What's wrong with rhyme?

[The Mutt]

Why are people so averse to rhyming poetry?

I love rhymes. I love sonnets. I love hypersonnets. I even like villanelles, maybe the goofiest rhyme-scheme ever created. I like reading them. I like writing them.

I don't see rhymes as constraints or restraints. I see them as a challenge. I don't see them as old-fashioned or corny. Good enough for Shakespeare? Good enough for me.

It's easy to drive 200 across the salt flats. Driving 200 through a laid-out grid of city streets? Sweet.

 

[Tsotha]

Why are people so averse to rhyming poetry?

I love rhymes. I love sonnets. I love hypersonnets. I even like villanelles, maybe the goofiest rhyme-scheme ever created. I like reading them. I like writing them.

I don't see rhymes as constraints or restraints. I see them as a challenge. I don't see them as old-fashioned or corny. Good enough for Shakespeare? Good enough for me.

It's easy to drive 200 across the salt flats. Driving 200 through a laid-out grid of city streets? Sweet.

There is nothing wrong with rhyme. The question is why are you rhyming? Does every poem need to rhyme?

Also, if rhymes aren't constraints or restraints, where does this challenge you speak of come from?

I would also challenge you to translate this poem, by Augusto dos Anjos, keeping: 1) the metric; 2) the rhythm; 3) the rhyming; 4) the meaning; 5) the mood.

Versos Íntimos

Vês! Ninguém assistiu ao formidável
Enterro de tua última quimera.
Somente a Ingratidão – esta pantera –
Foi tua companheira inseparável!

Acostuma-te à lama que te espera!
O Homem, que, nesta terra miserável,
Mora entre feras, sente inevitável
Necessidade de também ser fera.

Toma um fósforo. Acende teu cigarro!
O beijo, amigo, é a véspera do escarro,
A mão que afaga é a mesma que apedreja.

Se a alguém causa inda pena a tua chaga,
Apedreja essa mão vil que te afaga,
Escarra nessa boca que te beija!​

Is it hard to do? Yes, it is. Why? Because there is a limit to what you can rhyme in any given language. Portuguese allows for a different set of words (and ideas) to be put together with rhyme.

So yes, rhymes ARE a constraint. Which again, doesn't mean there is anything wrong with rhyming, or forms.

 

[The Mutt]

There is nothing wrong with rhyme. The question is why are you rhyming? Does every poem need to rhyme?

Also, if rhymes aren't constraints or restraints, where does this challenge you speak of come from?

I would also challenge you to translate this poem, by Augusto dos Anjos, keeping: 1) the metric; 2) the rhythm; 3) the rhyming; 4) the meaning; 5) the mood.

Versos Íntimos

Vês! Ninguém assistiu ao formidável
Enterro de tua última quimera.
Somente a Ingratidão – esta pantera –
Foi tua companheira inseparável!

Acostuma-te à lama que te espera!
O Homem, que, nesta terra miserável,
Mora entre feras, sente inevitável
Necessidade de também ser fera.

Toma um fósforo. Acende teu cigarro!
O beijo, amigo, é a véspera do escarro,
A mão que afaga é a mesma que apedreja.

Se a alguém causa inda pena a tua chaga,
Apedreja essa mão vil que te afaga,
Escarra nessa boca que te beija!​

Is it hard to do? Yes, it is. Why? Because there is a limit to what you can rhyme in any given language. Portuguese allows for a different set of words (and ideas) to be put together with rhyme.

So yes, rhymes ARE a constraint. Which again, doesn't mean there is anything wrong with rhyming, or forms.

Sorry, I don't speak Klingon.

 

[Tsotha]

Sorry, I don't speak Klingon.

And you're all the worse for it.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

My goodness it's The Mutt long time no see!

I'm not averse at all and like you I don't understand why anyone finds it a constraint. I hear the rhythm of the rhyme, I don't know why and find it sad that other poets don't hear it too.

 

[Tsotha]

My goodness it's The Mutt long time no see!

I'm not averse at all and like you I don't understand why anyone finds it a constraint. I hear the rhythm of the rhyme, I don't know why and find it sad that other poets don't hear it too.

Read above.

Whether you "hear the rhythm" or not is beside the point. Rhymes ARE a constraint. That's the entire point of it, constraining by sound! You two speak of it as if constraints were a bad thing.

