Neath Juniper's Fern

Hey there, I'm just here to write a quick review. I really enjoyed reading this poem. I loved that you were able to capture an entire love story just within the stanzas of this poem. That being said, I agree with what Ventomology wrote. Though I don't have a ton of musical knowledge, I was able to tell that there was a varied rhythm throughout the poem, which I would equate to the lines having different syllable counts.

Heyyy! Thank you for tagging me <3 I love the Williwaw poetry collection.

Let's talk about meter this time, because I think that understanding how it works will help you a lot going forward with your rhythm and consistency.

When you get down to it, much like in music, there are actually only a few different meters out there. (Like how five-four time can actually be broken into a bar of three and a bar of two... or a sycopated bar of two and a standard bar of two.) The big ones in English are triple and duple (of which the famous iambic pentameter is a member), or three-syllable and two-syllable meters. If you've ever listened to a waltz, particularly of the fast, Viennese variety, that ONE-two-three ONE-two-three rhythm, with emphasis on the one-count is basically what triple-meter poetry sounds like.

(Idk how much musical knowledge you have??? Sorry if this is confusing. Andre Rieu's recording of The Second Waltz is a good example of a Viennese.)

Willy Shakes, obviously, has some excellent examples of duple meter poetry, but if you're looking for a more modern, musical example that maybe isn't so rigid, "All Things End" by Hozier has a pretty strong duple meter. You can even hear it in the syllables that he pauses on when singing! The syllables of the opening line have this emphasis: a TWO ton WEIGHT u-PON my CHEST feels LIKE, and it is the words "weight," "chest," and "like" that get held out in the music.

There is this very fancy element of linguistics called prosody, which basically studies how rhythms form naturally in language, and it's especially important to poetry because we want to use the natural rhythms of language to create the rhythm of a poem, rather than trying to cram the language into a rhythm you've thought of. This is where reading poetry aloud a bazillion times is important: I find it's actually really difficult to understand what rhythm is created by the written word until it all comes out of my mouth.

So, in the very first line of this poem, we have "Neath Juniper's Fern, In the blossoming of spring." When I first read this, I got a little tripped up at the word "blossoming" because it breaks the very strong, natural triple meter that we get right out of the gate with the word "Juniper" (which I would speak as JUN-i-per, using "neath" as something akin to a pick-up note). That "of" that follows doesn't really help. I ended up naturally reading this line aloud as: "neath JUN-i-per's FERN, in the BLOS-so-ming of SPRING" and if you were counting, that put three syllables between BLOS and SPRING instead of two, which we would have in triple. (Or you could emphasize "of" which... no.)

I suspect in this line, you were thinking: "neath JUN-i-per's FERN, in the BLOSS-'ming of SPRING" thereby removing the extra syllable and preserving your meter and rhythm. And if that's the intent, it's important to have it written somehow. Shakespeare often did things like this with apostrophes and with the accented e to add "ed" as a full syllable on words where it wouldn't otherwise act that way. Park-ed, versus parked.

Anyway, in the second line, we then kind of expect to follow the triple meter again, and to also probably have the same syllable count (or at least a similar one. There is leeway in triple meter because you can "pick up" into it.) However, the natural syllabic emphasis looks like this: a GIRL and a boy MET, and be-GAN a SUM-mer FLING. This really doesn't follow the triple meter, and it also doesn't follow a duple meter. We're seeing three syllables between GIRL and MET, and then only one between GAN and SUM. (an easy reword would be: a GIRL and boy MET and be-GAN a light FLING).

I don't think it's unreasonable at all to change meters in a poem or single line. (Think sea shanties, where you may go from triple meter to a "swung" duple meter with a held emphasis on the first syllable of each duple.) What has to happen when you change meter though, is that it needs to match the rhythm of the language, and it needs to be done consistently. The rhythmic choices made in lines one and two should be repeated in either three and four, or in one and two of the next stanza, especially in this kind of lyrical, lore-ish poetry (which I assume kind of acts as a ballad in-world). If people were to sing this, I think they would want to expect to be able to repeat the same rhythms and notes over and over.

And, well, there's no getting around it: the only way to check rhythm and meter in poetry is to say it out loud, often several times. In fact, I'd argue the only way to get experience and become good at rhythm and meter is to read your poetry out loud. Eventually, you will get a sense for it (haha try writing tens of Shakespearean sonnets and then writing poetry in any other format... I'm doomed), but until then you have to build up your tingly syllable sense somehow.

Anyway that was so long. I'm so sorry.

I am seeing improvement in your meter. I see a lot more line length consistency in this poem than I did in Black Bull, and I think the meter gets broken less often, and in ways that are more easily fixed and worked around. Also? So many props for picking a rhyme scheme that involves finding FOUR WHOLE RHYMES in each stanza. And SIX RHYMES in stanza six. I am not that brave.

Also this is extremely cute, and I love the subtle history in the background of their love story. Great work!

-Vento