>Prose poetryThere is no such thing, some things are just mutualy exclusive.If it doesn't have a rigorous meter, or at least a fluctuating one that follows certain second order rules, it's not poetry.
>>25125303There is poetic prose thoughbeitever
i know some diaspora bunnies with BWC-blasted anuses who would disagree
>>25125303I love it when /lit/tards talk about poetry because they're still stuck on middle school tier conceptions>poems have to have meter because... because... THEY JUST DO OKAY >poems have to rhyme because... because... THEY JUST DO OKAY>poems have to do/have/be X because... because... THEY JUST DO OKAY
>>25125408They don't have to rhyme but they do not meter.
>>25125420They have to have a consistent (first or second or higher order) meter*
>>25125423why do they have to have a consistent first, second, or higher order meter? what do any of these terms mean?
>>25125303>I don't care if the thing exists and is vigorously defined, I don't like it, so it's not realwe got a real intellectual over here, boys
>>25125437Square circles are rigorously defined too, you can't draw one.
>>25125478I think you're conflating the term "poetry" with the term "verse".
>>25125435First order meter is having iambic pentameter thorough the whole poem. Second order meter is alternating between iambic nmeter and some other meter. As you move up the orders you can use more meter types but each line or verse still has to have some interwoven patterns.It can rhyme but it doesn't have to.Prose poetry isn't a thing.
>>25125530You can't distinguish between the term poetry and the term verse.
>>25125535>Poetry>literary work in which the expression of feelings and ideas is given intensity by the use of distinctive style AND rhythm; poems collectively or as a genre of literature.You can not have rythm without verse.
>>25125303Good prose harnesses the techniques of poetry, and is aware of rhythm, rhyme, assonance and all the rest.>A way a lone a last a long the
>>25125540>You can not have rythm without verse
Poetry = beautiful writingProse = writingsimple as
>>25125697You can have beautiful prose though. Usually it’s by people who’ve already written poetry.
>>25125724Yes, exactly, that's prose poetry.
>>25125811>>25125303There's prose in verse — most "poetry"There poetry in verse — good poetryThere's prose poetry — good poetry not in verseThere's prose — non poetic writingsimple as
>>25125825Or, just because it rhymes doesn't make it poetry, and just because it doesn't rhyme doesn't make it not poetry; and lo: just because it is in verse doesn't make it poetry either.
>>25125408Op is not criticising free verse, he's criticising prose poetry you retard. Learn the difference.
>>25125811Take Joyce for example, by no means did he write any exceptional poems (still very musical as intended though), but he did write them nonetheless. Take Ulysses, which is of course prose, but its often poetical structure far outclasses his early work like Chamber Music. It’s not prose poetry, but it is beautifully poetic.
>>25125811The writers of prose poetry have clearly made a distinction between prose that is just beautiful and prose poetry. There wouldn't be anything innovative about prose poetry if it was just beautiful prose.
>>25125832All of Consolations of Philosophy is poetry, not just those parts that are in verse.Poetry is beauty of writing—regardless of the content of its meaning or its "structure". Not beauty in writing but beauty of writ itself.
>>25125839That's just pedantry
>>25125653This is unrelated to the thread but I often wonder how many pictures of these frogs you have saved on your device.
>>25125841>Poetry is beauty of writingThat's a totally arbitrary definition. No writer of free verse, or write of prose poetry (a far more nebulously defined thing) has said that.>>25125845Call it what you want, prose poetry has always been considered distinct from just beautiful prose. It may blur the definitions, but it's still not the same.
>>25125858>blur the definitionsIt's obviously a spectrum of intentionality All consistently beautiful prose = prose poetry, while most beautiful prose writers only reach poetry every once in a quaint paragraph, since their excellence was natural and almost accidental—these are the works we preserve. Genius.While intentional prose poetry is the active attempt at imbuing every line with poetry, and ironically turns up pretty bad.
What about Sprechgesang?
>>25125871>All consistently beautiful prose = prose poetryThat's just bullshit. I think Samuel Johnson wrote beautiful prose, but none of it is poetry. 'Beauty' is too vague and broad a term to be the definition of poetry. It can mean a million different things, sometimes a kind of beauty very closely approximating poetry, other times not so. Besides, intention is ultimately what matters. A brief sentence from a novel can sometimes be exceedingly beautiful and poetic, but it's not lineated, or put in some other context in which it is received as poetry, and so it remains as prose and does not vibrate on our minds to the maximum possible degree. The maximum possible charge of meaning, or emotion or sensuousness within the briefest amount of language can only come with poetic lineation. It's a very complex subject, but it doesn't mean we can throw our hands in the air and say lineation and metre don't have the primary role in the definition of poetry.>While intentional prose poetry is the active attempt at imbuing every line with poetry, and ironically turns up pretty bad.You've read Baudelaire and that's your assessment????
There's difference between poetic prose and prose poetry. Most of Nabokov, Faulkner etc. would fall in the former. For the latter see specific works like Maldoror, Moby-Dick, Blood Meridian, certain chapters of Ulysses, The Waves by Virgina Woolf etc.
>>25126019Chud Meridian lol
>>25125303Wow… OP, you’re a genius. You figured it out. I guess we should start calling it something else in light of your discovery
>>25125811So is Moby Dick prose poetry or just good prose?
>>25126019So can you actually explain the difference?
>>25125841Maybe it's my translation (oxford world classics) but the writing is very good and lucid but still mechanical.
>>25126019>There's difference between poetic prose and prose poetry.Please formally define this, give a rigorous definition.
>>25126019The latter books you mentioned aren’t prose poetry though. Most are very poetic, like Moby Dick and Ulysses but for the most part they’re just very well written prose. Prose Poetry is stuff like Le Spleen de Paris by Baudelaire
>>25126168Poetic prose uses poetic stylistic devices with a prose structure. Prose poetry uses prose for discoursing the subject of a poem. E.g. Murray's translation of Homer is in prose but Homer's extended similies are poetic subjects, so they become prose poetry.
>>25126444But there is a difference between the two examples. The former don't aspire to heightened musicality; the latter do. You will much easily find metrical forms in many passages in the 2nd group than in the 1st. It's not just well written prose; may as well call poetry just well written prose with line breaks then.
>>25126020>>>/v/ is over that way
>>25125540>You cannot have rhythm without verseJust say you’ve never noticed Ahab’s speeches in Moby-Dick are in blank verse, there’s no need to pretend to be intelligent to impress 4chan
>>25126465>Homer's extended similies are poetic subjects, so they become prose poetry.I don't buy it
With how often this comes up, it's obvious that some of you unironically believe this. Which is fine, we all have our lines in the sand. But just know that means that you think trash pop/rap music qualifies definitively as poetry, while you believe Walt Whitman, TS Eliot, etc, do not. You can dig your heels in on the issue, or you can let go of your elementary understanding of categories and definitions. The only person you're hurting is yourself. Free-verse enjoyers are generally unbothered by such trivialities.
