What is Prose?, A definition Options

[Guest_Toumai_*]

John - I was right! You ARE a smoooth operator, lol  

Hi everyone,

I have seen poetry and prose defined in various different ways and none of them seems to be 100% exclusive. Do you  think that niggles us because humans have this basic need to shove things into categories and define them? I have read some 'prose poetry' (NOT on MM, lol)  that was more turgid than the most boring appliance manual and I have read stories with prose that shines and lifts one into another universe. I think Lucie is at the heart of the matter: poetry is very concentrated; an essence of the subejct; and the words are memorable (it is so wonderful that you remember your first poem, Lucy! ). In prose we may gain the same, but are unlikely to remember an entire passage word for word.

Fran

[Guest_Perrorist_*]

In prose we may gain the same, but are unlikely to remember an entire passage word for word.

An interesting comment, Fran. I have a view, almost certainly not original, that stories in olden times were often set to verse because they had no means of recording them and the rhythm of verse aided memorisation.

I remember from when I lived in Finland an epic poem called the Kalevala. It was a collection of oral fragments that were gathered together a couple of hundred years ago by two physicians. The fragments all had the same sing-song lilt to them. (Longfellow used the same rhythm for The Song of Hiawatha.)

[Guest_Jox_*]

OK, my bottom line is too big.

Right, I'll start again...

OK, my bottom line is that something is what a writer says it is, providing they are educated and serious. That is, so long as they are aware of different types of writing and seriously believe theirs is either Po or Pr then fair enough - does it matter much?

From the POV of running a crit board, a competition or publishing, pigeon holes are useful / essential, so the managers have to be able to pigeon-hole according to their criteria. But we shouldn't accept that as gospel - it is just their take, even if the majority of writers agree.

As Fran mentions that prose may have rhythm (I won't ask!) that line is out of the proverbial window.

My own take is that all writing is prose, unless it is distilled to its essential components. That is easily confused with minimalism poetry but I don't mean such. A poem may have many words in which should be axed to make it minimalist but which still earn their keep by having an important effect on the whole.

Prose can afford to explore more avenues and travel parallel lanes; it can even drive down both sides of a dual carriageway in opposite directions. It can take the ferry; only to return back by plane without the goods. Prose can cycle up mountains and down dales; it can enter a few races (to lift up thine eyes and seek His face). Prose can do a few twirls of roundabouts - major and mini; it can lead us down dark cul-de-sacs - and, yes, up the garden path. It can jive, pogo, jitterbug on the central reservation - leading us a merry dance.

Poetry has no time for any of that. Poetry has one theme and quickly cuts - or cuts to the quick. It is precise and each metaphor must serve the overall aim precisely. Poetry is life distilled; it is an exhilarating helicopter-ride over all the clogged road system.

OK, I'll be on my bottom line in Pseud's Corner if anyone wants me. C'mon, someone must? No? oh ok...

J.

[Cleo_Serapis]

I find this tile very interesting!    

It seems that there is no singular definition to differentiate the two except to say what others have mentioned:

"Poetry is very concentrated; an essence of the subject..."

Often times, in poetry, conjunctions are replaced (or eliminated) with action verbs etc... and really are meant to be 'snippets' of thought.

Poems are fragments of stories IMHO.

Generally, there also might be a specific meter associated to make it 'sing along' which is why we remember poetry more easily. I think of the The Grinch for example by Dr. Suess and The Raven by EAP Poe.

Prose can most certainly use elements of poetry - poetic devices such as alliteration and assonance, coupled with meter and rhythm as well.

JRR Tolkien was effective with these devices in his writings, most notably The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings He even used poetry within the pages of prose.  

I guess it boils down to what Jox states - It is what the writer says it is. However, it may also be what the reader interprets it to be.  

~Cleo  :p

[Guest_Nina_*]

That is, so long as they are aware of different types of writing and seriously believe theirs is either Po or Pr then fair enough - does it matter much?

It doesn't matter much.  It is only giving the piece a label.

