Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!
Erin's Poetry Tips
« April 2024 »
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
Entries by Topic
All topics
Alliteration
Brevity vs Verbosity
Challenge Anyone?
Cliche
Concrete poetry
Cosmetics
Daily Writing Time
Diction
Enjambment
Flow
Free Verse
Gerunds and Participles
How to Critique
Image Progression
Imagery
Inneundo
Inspiration
K.I.S.S.
Lists and Links
Metaphor and Simile
Metaphysical Poetry
Passive vs Active
Poetic Forms
Poetry vs Prose
Point of View
Politics of Web Poetry
Proofreading
Publication Tips
Quick Tips
Reciprocity
Repetition
Rhyme
Sentence Fragments  «
Shiftless Tenses
Subject
Synesthesia
The Plan
Title
Vocabulary
Workshopping
Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
View Profile
Writing Blogs
Vickie's Writing Place
You are not logged in. Log in
Friday, 4 March 2005
Sentence Fragments
Topic: Sentence Fragments
sentences failing


A proper sentence should have both a subject and a verb, with the necessary clauses to make it complete and able to stand alone. There must be at least one independent clause. There must be a subject-verb relationship -- something or someone, doing something (or someone), all in phrases and clauses joined by adverbs and such.

In poetry, writers tend to feel that it's acceptable to use fragments. I could find dozens of poems on MTC right now that I could use as examples. Unfortunately, as much as poetry is an art and a conveyance of some feeling or impression, it should still follow grammatical rules.



For those of you who are thinking how poetry doesn't follow rules, how it's art expressed from the depths of your soul and rules simply do not apply to emotion or art, consider the effect that fragments have on the overall piece.

Let's start with an example:

Wind blowing.
Hair streaming.
Tears flowing.
Lost love.

Now this is nothing more than 4 incomplete sentences offered up in list form. There are three lines that have -ing form verbs, with no auxilliary form and therefore are not true verbs as used here. They SEEM to be a subject (wind/hair/tears) with a verb (blowing/streaming/flowing) but cannot function as such.

This is not poetry.
This 'piece' never gives the reader anything to hold onto, or to follow. It's 3 partial images, and a label.
There is nothing concrete, no place for the reader to follow the writer in order to see his 'vision' of lost love.

Now let's finish the sentences, make it more complete.

She stood
face to the wind,
with hair flowing behind her,
as her dreams had.

Her tears flowed, flooded
the dam of the river
of lost love.

OK so it's no masterpiece, but you can see how the reader has more footing in his trip through this snapshot.

The grammatical rules that poets tend to forego for the sake of 'art' only lead to better art when understood and properly applied. So if you feel the need to rebel against them for the sake of rebellion, consider whether it's worth allowing your work to suffer for it.

Posted by poetry/emonahan at 12:01 AM EST
Updated: Thursday, 24 March 2005 10:39 PM EST
Post Comment | Permalink | Share This Post

Newer | Latest | Older