I’m thinking of completely abandoning some of my flash or
micro fiction and rethinking them as poems. In the past I’ve tried to do this
by dividing up work that has already been written and reconfiguring it. But
this is a kind of cheating, particularly if I want to think about form and
whether the form makes emotional sense when connected to words. So rethinking
these stories is going to be important, because, according to my last post, the
new work must somehow resonate for me in a way that it didn’t in story form.
The form needs to bring some emotion to the work and the
work needs the form to be almost secondary to the meaning – yet crucial to the
meaning – but in an effortless way. I’m not even sure I’m making sense here.
Let me try again: I have to live in the form before I can
write the form –
Poetry forms such as villanelles, sestinas, ballads, were
sung over and over again both by the person who made it up, and by singers who
heard the songs and then started singing it themselves. Someone would make one
up, another would hear it, memorize it and sing it somewhere else until the
form, the rhythm the rules of the form, would become embedded, physically embedded,
in the singer’s body. Sing something enough, you change it. Change it and it
begins to become your own. And reading is not the same as singing. Which means,
I guess, that I’ll need to memorize some poems – get them into my head in a
permanent way, the way troubadours used to and sing them to myself. Quietly. So
as not to embarrass my daughters. Sigh.
The problem, of course, is that I stink at memorizing.
Always have. Well, except for my American Express Card number – I’ve got THAT
down. (Also thanks to my daughters’ addictions to Etsy) (Ok, that’s a partial
truth. I too am addicted to Etsy)
And the other problem is, which poem to memorize? Which
form? After reading The Making of a Poem*,
I’m kinda drawn to the sestina. 39 lines, though. THIRTY NINE LINES.
But I like the non-rhyming aspect of the sestina – because
rhyming is hard – and if it’s not done well then the poem is a slave to the
rhyme rather than the rhyme being a way of adding to the poem’s overall meaning
and emotional strength. “The Raven” would not be “The Raven” without that
building intensity of the rhyme scheme. It would lose that heart pounding
quality. (Here’s my absolute most favorite reading of The Raven EVER – read by Christopher
Walken.)
What I like about the sestina is the way words are repeated
throughout the poem which gives the illusion of rhyme without actually having
to look every third thing up in Webster’s Rhyming dictionary. And it also
builds the intensity of meaning. Each time the words are repeated they change
in meaning, building in meaning.
Which words though!? Which words??? See how these things can
go? This is why I think the form needs to be embedded in the body and mind
before one attempts to go writing in a poetical form.
Song writers do this. My older daughter is a
singer/songwriter. But she doesn’t just make up songs, she sings other peoples
songs. And while she is pretty discriminating in what she listens to, she isn’t
discriminating at all in what she chooses to play and sing. Because she knows
that even some of the worst songs (or the worst seeming songs) have an
intricacy and rhythm that is useful to learn. (Here is her soundcloud account where she is singing
Wrecking Ball by Miley Cyrus, just to prove my point. I think my daughter’s
version is fantastic.)
So, in order to write, I need to memorize. I need to sing
sestinas.
I’ll let you know how it goes.
According to The
Making of A Poem, here is the sestina form:
1.
It is a poem of thirty-nine lines (THIRTY NINE
LINES)
2.
It has six stanzas of six lines each
3.
This is followed by an envoi of three lines.
(Gonna pause here for a minute and talk about the envoi. An envoi, according to
The Poetry Foundation’s poetic terms is “The brief stanza that ends French poetic forms such as the ballade or sestina. It usually serves as a summation or a dedication to a particular
person.” This is different from an envoy, a person sent by a government to
represent that government but there are similarities I think – because the
envoi at the end of the poem is the thing that sends it off – it’s the part
that might get most stuck in your head because it is the last thing you hear
and in this way it becomes the messenger or even the introduction. Here’s what
Webster has to say about it:
a.
Definition of ENVOI: the usually explanatory or commendatory
concluding remarks to a poem, essay, or book; especially :
a short final stanza of a ballad serving as a summary or dedication. Middle English envoye, from Middle
French envoi, literally, message, from Old French envei, from enveier to
send on one's way, from Vulgar Latin *inviare, from
Latin in- + via way
I like the way it comes from via – way, and that the envoi because it
ends the poem, actually sends you on your
way. It’s saying, ok, off you go, take this out into the world now. It’s
yours – go on, take it!)
4.
All of these lines are unrhymed.
5.
The same six end-words must occur in every
stanza but in a changing order that follows a set pattern
6.
This recurrent pattern of end words is known
as “lexical repetition”
7.
Each stanza must follow on the last by taking a
reversed paring from the previous lines
8.
The first line of the second stanza must pair
its end-words with the last line of the first. The second line of the second
stanza must do this with the first line of the first and so on.
9.
The envoi or last three lines must gather up and
deploy [another messenger word!] the six end words. *
Also, here is a very nifty blog post by Camilla Guthrie on
the Poetry Foundation’s website called “Why Write Sesitnas?” in which she says
what I’ve just said only better and more poetically.
* Strand, Mark and Eavan Boland. The Making of A Poem: A Norton Anthology of Poetic Forms. New York:
W.W. Norton & Company, 2000. Print.
No comments:
Post a Comment