 

[Tsotha]

Next someone will come around and say that a Sestina doesn't constrain you to ending your sentences with a set of six words.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

Read above.

I have, as I've never tried to rhyme in Portuguese I couldn't comment but this is English/American poetry for the most part (although Senna flings in odd languages now and then) and your take on that language seems ok to me. Are you saying that because Portuguese is your first language you can't rhyme in any other?

 

[The Mutt]

My favorite play ever is Cyrano de Bergerac. It was written in French by Edmund Rostand. It was written in rhyming couplets. There have been many attempts to translate it into English.

Anthony Burgess, a writer I greatly admire, did a version in verse that I think is kind of terrible. The rhyme is there, but the heart is lost.

Brian Hooker's version doesn't try to keep the rhyme scheme. He just tells the story. And it will slay you.

So, I'm not saying you always need rhyme, or there is anything wrong with non-rhyming poetry. I'm just saying it's fun.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

Next someone will come around and say that a Sestina doesn't constrain you to ending your sentences with a set of six words.

A Sestina is another thing altogether, it's form yes but it doesn't rhyme. The only reason I find it difficult is I keep losing my place.

 

[The Mutt]

Read above.

Whether you "hear the rhythm" or not is beside the point. Rhymes ARE a constraint. That's the entire point of it, constraining by sound! You two speak of it as if constraints were a bad thing.

You're right. I expressed myself poorly. Rhyme and form ARE constraints on how you say what you're saying, I just don't see them as constraints on WHAT you are saying.

 

[Tsotha]

I have, as I've never tried to rhyme in Portuguese I couldn't comment but this is English/American poetry for the most part (although Senna flings in odd languages now and then) and your take on that language seems ok to me. Are you saying that because Portuguese is your first language you can't rhyme in any other?

This is an English/American poetry forum, so...? Your point is? Frankly, that's insulting, especially since I'm not saying you need to read poems in Portuguese. Rather, I am using a poem in Portuguese to try to answer your question.

As I've said, you can't translate the poem and keep both the rhymes AND the meaning. Now stop to think about it for a moment. Why is that? What does it mean?

Answer: It means that there is at least one meaning (or thought) that can't be rhymed in English. (This one, which is written in Portuguese, and can't be translated and made to rhyme.) So there it is, your answer. The moment you start to rhyme (or even simply write, for that matter), you're walking down a path determined by the constraints of whatever language you're writing in. You'd never write exactly what Augusto dos Anjos wrote (while rhyming, in English).

For a more frightening thought, what you're capable of thinking is limited by what language you're thinking in.

There is an excellent book by Graciliano Ramos, "Vidas Secas", in which a (really, really poor, and ignorant) character is repeatedly abused and suffers injustices, and he knows what he is going through is wrong, but he is very humble, no education, so he cannot put it into words, he has no words to describe what he feels, so it's as if those feelings did not exist. In a sense, he is not fully human to those around him, in a better social condition.

Of course, both English and Portuguese are complete languages. I'm not saying you're less human by not knowing both. You can express most thoughts in one, and the other, with little trouble in translating. They are very similar languages, at least when compared to, say, Japanese. However, there are thoughts that become words which are stronger in English, and thoughts that become words which are stronger in Portuguese. And the same for Spanish, and Italian. Why are they stronger? Because they sound better (e.g., they rhyme, or get better rhythm, or whatever).

There are thoughts which will never be as strong in English as they are in Portuguese. And vice versa.

Annie, the Babel Tower is no joking matter. Different languages are much more than "word A translates to word B". When you look at a really different culture (e.g., the Chinese), you'll see that often there is no exact translation for some of their thoughts/concepts. You might need thousands of words to explain what a single word means, because it's an alien concept/idea, which does not exist here.

 

[Tsotha]

So, I'm not saying you always need rhyme, or there is anything wrong with non-rhyming poetry. I'm just saying it's fun.

I think so, too. It's fun, and I kinda suck at it.

 

[The Mutt]

This is an English/American poetry forum, so...? Your point is? Frankly, that's insulting, especially since I'm not saying you need to read poems in Portuguese. Rather, I am using a poem in Portuguese to try to answer your question.

As I've said, you can't translate the poem and keep both the rhymes AND the meaning. Now stop to think about it for a moment. Why is that? What does it mean?

