God Ess, you sound more and more like an elitist every time you post.

You do have a point though, I suppose. Content isn't everything. But I know some people who only focus on the form and forget the content. *wink*

Two sides of the same coin, my friend.

"Well I wish that you would cheat with someone, 'cause you're like diggin' holes in water and we know that can't be done."

quote:

---

People don't even pursue basic and strong sentence structure and punctuation, let alone strong poetic form.

---

quote:

---

I won't hide the fact that I find freeverse an inferior form of writing poetry when held up in comparison with traditional, wellwritten formverse in English.   In my opinion it is a bit of a delusion to paint it out as if it is an "equal" tool.  I simply don't see this "tool" doing as well as the tools of such poets as the Beowulf-Poet, Chaucer, Shakespeare, Pope, and Poe and so many others, that heightened poetry so strongly thro stress-meter, syllable-stress meter, and rhyme.  They had much more than good ideas, but they heightened the language as much as possible to bring forth ideas and words in as eloquent a way as possible.  People today may go that distance as well if they dared to be so ambitious and heighten language as much as possible by using such forms.  But since freeverse basically "frees" itself from those, it also lacks the long historical support of them.  That doesn't mean it doesn't have its own more individual strength, but that individual strength is is not as strong as the traditional forms already so strongly proven thro many ages.

---