I do not usually care much about meter or rhyme, as some poets work extremely well with it, and others without. Also, while I mentioned strictly English poets above, I ask this in the spirit of breaking free from those confines.
In other words, just throw out some names -- your favorites, your most abhorred, whatever it be. I understand that what works for one does not necessarily imply that it will work for the other, but I figure that this is the best way to approach it. It is more exciting this way.
If you need clarification on any point you might be curious about, please ask.
― mj (robert blake), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 04:48 (nineteen years ago)
― mj (robert blake), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 04:50 (nineteen years ago)
Might help. My only comment is that I don't like that Mr. Pope.
― Casuistry (Chris P), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 05:13 (nineteen years ago)
Among the early poets, I like John Skelton. He's feisty, somewhat of a dandy, and has very glossy feathers he loves to preen. So, he's rather fun. Sidney's sonnets are not as good as Shakespeare's, but they are good.
Herbert was a puzzlement at first, since he is so Christian and devotional. After I got more comfortable with that, I discovered he was a keenly sad and sincere poet, who poured a lot of his heart into his work. Herrick, another cleric, is a trifler, but many of his trifles are sweet and foolish (in the good sense of the word).
Pope can be damned hard to take. The best I can say for him is that he was the undisputed ringleader of the combative, competitive wits of his day and he had a quick, mean jab. Reading him can be like being trussed up and smacked around, even though he is superficially all politeness. He inspires a desire to hit back, which is frustrating, because he's dead.
Kit Marlowe didn't write much poetry that wasn't in his plays, but his poems are worth reading. Kit Smart is hard to find copies of, but he's very interesting - a scribbler, bawd-chaser, tippler, and eventual madman who wrote poems directly to God from the madhouse. Smart's much livelier than most of his contemporaries.
― Aimless (Aimless), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 21:13 (nineteen years ago)
Also, for the elizabethans, you might want to read Eliot's book and then read the Duchess of Malfi.
― kenche, Tuesday, 14 February 2006 21:45 (nineteen years ago)
Have you thought of reading poetic history books? I've always found them pretty fun.
Could you name a couple that you have liked? It sounds like a good idea, as long as the author is excited about the subject.
Also, your Eliot recommendation is well-noted.
Kit Marlowe didn't write much poetry that wasn't in his plays
As you and Kenchen have pointed out, there were great writers who stuck all of their poetry into plays, which I keep forgetting; I probably should read more Marlowe while I am in this mood.
― mj (robert blake), Tuesday, 14 February 2006 22:32 (nineteen years ago)
If you're at work, see here: http://www.luminarium.org/lumina.htm
― kenchen, Tuesday, 14 February 2006 22:51 (nineteen years ago)
I can't remember who called who called Rochester "the greatest of our second-rate poets" but it's true, I think, or nearly. Not that I'm qualified to say that! But there's a lot beneath the rage and buggery and impotence, even though the rage and buggery and impotence is so good that there doesn't even need to be? I think he'd be a great choice if you weren't too concerned with meter-mastery.
I like Richard Barnfield a lot too - his better known poems are these very homoerotic pastorals that were a big influence on the Shk Young Man sonnets, they're pretty light and pleasant to read but if you feel like bouncing some close reading at them they yield a surprising amount pretty fast. The earlier editions are wicked bowlderised tho so um watch out for that or something.
― Gravel Puzzleworth (Gregory Henry), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 00:04 (nineteen years ago)
GP -- speaking of Rochester, I am glad you mentioned him, because I have been meaning to read his poetry for ages. Sodom, as well.
I might revive this thread every now and then if the need arises.
― mj (robert blake), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 04:48 (nineteen years ago)
THE COLLAR.
I STRUCK the board, and cry’d, No more ; I will abroad. What ? shall I ever sigh and pine ? My lines and life are free ; free as the rode, Loose as the winde, as large as store. Shall I be still in suit ? Have I no harvest but a thorn To let me bloud, and not restore What I have lost with cordiall fruit ? Sure there was wine, Before my sighs did drie it : there was corn Before my tears did drown it. Is the yeare onely lost to me ? Have I no bayes to crown it ? No flowers, no garlands gay ? all blasted ? All wasted ? Not so, my heart : but there is fruit, And thou hast hands. Recover all thy sigh-blown age On double pleasures : leave thy cold dispute Of what is fit, and not forsake thy cage, Thy rope of sands, Which pettie thoughts have made, and made to thee Good cable, to enforce and draw, And be thy law, While thou didst wink and wouldst not see. Away ; take heed : I will abroad. Call in thy deaths head there : tie up thy fears. He that forbears To suit and serve his need, Deserves his load. But as I rav’d and grew more fierce and wilde, At every word, Methought I heard one calling, Childe : And I reply’d, My Lord.
Marvell is interesting too, I think.
― Archel (Archel), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 10:20 (nineteen years ago)
Archel that poem is great!
― Gravel Puzzleworth (Gregory Henry), Wednesday, 15 February 2006 17:58 (nineteen years ago)
― Aimless (Aimless), Thursday, 16 February 2006 02:10 (nineteen years ago)