Answer: It means that there is at least one meaning (or thought) that can't be rhymed in English. (This one, which is written in Portuguese, and can't be translated and made to rhyme.) So there it is, your answer. The moment you start to rhyme (or even simply write, for that matter), you're walking down a path determined by the constraints of whatever language you're writing in. You'd never write exactly what Augusto dos Anjos wrote (while rhyming, in English).

For a more frightening thought, what you're capable of thinking is limited by what language you're thinking in.

There is an excellent book by Graciliano Ramos, "Vidas Secas", in which a (really, really poor, and ignorant) character is repeatedly abused and suffers injustices, and he knows what he is going through is wrong, but he is very humble, no education, so he cannot put it into words, he has no words to describe what he feels, so it's as if those feelings did not exist. In a sense, he is not fully human to those around him, in a better social condition.

Of course, both English and Portuguese are complete languages. I'm not saying you're less human by not knowing both. You can express most thoughts in one, and the other, with little trouble in translating. They are very similar languages, at least when compared to, say, Japanese. However, there are thoughts that become words which are stronger in English, and thoughts that become words which are stronger in Portuguese. And the same for Spanish, and Italian. Why are they stronger? Because they sound better (e.g., they rhyme, or get better rhythm, or whatever).

There are thoughts which will never be as strong in English as they are in Portuguese. And vice versa.

Annie, the Babel Tower is no joking matter. Different languages are much more than "word A translates to word B". When you look at a really different culture (e.g., the Chinese), you'll see that often there is no exact translation for some of their thoughts/concepts. You might need thousands of words to explain what a single word means, because it's an alien concept/idea, which does not exist here.

I don't know that it's quite as big a hurdle as you are making it out to be.

Yiddish is a very nuanced language, but I'd bet most Americans know and use at least a dozen Yiddish words and don't really know where they learned them. (TV comedies.)

Translation is such a strange thing. When I watch a German or French film, I can understand the emotions and intent of what they are saying, even without the subtitles.

But when I watch a Japanese film, they could be saying, "I love you, you delicate flower" or "I hate you, you murderous bastard" and it all sounds like HOO ACH ICHIHOOBA HOOBA!!!

And I'm sure the cultural nuances are even harder to get.

 

[todski28]

Why are people so averse to rhyming poetry?

I love rhymes. I love sonnets. I love hypersonnets. I even like villanelles, maybe the goofiest rhyme-scheme ever created. I like reading them. I like writing them.

I don't see rhymes as constraints or restraints. I see them as a challenge. I don't see them as old-fashioned or corny. Good enough for Shakespeare? Good enough for me.

It's easy to drive 200 across the salt flats. Driving 200 through a laid-out grid of city streets? Sweet.

I like the way you write rhyme, have read a lot of your poems and you seem to find a way, as does underyourspell to make the rhyme and rhythm work for your write, I hate the way I write rhyme, haven't attempted to look up a sonnet yet so have no freaking idea if I am even capable of writing one I can't seem to write a luc bac so I'm thinking sonnet is beyond me. As are most things in general

 

[Magnetron]

I make up my own schemes.

Doubtful they will truly rhyme In another language, but hopefully the musicality crosses the translation barrier.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

This is an English/American poetry forum, so...? Your point is? Frankly, that's insulting, especially since I'm not saying you need to read poems in Portuguese. Rather, I am using a poem in Portuguese to try to answer your question.

As I've said, you can't translate the poem and keep both the rhymes AND the meaning. Now stop to think about it for a moment. Why is that? What does it mean?

Answer: It means that there is at least one meaning (or thought) that can't be rhymed in English. (This one, which is written in Portuguese, and can't be translated and made to rhyme.) So there it is, your answer. The moment you start to rhyme (or even simply write, for that matter), you're walking down a path determined by the constraints of whatever language you're writing in. You'd never write exactly what Augusto dos Anjos wrote (while rhyming, in English).

For a more frightening thought, what you're capable of thinking is limited by what language you're thinking in.

There is an excellent book by Graciliano Ramos, "Vidas Secas", in which a (really, really poor, and ignorant) character is repeatedly abused and suffers injustices, and he knows what he is going through is wrong, but he is very humble, no education, so he cannot put it into words, he has no words to describe what he feels, so it's as if those feelings did not exist. In a sense, he is not fully human to those around him, in a better social condition.

