A single letter is the first unit of any writing, next the syllable, and then the complete word. In poetry, after the word comes the line, and after the line, the stanza. A stanza may be two or more lines of any length. However, the preferable line length is from six to ten syllables, or beats. And in regard to the number of lines in the complete poem, most editors like from twelve to sixteen, sometimes twenty, with a preference for the smaller number.
The couplet is a stanza of two, or it may be a complete poem of two lines. The quatrain is a stanza of four lines, and it may also be a whole poem. These are the most popular lengths for the ordinary stanza, although any combination of these may be used.
The sonnet is a familiar poetry pattern, and popular with most editors. It consists of fourteen lines of five iambic feet each. The first part, or octave, is composed of eight lines ; the second part, or sestet, is composed of six lines. The octave usually has but two rhyme sounds, the sestet three. This is the pattern :abba abba, abcabc. The rhyme words would go like this, every line rhyming with some other : tree, band, sand, sea; lea, stand, hand, be, for the octave ; and go, nest, sky, blow, west, die, for the sestet.
The poet may make any pattern he chooses for the first stanza of his poem ; that is, any line length, rhyme scheme, type of poetic feet, or number of lines to the stanza. But he should have all following stanzas conform to the pattern he has set in the first. If he makes the first stanza of four lines, all other stanzas should have four lines each. The following lines should correspond in length to those of the first stanza, and the beats, or accent, should come in the same places.
A sculptor begins his work with a block of marble. He roughly outlines the object he has in mind. Then he cuts and chisels until he has brought out the figure, or figures, in detail. Finally he sands and polishes the whole until the once clumsy, rough piece of stone becomes a statue of grace and beauty. So also should the poet work.
When the poet first gets the idea for his poem, he may put it down in whatever form it is conceived, with, for the moment, slight attention to technique. Then, even as the sculptor, he should begin to cut and chisel, and continue to do so until the details are clear and recognizable. Finally, he should carefully polish the whole until it is as perfect as he can make it.
Too many verse writers stop when they have completed but the first step—the rough outline. The cutting and chiseling, the sanding and .polishing, are what take hard, painstaking effort, and these are the things that are too frequently neglected. This polishing process is acco,mplished by laying our verse alongside the rules of poetic technique, and fitting them as nearly as possible to the accepted standard. This fitting and polishing means looking up the synonyms for time-worn words and expressions, trying to find new and interesting substitutes, choosing apt similes and metaphors.
Publication Details.—The poet should use discretion in choosing the place or medium of publication for his verse. A careful study of the periodicals in the field for which he writes will save postage and disappointment. Individual magazines, even though classed in the same field, often differ to a considerable extent in the verse used. A journal for the home would not use a type similar to that used by a deeply religious periodical. Many religious magazines use nature verse, but some require that it have an inspirational slant and some that it make mention of the Deity. With others, the fact that it concerns nature is sufficient These details the verse writer must learn by acquaintance with the magazine and its editorial requirements.
A record should be kept of all work sent out, and the place to which it is sent. Be sure to retain a copy of the poem for your own files. Uncle Sam is careful and so are most editors, but losses may occur in spite of this. Never send a poem to more than one editor at the same time. Should it be accepted by more than one, it would cause embarrassment to all concerned.
You should be able at any time, by consulting your records, to know how many and what poems you have submitted, and to whom; also what has been accepted, by whom, and what amount, if any, was received for it. Most poetry must be given away, and it is sometimes hard even to do that. But there are some markets that pay, and an occasional check does much to help on the postage and stationery bill.
Do not blame the editor for rejecting your poem. There are many reasons why he may not be able to use it. He may already have many poems on hand, or he may have recently printed one on the same subject. It may not fit in with the editorial requirements of his publication, and it may not measure up to the literary standards of his journal. Since each editor receives hundreds of manuscripts in the course of a month, he cannot write a personal letter to each contributor, giving his reasons for rejection. So do not expect it.
