I am not surprised that among emanilapoetry contributors, there are those who like to experiment with grammar in their posts. After all, there is the impression that, of various genres of creative writing, poetry gives the writer a license to write in a language, form or structure that he or she pleases.
Unfortunately, creative writing is mistaken for a license to dispense and ignore good grammar and correct spelling. Especially these days where most writings are done online and Twitter- and Facebook-based communication is popular, some writers tend to think that good grammar and correct spelling are already things of the past.
Look at e.e. cummings, they say. Cummings who had given traditional grammar the so-called proverbial finger had been known to have dispensed with all capital letters, and had become sort of what I call the “father of lower-cased poetry.” He also appeared to have started poetry punctuated in random-walk pattern. What if Cummings adopted a conventional style? Perhaps, the world had not taken notice of him.
But even Cummings did not ignore good grammar and correct spelling. Yes, he played around with structure and punctuations, but not good grammar and correct spelling.
At emanilapoetry, except for the layout of our webpage as well as the site’s typography, we can see nothing that should prevent members from experimenting with their posts. But before experimenting, let us make sure we know the rules of good grammar.
Let us remember: Lack of knowledge of grammar rules cannot be hidden in poetry, experimental or otherwise.
We still like to view poetry as an area which requires writer’s knowledge of grammar and spelling. Lack of knowledge of grammar will show in the writer’s poems – as being amateurish. And as we all know, the present, or rather a mistake not corrected now, has a tendency to haunt us down in the future.
So, here is the point: Aside from spelling, make sure that before you experiment, you have a good grounding of the rules of grammar. As they say: “Learn how to walk first, before you start running.”
Other suggested articles
[Not necessarily related to above post; Automatically generated]
{ 18 comments… read them below or add one }
I agree with Mr. Romy Cayabyab’s view on grammatical and spelling correctness in poetry, as in other fields of literary work. A “corrected” poem is a well-polished work of art.
@Pacific – Thanks for the feedback.
In this Google-era, there is really no excuse for not editing and revising our works due to lack of knowledge or lack of information on what makes a better poetry. When I entered this search term: “Editing poetry. How many times should I read and revise my work?” Google came out with 614,000 possibly related pages. Wow, that practically removed any excuse for not knowing. Among the pages on how to write better poetry, here is something I would like to share. It’s a very simple advice.
“There’s a secret about writing poetry well. When you write a poem down the first time, that’s about half the job. The other half is reading it over and making it better.
“This part of the job includes finding stronger words and lines, cutting out repetition, awkward and dull parts, and overcoming the usual English problems in spelling, punctuation and grammar. Without inspiration and emotion, no poem is ever going to be very good. But you can have inspiration and emotion, and still produce a not very good poem — if you don’t edit and revise it well after the first draft. “
I agree! I just finished reading a good booklet about creative writing. These were the three points I learned – revise! revise! revise!
Quite true! Even a Shakespeare is not excepted from the “revise! revise! revise!” dictum.
I just joined a group called Flexwriters. They have a theme every day to write about. I find this very difficult because one only has 24 hours. I don’t know how some of the writers can come up with three and four poems in this short time. Where does the inspiration come from? Are they writing from the tip of the pen,and not the soul of the heart?
I can’t agree with you more, Romy. The true measure of a writer (whatever the medium) is his grammar. No pen-pusher (okay, pc-user) worth his byte can throw grammatical caution to cyberspace and end up with praise. Emanilapoetry contributors are blessed with readers who take lapses in stride, could not care less or simply take them for granted. Woe unto the unedited. I’d rather my attention was called if I slipped.
Ham, thanks for sharing with us your thoughts.
Fortunate are we (pc-users) indeed that we are in an age where online tools like browsers have grammar and spellcheckers built into them. Corrections are just clicks away.
About the attitudes of emanilapoetry readers: I regularly visit other poetry and writers websites so I can benchmark our poetry site’s performance. Modesty aside, I must say that, by and large, our writers and contributors at emanilapoetry are way ahead of them. But that does not mean, we should do nothing. As Franco stated – “revise! revise! revise!” There is no other way! To use a cliche: The world’s largest room is the room for improvement. At emanilapoetry, the doors to that room always remain opened!
Romy,
That you nailed it certainly evident!
Ham
Romy,
you are right! that is the reason that it is a good practice to self edit your work a million times or ask a close friend to critic your work before posting it. Well, I am still learning. thanks for the friendly reminder.
Hi Carlos > Thanks for joining us. We look forward to your posts. – Romy
I suddenly felt sad. Most of my poems and stories are typed and published right away-no editing whatsoever. I believe that the imperfect grammar my writings has makes it unique, since my main goal is to be able to express myself, even if people around me doesn’t care.
After reading this post I realized that I don’t have to be that much of a self-centered woman and I have to start polishing my works. I guess I have to grab that grammar book again.
Thanks Sir Romy.
Like others, I have always believed that the first step to improving ourselves, our writings included, is to acknowledge that there is something to improve. Thanks for dropping by and sharing with us your thoughts.
I have expressed a similar sentiment in my poem “Poesy Defiled” posted almost a year ago in emanilapoetry.
It says in part…
“Poets with fractured verse gather
As in symbiotic safety
Unmindful of grammar formality
Spewing anarchic syntax
Senseless verbiage strung indiscrete
Metaphors unmatched and asinine
Words spelled as heard
Free verse shamelessly abused
Mouthing poetic license as an excuse to
Inflict mayhem on literariness
Drawing attention as avant-garde
The charade lives on, robust and raucous
In the circle of fools”
I remember that post, Ed. Here is the link to that post > http://www.emanilapoetry.com/writersgroup/index.php/poesy-defiled/
Using 16th century tools to do 21st century work? My view is that poetry like any other communication medium, is not static, but a dynamic language. Like any other languages that are evolving thru time and changing usage, cultural perspectives and moral practices, poetry is no exception. It will evolve into different colors, perceptions, emotions and communication style. There is such thing as the “thing of the past” and those old rules will be replaced by something new. The one question in my mind is, “what is she/he trying to communicate, and how effective is the style?”
I share your view that poetry as a communication medium is not static and like other media, poetry is dynamic. Like other languages, poetry is constantly evolving to a point where “old rules will be replaced by something new.”
That is exactly the point of this article. It may well happen that some mavericks would challenge established norms but until such time that their own style including loose grammar and incorrect spelling (in current standards) becomes commonly accepted, then the current rules apply. And when this “something new” becomes common usage, then this too becomes part of the rules which again need to be observed.
I do not feel poor English and a lack of punctuation knowledge should replace good English and knowledge of punctuation. The only excuse is the poet is lazy and does not want to learn or just do it. I have read poetry with poor English, written without any commas or periods and the work runs amok. It does not make sense. I do not want to re-read a line twice before I can grasp where the writer is going, or where he has been.
Thanks for dropping by and sharing your thoughts, Mari Ana. I agree with you. If a line has to be read one more than once, that means that line is poorly written.
{ 1 trackback }