Of course, both English and Portuguese are complete languages. I'm not saying you're less human by not knowing both. You can express most thoughts in one, and the other, with little trouble in translating. They are very similar languages, at least when compared to, say, Japanese. However, there are thoughts that become words which are stronger in English, and thoughts that become words which are stronger in Portuguese. And the same for Spanish, and Italian. Why are they stronger? Because they sound better (e.g., they rhyme, or get better rhythm, or whatever).

There are thoughts which will never be as strong in English as they are in Portuguese. And vice versa.

Annie, the Babel Tower is no joking matter. Different languages are much more than "word A translates to word B". When you look at a really different culture (e.g., the Chinese), you'll see that often there is no exact translation for some of their thoughts/concepts. You might need thousands of words to explain what a single word means, because it's an alien concept/idea, which does not exist here.

Slow down you're being insulted by taking snippets of my answer out of context I didn't say it was an English/American poetry FORUM and I asked as it's not your first language does it make it hard for you to write with rhymes

I make up my own schemes.

Doubtful they will truly rhyme In another language, but hopefully the musicality crosses the translation barrier.

So do I there's at least two examples of mine on here somewhere

 

[Magnetron]

So do I there's at least two examples of mine on here somewhere

Being ( for lack of a better word ) controlling about how one's poetry is translated into other languages would be constraining in itself through limiting how it would ultimately be expressed.

I write it because I enjoy it. Ensuring that it can be read by everyone, that it even survives the evolution of the English language is not in my job description.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

I just don't understand where anyone is coming from with this 'constraints' argument, if rhyming poetry is done properly it flows and to my mind a damn sight easier than free verse where you have to make it poetic without the aid of the verse! If that makes sense lol Throwing Sestinas into the brew only confuses the issue because we are talking rhyming forms here, not all forms.

 

[oggbashan]

I like some rhyming poetry, but some is distorted to fit the rhyme. e.g William McGonagall.

I like some free verse, but I expect more from it that from rhyming poetry.

As for translation? I don't think that it is possible to accurately translate poetry from one language to another, whether that poetry rhymed or not. The poem has significant meaning in its original language. The nuances and allusions, and the assumptions made about the reader, don't translate.

What is possible and is sometimes done very well, is to create a new poem in the translated language using the ideas and emotions conveyed in the original language. Some Shakespeare translations are very good. But however good they are, they aren't what Shakespeare wrote.

If I can, I prefer to read poetry in the original language. Even then I miss a lot because I don't know the culture that produced it as well as a native speaker would.

 

[Senna Jawa]

Why are people so averse to rhyming poetry?

Some do, some don't.

I don't see rhymes as constraints or restraints. I see them as a challenge.

Blesław Leśmian wrote structured poems (meter+rhymes, both sophisticated) only. He would never sacrifice poetry for rhymes or meter. On the contrary, the severe limitations of any given poem structure would induce him to be extra imaginative. Within the existing means of expression, and within a strict structure, it would be impossible to write anything truly worthwhile. Leśmian needed to go, within the strict structure, beyond the existing means.

As for translation? I don't think that it is possible to accurately translate poetry from one language to another, whether that poetry rhymed or not. The poem has significant meaning in its original language. The nuances and allusions, and the assumptions made about the reader, don't translate.

What is possible and is sometimes done very well, is to create a new poem in the translated language using the ideas and emotions conveyed in the original language.

Indeed, the majority of translations amount to an artistic crime. And still, there are some here and there good translations, and we own gratitude to the respective translators. (I know however only one incredible translator who manages rhymes, meter, the meaning, the mood, the melody...--everything!, and this one got burned by the business, and does not care anymore to enrich the poetry lovers, including children, such a shame).

 

[pelegrino]

There is nothing wrong with rhyme if you can do it right. Rhyme is a medieval invention. Poetry existed much before it and will exist after it if we decide to give up rhyme totally, but there is no reason to give it up, so long as we feel comfortable within its confines.
In all contemporary stressed languages rhyme is primarily a sonic phenomenon, ie it needs to be sounded, not read silently. There, I think, lies the wrong understanding of it by many people who only read it silently.
After the vowel of a syllable has been stressed at the end of one line, the sound that follows,(in however many syllables), rather than the letters, must be the same or very similar to the sound of the ending of any other line intended to rhyme with the first sounded line by means of similarly sounding stressed/unstressed vowel(s) and consonant(s).
I hope I can clarify better with an example:

The word "meander" and the word "Alexander" are perfect natural rhymes, agreeing in vowels, consonants and stress. The word "lavender" is not rhyming with them either in stress or in vowel sound. Yet many rhyming dictionaries would have you believe otherwise and they would give you more too far-fetched examples of rhymes like bender, binder, cedar, etc. They all fail to see where the stressed vowel is and what sound follows it.
Now, the word "plunder" rhymes perfectly with "meander" and "Alexander" despite the fact that is spelt with a different vowel. It owes this to the stressed "u" been pronounced with a sound reminding the "a" sound and to the consonants and vowel that follow it.

