popularity

I thought it was kind of deep and meaningful at first, and I felt let down when it came to the end . If you are going to write a funny poem then it pretty much has to be funny consistentley.

That's not really fun, and it's a blah ending.

I totally agree, and in some places the rhyming was a bit off. I wouldn't say start again though! The idea is a really good one. Try writing another poem along the same lines and then you can kind of take bits from this poem to help!
x frm lucy

Pushca wrote:bob addressed pretty much every issue that any poet has ever had in the history of yws, but i have to say that when i read this, i thought it was a bad joke. i think it was the blatant rhyming that killed it. scratch the poem and start over.

I agree completely, the rhyming ruined the poem. Throw it in the bin, burn the bin then feed the ash to a dragon. Then start over.

So, some key points.

- Rhyme is not necessarily your friend; remember that. Contrary to popular opinion, rhyme does not automatically make a piece of writing more poetic: in fact, when done badly, it can make it absolutely horrible. That's what has happened here.
Basically, you're forcing the poem to fit into this rhyme scheme, which makes the whole thing read unnaturally and flow very badly - rhyme is supposed to be subtle, it's supposed to help the poem flow and to draw attention to certain parts of the poem. Unfortunately, what bad and harsh rhyming does is to draw attention to the fact that it rhymes... and there isn't really much point in that. It doesn't help transmit and poetic point, it doesn't help the reader connect. It just sounds ugly.
What you need to do, if you've really got your heart set on rhyming things, is not make it so blunt and obvious all the time. Instead of constantly using obvious couplets like "best/rest" or "down/frown" or "well/hell" which absolutely everybody can see coming a mile off, you've got to work with a little more subtlety. Start using rhymes like "spark/dart" or "round/brown" or "destiny/festering" or "blue/noon" - things that aren't always obvious, that you can't always see coming. You still get all the advantages of a rhyming poem, but it's not always these whole, full, harsh rhymes that detract from the poem's beauty.

- Rhythm is always your friend, and this poem hasn't got any. Half the battle with poetry is getting it to flow: if it starts and stops and shudders and judders along, then it's never going to read well, and it's never going to get a good reception. What you need is for it to read like water flowing off your tongue; for it to be easy in the mouth and easy on the ears. How to do that? Standardise it.
The human mind latches onto different kinds of rhythm and responds to them: some are obvious, such as Iambic Pentameter, which English sonnets are written in; it's the closest rhythm to normal English speech. Here's an example:

Since there's no help, come let us kiss and part,
Nay, I have done: you get no more of me,
And I am glad, yea glad with all my heart,
That thus so cleanly I myself can free.
(Drayton, Idea, LXI)

See how it flows? Each line is ten syllables long, there's a vocal stress on every second syllable (since THERE'S no HELP come LET us KISS and PART etc.) - it makes for very easy and flowing reading.
If you want your poetry to sound good, you're going to have to do something of the same: no-one expects you to get it as spot on as Drayton or Shakespeare first time, but there are some simple steps to take.
Firstly, start getting your line lengths more the same - these are all ten syllables, which is very common, but there are other lengths that work well together. Twelve syllables mixes well with ten, and so does eight; experiment, find out what you think reads well.
The second point follows on from that: read out loud to yourself. Read famous poetry, figure out how it flows; read your own poetry, and do the same. If you have to rush through bits to make it fit together, it isn't well structured; it should be constant, easy, flowing.
Thirdly, don't get upset if it doesn't always work rhythm and meter are hard work; just listen to advice from other people who read your poems, because they'll likely be able to look at it more objectively than you, who wrote it and understand how it's 'supposed' to sound.
So, yeah, rhythm - you're going to need to work on that one.

- Spelling and grammar are also your friend, because they stop us hating you. There's nothing more frustrating to a reader than poems that have basic mistakes. Things like "your" instead of "you're" (yes, you did - verse one, line four for example) or missing out apostrophes from words (verse five, line two) or putting comma in sentences where they shouldn't go (verse two, line three: if you were saying that line, would you make a pause where that comma is? If so, you're speaking wrong). The point is, basic mistakes are just that: basic. If you're going to move on to become a better poet, those are things that you need to sort out very quickly, because they're simple English, a tool that all poets need to have sorted properly. Get to work on it, and proofread, multiple times before you post.

- Show, don't tell. Poems that 'tell' are boring, it's just a general poetic fact. If you say "this happened, this happened, this happened," that doesn't make for an interesting poem; if you say "this is true, this is true, this is true, this is the way it is, etc. etc., blah blah blah," well, that ain't so good either. Why? Because it contains absolutely nothing creative to hook the imagination on.
If you write "Being popular,/it isn't always the best./When you're popular,/you think your better than the rest." why do I care at all? All you've done is tell me your opinion, and that's neither poetic nor very noteworthy. You can have your opinion all you like, but it will never be poetic unless you make it poetic. There's a quote by Chekhov that says "don't tell me the moon is shining; show me the glint of light on broken glass", and that's exactly what you're going to have to start doing: you've got to take your opinion and make us see it in a new light, make us understand something new about it, make it clever and intelligent and unique.
So use imagery: show us how the image of a footballer sitting alone on an empty pitch tells us that popularity isn't all it's cracked up to be; take us into his mind, make us understand that he isn't happy, give dark examples from his day-to-day life, all this sort of thing. Don't just tell us what the truth is: show us why it's the truth.

Putting all these into practice isn't something that happens overnight, and it isn't something that's particularly easy: it took me years to get even the slightest handle on them, and I'm still not particularly good at any of them, not even the spelling and grammar. But the important thing is that you've got to keep trying if you're serious about being a poet - you've got to keep straining to improve, or it's never going to be any more fulfilling for you.

You've got potential, I think; perhaps I'm not the greatest judge of such things, but I think you'll do fine if you're willing to work. So get on it! Read as much poetry as you can, because it is the best teacher you will ever have. Find out how established poets use rhythm, rhyme, imagery, work on your grammar and technique, read up on poetic conventions and everything else you can get your hands on.

Good luck! Look forward to seeing you back with some more pieces. Hope this has helped you; if you've got any questions, complaints or comments in general, feel free to drop me a PM.

Cheers!