However as we have a deep rooted desire to label everything that they can be neatly pigeonholed/categorised we need to have a definition.  That definition should be flexible rather than a clear delineation and I rather like James' definition on what is poetry.

Poetry has one theme and quickly cuts - or cuts to the quick. It is precise and each metaphor must serve the overall aim precisely. Poetry is life distilled;

For me, beauty of poetry is that it gets straight to the point using the quickest shortest route possible.  It isn't necessarily just part of a story, it can still be a complete, just without the extra words that prose uses to enhance and elaborate on the message.

Personally when prose is chopped up to look like poetry it interrupts the flow and makes it more difficult to read.  

Lori says - It is what the writer says it is. However, it may also be what the reader interprets it to be.

Indeed which is why as writers we need to be clear ourselves as to whether we are writing prose or poetry so when the reader asks "Is this prose or poetry" we can give a reasoned reply.

Nina

[Guest_Calloused_*]

i mean, are you kidding me?
poetry can be far more drawn out than prose.

there are some true ignorances being brought into this argument and topic.

the most accurate definition i can offer is that poetry is that which is not formatted according to the rules of prose.

no other definition, no attempt at restriction can possibly carry the whole truth.

[Cleo_Serapis]

i mean, are you kidding me?
poetry can be far more drawn out than prose.

there are some true ignorances being brought into this argument and topic.

the most accurate definition i can offer is that poetry is that which is not formatted according to the rules of prose.

no other definition, no attempt at restriction can possibly carry the whole truth.

I wouldn't use the word 'ignorance'? I find that a tad insulting IMO.

As I mentioned in another thread, opinions vary with the depth of members here (and elsewhere).

I could argue the opposite: Prose is that which is not formatted according to the rules of poetry.  :laugh:

[JLY]

"A prose writer gets tired of writing prose, and wants to be a poet. So he begins every line with a capital letter, and keeps on writing prose."

Samuel McChord Crothers

[Guest_Toumai_*]

 Thanks for that, John

Poetry by Dictionary.com:

1) The art or work of a poet.

2) a) Poems regarded as forming a division of literature.
   b) The poetic works of a given author, group, nation, or kind.

3) A piece of literature written in meter; verse.

4) Prose that resembles a poem in some respect, as in form or sound.

5) The essence or characteristic quality of a poem.

6) A quality that suggests poetry, as in grace, beauty, or harmony: the poetry of the dancer's movements

and prose, as given by the same source:

1) Ordinary speech or writing, without metrical structure.

2) Commonplace expression or quality.

3) Roman Catholic Church. A hymn of irregular meter sung before the Gospel.

Anyone else feel that these definitions are somewhat circular?

Fran

PS Calloused, philosophically, would you agree that both truths and ignorances are subjective relational belief patterns? Perhaps slightly emotive language.

[JLY]

Fran,
You gave us much to ponder about the differences between prose and poetry.

I think to write good prose or poetry takes a certain skill / talent level; however I am inclined to think that to write great poetry, it takes a unique ability to express one's thoughts in a compact format.

To be able to express a complete thought in a succinct manner is not an easy task.....I know, I have been trying to do that for quite some time and my poems tend to be more like ballads.  I find myself caught in a crevice between two mountains: Prose on my left....Poetry on my right.  I prefer to reach the summit of Mt. Poetry, but I keep sliding downward into the crevice.

JLY

[Guest_Nina_*]

Hi Fran

philosophically, would you agree that both truths and ignorances are subjective relational belief patterns?

I totally agree.  Another person's perception of truth may not be mine.  In the same way my perception of another person's ignorance is a  judgemental assumption based simply on my own subjective belief of what is the truth.

Nina

[Guest_Jox_*]

Hi all,

Fran, yes the definitions are circular. I once heard a philosopher defgine a dog as a creature which was "full of dogginess."

That is the problem when we try to define anything - only the LCD ever really works. What are trousers? Well standard trousers are easy enough, then we can include jeans. But where is the cut off point (sic)? When do trousers become shorts or culottes or dungarees or whatever. Never easy. Throw writers into the pot and thw whole thing becaomes very hard indeed.

