But snow is prettier.

"Because You Asked about the Line Between Prose and Poetry" - Howard Nemerov

Nemerov uses a nice rhyme scheme here. I like those. I know people like to be all fancy and say, "Not all poetry has to rhyme," blah blah blah, but I think it's nice when they do. Even though it's gotten a lot less impressive since the dawn of rhyming dictionaries.

I'm not sure why he has it structured so. ABAB CC. That's weird. Maybe it's a thing. Someone should tell me.

But Nemerov seems to liken the difference between prose and poetry to the difference between freezing drizzle and snow. In other words, it's a fine line. But snow is prettier.

"So I walked back to my room and collapsed on the bottom bunk, thinking that if people were rain, I was drizzle and she was a hurricane." - Looking for Alaska by John Green

Poetry Interpretation: Hermione v. Luna

Mr. Perrine has expressed the view that some interpretations of poetry are too "far-fetched" to be correct. I won't say that I disagree with that, necessarily. Rather, I would like to refer to this opinion as the "Hermione Viewpoint." Hermione Granger of the Harry Potter series is a terribly intelligent witch; indeed, Sirius Black once calls her the "cleverest witch of [her] age." However, she often finds herself at odds with another witch in the class behind hers who has what I would call a broader range of realities. That witch goes by the name of Luna "Loony" Lovegood, and it is worth noting that she, rather than Hermione, resides in the Ravenclaw dormitories, where "wit beyond measure is man's greatest treasure," whereas Gryffindors treasure daring, nerve and chivalry. My point is that if there is no way for a poet to describe exactly what he meant without limiting his work, then perhaps the reader should be allowed to interpret it as they see fit, as long as they have ample evidence for their beliefs. If the interpretation is particularly "far-fetched," the interpreter will have to work a bit harder, but that's what makes poetry so interesting, right?

For instance, I "misinterpreted" Melville's poem. I do indeed prefer the "correct" interpretation with the deeper questions and *coughpretentiouscough* metaphors, but why couldn't it simply be a poem about soldiers soldiering? Perrine goes on in his essay to say that William Blake's "The Sick Rose" has a broad base of interpretation. Would my interpretation, then, that the rose is a rosy apple, the worm's dark secret love, be correct? It seems a little ridiculous, in retrospect, which is probably because I did it in the wee hours of the morning, long after I should have been asleep, but it still seems logical enough to me. "The rose must always represent something beautiful or desirable or good. The worm must always be some kind of corrupting agent of youth," says Perrine. Apples are desirable to some people, I suppose, although personally, they make me itchy. Also, a worm is indisputably a worm. I don't know about "corrupting agent of youth;" that seems like sketchy phrasing.