Fine Lines

(Walker Martin teaches eighth grade English at McMillan Middle School in Omaha .)

. . . misunderstood! Well, perhaps that is as it should be. One of the more likely complaints or misconceptions surrounds works of modern poetry.

“This stuff can’t be poetry. Poems have to rhyme.” My eighth graders insist on this well-known fact to the bitter end. I would like to offer a clarification on the matter, but only, of course, with the plea that no one assume my discussion to be complete. No view of “what poetry is” can ever be complete.

One important distinction within the world of poems is narrative vs. imagery. This separation might also be seen in rough terms as traditional vs. modern poetry. Most of us, when asked to define poetry, think of rhyming and predictable patterns of rhythm. The limerick is an example of both. This is typical of the narrative form. Modern poetry, while having some rhyme and repeating rhythm, doesn’t allow either to drive it. Often, no rhyme is present, or the rhythm is difficult to discern. Let us then look closer at these two forms.

The narrative tells a story. It moves the reader through time. The narrative is an ancient form and predates the written word. Its descendants amount to everything from epic ballads, nursery rhymes, mnemonics (those cute little memory joggers) to 99.9% of song lyrics. The narrative found its place in our ancestors’ lives because those charged with keeping track of cultural records found it easier to remember information that rhymed and had a specific number of beats in its construction.

The narrative form, then, carries one across time. It is the telling of a story. Imagery, on the other hand, tries to take a slice of time, freeze it, and then “paint the picture.” The narrative is ancient, and imagery is the bent of the modern poet. Understand, the two forms are anything but mutually exclusive. Narrative forms have imagery, and vice versa. The differentiation is one of primary purpose.

Imagery can be “painted” with the use of rhyme. But just as likely, if not more so, it is not. Even less likely is the use of a predictable pattern of rhythm. This, however, in no way lets the modern poet “off the hook” in terms of rhythm. All poetry has some element of “flow” to it. This allows comfort on the reader’s part. We demand this in sports, movies, art, and so it is with poetry, too. It is just the case that rhythm might not be as readily evident in some modern works.

So, how does one “paint” imagery? One means is to “freeze” in one’s mind an event or scene. The poem is then a description of this frozen moment. All senses are available to play with, as are emotions. For example, what does anger “look” like? The poet’s task is then to engage the senses and emotions through words that create visions.

Use of imagery does not preclude telling a story. Any story can be enhanced by the use of imagery. The modern poet would probably view the story as a vehicle for the series of images created in the telling. As readers, we tend to “freeze” scenes from a story anyway. So even the narrative, in the hands of the modern poet, would tend to be a sequence of vividly frozen pictures.