recognize a sonnet, and sees none in your work, you have probably strayed too far in the variation.

Good point about the contrasting ideas (pointing toward, I assume, the poem's theme). And you're right about people having to be able to identify it as a sonnet without having to wave a cue card in their face. That's just common sense.

My question arose because someone asked me what kind of sonnet it was. I gave a smart-ass answer that it was a 'rician sonnet. It's still over on the critique board. If you'd care to take a look I'd be obliged if you'd make some comments. The file name on the board is "Sonnet". The actual title of the poem itself should read "Life Goes On". However, I'm thinking of changing that to "Shit Happens".

'ric

'ric · Dec 28, 2007

Medievalist said:
Earlier sonnets in Italian don't have fourteen lines, and there are sonnets in English, prior to the publication of Tottels Miscellany in 1557 that don't, but the fourteen lines and iambic thing really really do work.

Couplets while common, are not required, nor is the volta or turn associated with Petrarchan sonnets. If forced to be more forthcoming, I'd add that there's a tendency for an extended metaphor or conceit, but not even that is required.

Well, those are certainly facts, so we can't argue with them. However, they really don't seem to help much, do they? I mean; maybe 14 lines, maybe not;maybe a volta, maybe not;etc.

Maybe it's kind of like pornography: You know it when you see it. Is that what you're saying?

'ric

Deleted member 42 · Dec 28, 2007

'ric said:
Well, those are certainly facts, so we can't argue with them. However, they really don't seem to help much, do they? I mean; maybe 14 lines, maybe not;maybe a volta, maybe not;etc.

Maybe it's kind of like pornography: You know it when you see it. Is that what you're saying?

'ric

Err, no.

I'm saying you could write software that can spot a sonnet.

1. Are there 14 lines?
If Yes go to 2; if not, End.
2. Are the lines predominantly iambic pentameter with end rhymes?
If Yes go to 3; if not End.
3. You have a sonnet.

'ric · Dec 29, 2007

Medievalist said:
Err, no.

I'm saying you could write software that can spot a sonnet.

1. Are there 14 lines?
If Yes go to 2; if not, End.
2. Are the lines predominantly iambic pentameter with end rhymes?
If Yes go to 3; if not End.
3. You have a sonnet.

That's reasonable (and nicely practical, too). Kind of like veinglory's suggestion. As a solution to my question, it is certainly attractive. If I were to categorize it, I would call it a "legalistic" solution. Nothing wrong with that. It works by settling disputes by means of established principles and precedents. It lays down the Law, in other words, and life goes on. That's a good solution. It certainly works.

However, I'm wondering: Is this really adequate? Is a sonnet nothing more than its outer form or appearance? Consider: Could there exist a poem which would be identified by your "software" test as a sonnet yet actually not be a sonnet, but rather, perhaps, be some sort of faux- or ersatz sonnet? For example, a mood-piece drivel about moonlight and floating fireflies gussied up in sonnet drag.

What I'm trying to suggest here is perhaps there's a bit more to a "sonnet" than just its outer form or appearance. Perhaps there might be a sonnet-soul or -spirit (metaphorically speaking, of course), some quality that makes a particular poem a "sonnet".

Admittedly there's a danger here with too much emphasis on this putative "-spirit" because under it literally just about anything could be a "sonnet". Nevertheless, I can't help but think that it needs to be taken into consideration. I agree with you and others here (if I understand you all correctly) that a poem's outer form or appearance is important. I would disagree with you only on the question of degree: I would prefer to allow a little more variation in how the poem is cobbled together. I like my leashes long.

One more thing about this hypothetical ersatz sonnet: We could just say that it is nevertheless a sonnet, but just a bad sonnet. That would certainly be a simple solution here. However, maybe it's just me, but frankly that's a tad too simple for my taste. Can't like that. As my Rabbi Lenny Cohen would say, "Thank God it's not that simple, in my secret life".

'ric

slcboston · Dec 29, 2007

What's a sonnet?

Easy. It's WAY too much trouble to write.

JBI · Dec 29, 2007

Didn't Keats in Ode to a Grecian Urn (I think it was that ode) modify the sonnet structure to use a 10 line construct?

JRH · Dec 29, 2007

JBI

Ode To A Grecian Urn" is in fact an "Ode" based on Pindar's Odes and consists of 50 lines in 5 Stanzas,

Keats did write many sonnets including "On First Looking into Chapman's Homer" and "When I Have Fears" that are among the most famous ones.