How to Judge Your Own Poem
Here are some of the points by which you can check your own poem to determine its height and breadth and depth in comparison with what are considered good poetic standards :
I. Originality of Subject.—Is your subject one that has not been frequently used?
2. Originality of Treatment.—Even though it is an old subject, have you treated it from a new and original angle ?
3. English and Punctuation.—Is the grammar correct, the punctuation sufficient ?
4. Clarity. Have you made your meaning clear ? Is the poem well balanced and complete?
5. Discrimination in Choice of Words. Have you chosen words that are musical, fresh, original, unusual, significant, appropriate ? Are they words that will enshrine themselves in the heart of the reader or hearer, that will sing in his mind long after he has forgotten the name of the poet who wrote them?
6. Imagery. Have you used original and interesting similes and metaphors? Are they aptly chosen? Are they clear and understandable?
7. Technique. Have you followed your pattern consistently? Are your stanzas uniform, not too long, or too numerous? Have you scanned the poem to see that it reads smoothly, without halting or stumbling? Do accents fall in the proper places, naturally? A word should never have to be mispronounced in order to force the accent of rhyme.
Briefly speaking, I would list under mechanical requirements of technique, rhyme, rhythm, and grammatical construction. Rhyme would cover the field of actual rhyme, alliteration, assonance, and consonance.* Rhythm is dependent on feet and meter solely. If feet and meter are correct, the rhythm will be. Grammatical construction would include good English, proper construction, and punctuation. All these mechanical requirements should be met by the writer before the editor gets a look at the poem. He is then free to concentrate on the creative technique. Of course, a "poem" could be written that would meet all these standards correctly, and still not be more than a trite bit of rhyme or a jingle.
8. Build Up to Climax. Have you progressively built up your poem to a climax, so as to hold the reader's interest to the last line ? And have you stopped when that climax was reached? Do not ramble and repeat, and finally leave the reader wishing he had not spent his time on the poem, feeling disappointed when he comes to the end. The most enjoyable feast is that which stops short of surfeit.
9. Prepation of Manuscript.—Have you written your poem, or preferably typed it, on one side of a clean sheet of paper? Have you enclosed a self-addressed, stamped envelopet with your manuscript in case it is rejected, and you wish it returned? Have you put sufficient postage on the envelope to be mailed to the editor, and checked the address to see that it is correct?
10. Quality—Finally, have you really said something worthy to be printed? Something you would care to read yourself if another had written it ?
If you can answer a majority of these questions in the affirmative, you may drop your contribution in the mailbox with the satisfaction of work well done, and the assurance that it will very likely find a place on some printed page. And if you can receive the inevitable acceptance or rejection slip, on the one hand humbly, on the other with good sportsmanship, then these articles will not have been -printed in vain.
In conclusion, I would like to leave with you this thought of Hoyt H. Hudson, faculty member of Princeton University, and author and compiler of many works on English literature :
"I suggest that our poets and prophets have' fallen down on the job. They have not aroused desire for the things that are lovely and lasting. Satirists have shown us wherein we are uncivilized and uncultured, but they have given us no dream of a desirable life and society. . 'Where there is no vision the people perish!' That remark is not my own, but it seems sound nevertheless; the present history of the world proves it. Where are the poets who will give the people a vision that will arouse irresistible hungers? 'As the hart panteth after the water brooks, so panteth my soul for Thee, 0 God.' . . . What might life be—for the individual, for the commonwealth? We ask, and are not answered. Somewhere, let us hope, there broods and dreams the poet who can furnish an answer, who can make his vision of life's possible loveliness the vision of us all, and who can paint that vision in such colors that our souls will pant for it."
BIBLIOGRAPHY
"The Complete Rhyming Dictionary, and Poet's Craft Book," edited by Clement Wood, Halcyon House, New York City, 1936, $1.89.
"The New Rhyming Dictionary and Poet's Handbook," by Burgos Johnson, Harpers, New York City, 1931, $4.
"The Forms of Poetry," A Pocket Dictionary of Verse, by Louis Untermeyer, Harcourt, New York City, 1926, $1.35.
"The Rhymester," by Tom Hood, Appleton, New York City, 1970, $1.50.
"Verse Technique Simplified," by Vaida Stewart