Plunder is a better rhyme to meander,
Than lavender would ever be to Alexander.

Got it?

As far as my knowledge of stressed languages go, I would say that not all modern European languages favor rhymes easily because they are not all equally phonetic. Southern languages like Greek, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese (let us include French to the "south" languages), seem to use a lot more vowels than northern languages like German, Swedish or Flemish, therefore to use rhyme in the former group comes more natural and easy. English is somewhere in between as the softest version of northern languages. Words of a Latin or Greek origin in it still rhyme easily in their English versions.

I conclude: In rhyme it is likeness of stress and sound we are after and not similar spellings of words, that last hopefully would be a natural result.
If you manage to write something having a meaning or a message using thus stress and sound, you may have a chance of been a "sonic poet".
Otherwise take the free option, you will not find it a bit easier, rather the opposite, me thinks.
And never, never try to translate rhyming poetry by inventing rhymes in the new language, it would be a waste of time. Just translate its meaning as best as you can. That's all.

 

[butters]

The word "meander" and the word "Alexander" are perfect natural rhymes, agreeing in vowels, consonants and stress. The word "lavender" is not rhyming with them either in stress or in vowel sound.

only the paired 'ander's here are perfectly rhymed, the sounds before don't - not in the way I speak them in english that is. And i think there, once again as 12 has pointed out before, regional accent can throw a dirty great spanner into the mix.

Now, the word "plunder" rhymes perfectly with "meander" and "Alexander" despite the fact that is spelt with a different vowel. It owes this to the stressed "u" been pronounced with a sound reminding the "a" sound and to the consonants and vowel that follow it.

Plunder is a better rhyme to meander,
Than lavender would ever be to Alexander.

Got it?

this is a perfect example of what i just said. maybe it is to some ears, depending on where you come from - to me, as an english speaking Londoner, plunder and meander are poles apart, their only similarities being the end 'nder'. To explain how i hear those, the 'u' is spoken the same as in 'under' and also sounds like the FIRST 'on' in Londoner - so Lun-don-er. And it's pretty normal to hear Lavender pronounced as 'lavander'. honestly, even if i mostly don't. The MOST heard sound where i live (more east-end) would be Lav-Vin-da

accents, accents, accents. something to take into account.

 

[Magnetron]

Rhyme the way it sounds best to you.

You won't be able to please everyone, so don't waste your time trying.

Rhymes have little to zero impact on paper if there is no rhythm in your head.

Making it rhyme to make it a poem may not make it poetic.

 

[butters]

Why are people so averse to rhyming poetry?

I love rhymes. I love sonnets. I love hypersonnets. I even like villanelles, maybe the goofiest rhyme-scheme ever created. I like reading them. I like writing them.

I don't see rhymes as constraints or restraints. I see them as a challenge. I don't see them as old-fashioned or corny. Good enough for Shakespeare? Good enough for me.

It's easy to drive 200 across the salt flats. Driving 200 through a laid-out grid of city streets? Sweet.

to answer this original post:

some see it as old-fashioned, some as a tool that's employed badly in too many cases - enough to spoil the meat of a write. rhyme for rhyme's sake, in other words.

i've nothing against rhyme when used well and with purpose. there's room for all manner of poetry where i'm concerned. if the poem is better suited to a non-rhymed scheme, then it's not great forcing it into a rhymed piece just for the sake of it. A poem can lose its integrity this way, imo. My personal preferences run to more subtle rhyming - or sound links - that run throughout the body of a piece rather than happen at the end of lines as decided by certain forms.

Where there's enough skill, end rhymes won't jar - will disappear beneath the overlying sounds, visuals, tangents, unless required to stand out for another reason. They're not just there for rhyme's sake but connect things, uphold stuff. And, when people are skilled enough, forms/end-rhymes can be a thing of beauty that allow a piece to fly rather than constrain. 99.9% of the time, this isn't achieved, and so a certain snobbery has built around the whole form/rhyme thing.