Hello all,

i would like ur oppinions on if u preffer a poem to be short or long on ur personal oppinion. I would very much appreciate a couple of replies on this subjects, feel free to express what ever u want to, go into as many details as u want.

thank you all

I especially like two lengths of poems: 1. poems that are more than 100 pages long, like the epic of gilgamesh or the Commedia by Dante, or (2) poems less that five lines long, like the works of Issa, Basho, and Buson

Peter

Generally I prefer poems about 20 - 50 lines, long enough to explore a topic, but not so long that they are the equivalent of a short story or novel. I like to see how poets have overcome the challenge of a fairly tight structure and fixed length by crafting a concise poem and not wasting a single word. Having said that, I also like some longish ballads - like The Lady of Shallot, the Wreck of the Hesperus, The Highwayman etc and also love Hiawatha and Under Milk Wood which are books. However, they are about the only 2 very long poems I really like and I love thousands of much shorter pieces.



Post Edited (11-11-04 03:18)

I tend to like the shorter poems. When forced to read verse for college assignments, I read everything with zeal. Now that I choose for myself I have to be very intrigued by a poem to follow it past 1000 words.

Don't get me wrong I've read Dante and The Ilyad and Aenid, but I consider those novels in poetic form. It's a mind set. Longer works need some kind of theme to hold one's interest unless they are intended to be read piecemeal such as the Rubaiyat.

Les



Post Edited (11-11-04 04:13)

For me, it depends on the subject and how it was written. Poems like The Raven, The Ancient Mariner and Evangeline held my interest from the very beginning. Poets like Dickinson and Nash who can speak in a few words can give you much to think about or keep you entertained for hours. I find poetry that is obscure, enigmatic or having meaning only to the poet very difficult to get through, no matter what the length is.

john

'I find poetry that is obscure, enigmatic or having meaning only to the poet very difficult to get through, no matter what the length is.'

And that is my difficulty. Bald statements don't make good poetry. Incomprehensible statements don't make good poetry. Adherence to form doesn't make good poetry, by itself. Poetic language doesn't make good poetry, by itself.

Tell you what I like. I like a poem that seems to be straightforward but has something deep/terrible/significant/warm/consequential/and so on, hiding within it. Like a spiked drink.

And no, don't ask me for examples. I'm not telling.

Stephen

Haiku, I think, is a lot like that: sneaks in a wollup.

Hi.

I am new to this forum, but if you don't mind, I'd just skip intoducing myself, and get straight to the topic :-)

I like both. But since I don't have much time to read, I more often read short poems. What I like about short poems is they are usualy simple and deep. One of my favourites is a 4 line poem by Wang Wei - about Magnolia blossoms. Long poems can be as reawarding as short ones, they only take more time to read and also perhaps demand more effort from the reader.
As a child I loved long epics, The Iliad especially. I think now I would never get round reading it again. It would just take too much time. But now and then I read a passage from it.

W.C.Williams, who is one of the masters of short poems, wrote also "Asphodel, that greeny flower" a long, but good poem.

Veronika