Calloused... "the most accurate definition i can offer is that poetry is that which is not formatted according to the rules of prose."

I agree with Lori - what is prose, then? That becaomes circular, too. For example, Fran's reply (from the dictionary) includes:

"1) Ordinary speech or writing, without metrical structure."

Well, I don't know of any writer who would accept that. If we wrote ordinary speech, we'd have so many "ums" and "errs" and "y'knows" that the piece would be unreadable. Prose writers try to produce prose which may be accepted as everyday speech sometimes - but certainly isn't.

Calloused: "i mean, are you kidding me? poetry can be far more drawn out than prose."

emm... Sorry, I can't see any meaning there. How can we compare? I could argue that "The Waste Land" is shorter than "War and Peace" or that "Macavity" is not as long as "Sense and Sensibility." etc. But, in any case, it is not absolute length but the use of the words which counts. For me, prose is not as distilled as is poetry. But I accept that's my feeling so I don't recommend it as a definition. To me, "drawn-out" implies needlessly so - which, for me, would be bad writing of any sort. But, by its nature, prose can (as I was explaining) investigate all over the place and it is able to zoom hither and elsewhere. Poetry is far harder to accept when it does that. The only really successful example I can think of is Shakespeare. But he's a tad special. Even TS Eliot confuddles most non-specialists.

Calloused... "no other definition, no attempt at restriction can possibly carry the whole truth"

You mention ignorance. But ignorance is a friend of definitions. The more ignorant one is, the easier to define something. That is because, as with the trousers example, the more one knows, the harder something is to precisely define. If I only know of standard trousers, their definition is really easy.

Also, I agree with Fran - ignorance is subjective. For example, I don't know a single academic fact which I accept as fact. If that means I'm ignorant then I heartily recommend ignorance as a better path to enlightment than than of the certainty in truths. But it is probably an age thing - when I was young I knew far more than I do now. Almost everything I knew lies on shifting sands which I didn't notice until I tried to jump on an island, only to find it had moved.

John you make a good point I'd forgotten - ballads. Very wordy but poetry. (By the way (as I was always told), don't beat yourself up - many others are willing to do that. Seriously, you under-value your own poetry).

Lori, Nina... Of course I agree with both of you about readers' interpretations - I've been yattering about it long enough. Good point.

[Guest_Perrorist_*]

I think the man on the Clapham omnibus would recognise prose when he saw it and much poetry, especially if it had a distinct meter and/or rhythm. These are clearly distinguishable. Somewhere in the middle is blank verse and the more experimental stuff that looks like advertising copy in an expensive, glossy magazine. The man on the bus would scratch his noggin and be unsure whether he was perusing prose or poetry.

This suggests to me that conventional prose and poetry are definable but the point at which the two touch or overlap confounds the demarcation.

I suppose similar problems arise in art and music.

[Guest_Jox_*]

Hi all,

Perry:

"This suggests to me that conventional prose and poetry are definable but the point at which the two touch or overlap confounds the demarcation.

I suppose similar problems arise in art and music."

And trousers!

[Cleo_Serapis]

and romantics ?

[Guest_Nina_*]

Lori - and romantics

I wouldn't know!  

I'll stick to the trousers analogy

Nina

[Guest_Toumai_*]

Nina, that's a thoroughly modern attitude: 'Pants to romance!'
Fran

[Guest_Perrorist_*]

Nina, that's a thoroughly modern attitude: 'Pants to romance!'
Fran

It's also very English. Could you please explain the meaning of 'pants' again.

[Cleo_Serapis]

Nina, that's a thoroughly modern attitude: 'Pants to romance!'
Fran

It's also very English. Could you please explain the meaning of 'pants' again.

Ohhhh - pick ME!  :lion:

Pants = heavy breathing

thus

romance leads to heavy breathing

OR

heavy breathing leads to romance ?
 :oops:  :upside:  :jester:

[Guest_Perrorist_*]

I think 'pants' is British slang for something derogatory or unworthy. I had to ask this question before but I can't quite remember the answer.