Many of his sonnets can be found at: http://www.sonnets.org/keats.htm

Jim Hoye, (JRH)

Writer??? · Dec 29, 2007

'ric said:
That's reasonable (and nicely practical, too). Kind of like veinglory's suggestion. As a solution to my question, it is certainly attractive. If I were to categorize it, I would call it a "legalistic" solution. Nothing wrong with that. It works by settling disputes by means of established principles and precedents. It lays down the Law, in other words, and life goes on. That's a good solution. It certainly works.

However, I'm wondering: Is this really adequate? Is a sonnet nothing more than its outer form or appearance? Consider: Could there exist a poem which would be identified by your "software" test as a sonnet yet actually not be a sonnet, but rather, perhaps, be some sort of faux- or ersatz sonnet? For example, a mood-piece drivel about moonlight and floating fireflies gussied up in sonnet drag.

What I'm trying to suggest here is perhaps there's a bit more to a "sonnet" than just its outer form or appearance. Perhaps there might be a sonnet-soul or -spirit (metaphorically speaking, of course), some quality that makes a particular poem a "sonnet".

Admittedly there's a danger here with too much emphasis on this putative "-spirit" because under it literally just about anything could be a "sonnet". Nevertheless, I can't help but think that it needs to be taken into consideration. I agree with you and others here (if I understand you all correctly) that a poem's outer form or appearance is important. I would disagree with you only on the question of degree: I would prefer to allow a little more variation in how the poem is cobbled together. I like my leashes long.

One more thing about this hypothetical ersatz sonnet: We could just say that it is nevertheless a sonnet, but just a bad sonnet. That would certainly be a simple solution here. However, maybe it's just me, but frankly that's a tad too simple for my taste. Can't like that. As my Rabbi Lenny Cohen would say, "Thank God it's not that simple, in my secret life".

'ric

Well, personally, I think the "spirit", or "soul", or essence comes largely from the structure and form. A sonnet has the qualities it has, and is recognizable by-and-large, because it has a metered line, it has a set number of lines, it has a rhmye scheme, it has the form (roughly) of point/counterpoint/answer, and, as mentioned before, I think the metered line and the sing-song way it can be (but doesn't have to be) read is part of that "spirit" you talk about.

Same goes for the second part where the opposing view is given, or the topic is approached from another avenue. And the summation or answer. There is plenty of freedom within the traditional forms of the sonnet. No one would reject it being a sonnet simply because it isn't iambic, or pentameter. Make it any 'ic or meter you like, but be consistent.

Make the summation an open question. Make each section it's own metaphor, or the whole thing an extended metaphore. Forget iambic, tetra, hexa, etc. and simply count the syllables giving it some discernable pattern and flow like 8,8,8, 8 or, 6,8,6,8 or, 10, 8, 8, 10 or something, but, be consistent and give it flow.

Play with the rhyme scheme, but again, the key (for me) is consistency. Use an all "a" or a,b,a or, whatever, but be balanced and discernable to the reader.

For me, I think that is the heart of a sonnet. Despite how it is played with, it is discernable. I will discover a meter, I will discover a rhyme pattern, I will discover the form. Like an old friend or family member, despite the clothes it wears I will recognize it from the sound it makes. Not so much WHAT it is saying, but the WAY it says it.

Uncle Fred could suddenly dress in drag and start spouting deep thoughts on the space-time contiuum in the tenth un-paralleled dimension, but he'd still be so tall, so fat, gravely voice, and somewhere, somehow, his personality, his spirit, his "Uncle Fredness", would come through for me to recognize.

Ultimately, this is a dead topic. As has been said, you can call a poem anything you want as it's creator, getting others to call it that is a losing battle. When I see a poem that has say, 3 ten line stanzas, or a jumbled meter, or rhyme pattern, I'm probably immediately going to say, "That's not a sonnet. It doesn't look anything like a sonnet." So if you're going for overall acceptance of your particular freedoms with a traditional form, it ain't gonna happen.

There are new forms of poetry happening. Even here on this forum. Kie Borsden did it briefly with the "Borsden Englyn" and Davids has done it with "Prosetry", but even those, while popular here with a few (me being one of them), have not gained wide acceptance or even publication as far as I know. But here, you are not suggesting a new form, but rather a severely altered "traditional" form and asking how far one can go and retain the "spirit" and still call it by it's original name. I think it would be easier to just call it something new like, "(your name) Sonnet".

The beauty of Kie's form is that it retains everything of the original englyn form including the cross and end rhymes, and syllable requirements, and merely extends it to any number of stanza you like and gives it a special, indented line layout style. Davids is even more beautiful in it's simplicity in that there are no rules, anything goes. I mention this just to show the difference between offering "new" forms, and altering (radically some would say), the old ones yet trying to call them by the original.

