I'm sure that there's smaller, more minute differences between my starting poetry and my current poetry, but the most noticeable one is the difference in length. My old poems were really long. Some newer ones are definitely on the longer side as well, but I've learned how to cut back with my descriptions.
I think I've also leaned more into describing a specific moment, rather than a general feeling.
When I first started my poems was clear at all you really couldn't tell what was going on. I remember when someone told me ¨You have great ideas, yes, but I just don understand what your talking about.¨ So I sat there for about a 1 hour rewriting every poem I ever did. So now my poems are somewhat understandable I guess you can say.
I promise this type of pain only gets worse ~Esmeraya~ she/they
I think it depends on how far you go back for me, because there was definitely a time when I only wrote (poorly) in iambic meter and nothing else. Other than that, I get the sense that my word choices are wilder nowadays, and I tend to be very chaotic in mixing registers, i.e. "self-induced despair" next to "potato crunch" in the same poem. I also think I tend to use more caesurae in my poetry nowadays than I used to.
I don't know if either was 'better' necessarily. There was definitely an 'organic' feel to some of my earlier poetry, i.e. an English teacher would probably approve of it, but my current poetry seems a bit more adventurous, less predictable, which has value in my book.
Gender:
Points: 6251
Reviews: 461