To me, it's like you are trying to say that "A rose is a rose", when what you really have is perhaps a rose grafted to a daffodil or something making a "Rodafsedil". Like someone said in an earlier post, (roughly) do what you want and call it something new.

Also, I'd just like to throw my two cents in about legalism. I think this goes hand in hand with trying to "alter" a traditional form too much, and still call it by it's traditional name. Rules are rules and can be bent and still retain the "spirit" of the original, but break them and you are definitely asking for the gavel of "defining" to point out where you strayed. In other words, don't tell me it's a Peanut butter and Jelly sandwhich when it's really Ham on rye. Yeah, it's still a sandwhich like a poem is still a poem, but it ain't no PB&J.

Deleted member 42 · Dec 29, 2007

'ric said:
Is this really adequate? Is a sonnet nothing more than its outer form or appearance? Consider: Could there exist a poem which would be identified by your "software" test as a sonnet yet actually not be a sonnet, but rather, perhaps, be some sort of faux- or ersatz sonnet? For example, a mood-piece drivel about moonlight and floating fireflies gussied up in sonnet drag.

The sonnet is defined by form, not by content; it is not a genre. Sonnet drag, as you put it, would be the fourteen lines of iambic-or-mostly-iambicpentameter.

So, yeah, a sonnet is "nothing more" than its outer form.

That being said, a sonnet is also much more than its form--but it begins with form.

'ric · Dec 31, 2007

'ric said:
Pardon me for butting in here, but I got a question.... If one starts messing with the form, at what point does the sonnet become no longer a sonnet? 'ric

I want to thank everyone here for the time and effort you've all taken to enlighten me with your views on how much messing around one can do with the sonnet form before mutating it into something else. If you all will indulge me a bit, let me offer a quick summary.

I believe the main consensus here is that the average sonnet reader, whatever his or her particular tastes and proclivities, should be able to recognize the poem as a sonnet: To this end, regularity of line length is required; hard-line purists might insist on pentameter, but free-spirits are free to experiment with other lengths. There also seems to be a marked preference for the iambic foot, though, here again, non-conformists and would be rebels may, if they wish, try, say, writing with dactylic feet, but they do so at their own peril. Also, there seems to be a marked preference for 14 lines, no more no less. Personally, this strikes me as perhaps a tad too rigid, but I can live with it.

I also must say that I can't disagree entirely with Medievalist who maintained that a sonnet is its form. Personally, I can't help but feel that there must be something more than just that, but I also realize that perhaps I may be larding on too much here: Occam's Razor has not, to my knowledge, been repealed. Medievalist's dictum does work, and that, I suppose, is what's important.

Again, thank you all for your responses.

Now, I have some news:

I notice that my status here has been upgraded from "esteemed new member" to "one of the locals". Well, good for me. I certainly feel as if I've found a home here. However, I'm in the process of moving to the big city (this small town life is driving me nuts), so I will be away from my computer for a while. This means my appearance here will be rather spotty for the near future. Rest assured (or be warned, as the case may be) that I shall return. If anyone asks, just tell them that I'm out of town on business. I look forward with happy anticipation to seeing you all again.

'ric

ghostwriter21 · Jan 1, 2008

modern variations on sonnet

Yes, it is 14 lines, usually iambic pentameter, either Shakesperean, Petrarchan, or Spencerian. In the 20th century, however, it is often 14 lines with ten syllables per line with accents either very skewed or missing altogether. So: many modern poets use 14 lines, ten syllables as the definition, although many still write traditional sonnets.

LimeyDawg · Jan 1, 2008

What happens when an unstoppable force encounters an immovable object? If the poet believes his work to be a sonnet, and the reader believes otherwise, who is right?

Deleted member 42 · Jan 1, 2008

I am

Seriously, if you look closely at the six hundred or so year tradition of the English sonnet, the meter and rhyme scheme is variable within the line. The very best poets will deliberately mess with the meter, for emphasis, timing, and music. Sidney loved to stick in Alexandrine lines, or entire sonnets in hexameter; Shakespeare loved to alter the patten in a single foot in a line.

What is a sonnet?

'ric

Deleted member 42

JRH

practical experience, FTW

JBI

veinglory

volitare nequeo

Writer???

Because EYE said so!

LimeyDawg

Scars are poems too

Deleted member 42

'ric

'ric

'ric

'ric

'ric

'ric

Deleted member 42

'ric

slcboston

Pasture-ized

JBI

JRH

practical experience, FTW

Writer???

Because EYE said so!

Deleted member 42

'ric

ghostwriter21

Maybe, maybe not

LimeyDawg

Scars are poems too

Deleted member 42