by Suzanne Saporito (guest blogger)
Let me take you to my beginnings with form and my journey in the unaided ways of working with poems and structure. My first, and still most loved form is Rubaiyat. It has an unbalanced beauty to its fall and frustrated my free falling poetic mind, that I lost my way trying to count syllables (8989) and then casting more doubt into its rhyming lines (aaba)… What is that?, I said “you’ve got to be kidding me”. I became so disturbed by the strict, straight and narrow that I lost my way and found myself in the emptiness where no muse would gather to share her light.
Each line was forced under the strain of keeping time and rhyme, I was frazzled. Then a friend introduced me to Fitzgerald’s translations of Omar Khayyam (Rubaiyat) and he told me to just read them. Wow, the poetic spirit of the poems spoke to me and shined. Each small four lined piece of magic was ingrained in my person, not memorized, but captured like a photograph, except I captured the flow and fall of the piece. I found my way in the poem and the poem taught me not by the numbers that were laid in the count of syllables, but where the meter fell naturally and then the rhyme followed suit.
Every form has its song in its poetic workings, and yes I know now that there are words to define them, but its the melody of the poem that allows the write to come to structure. So I let sail the way of the form, I didn’t count a number just moved into the rhythm of the form, unaided by any direction given just the rhythm…. After that I go back over the piece an pick and weed, change and conform, Try it…. find a form that you know of or don’t know of. Unaided by any structural direction, read the poem till its meter sinks in your person. Then write where the music of poetry takes you. Sometimes its the soul of a poet that puts the melody of the form into play, seemingly unaided.






Form and content, ham and eggs, male and female, yin and yang!
Often it is difficult to write in the phone booth of restricting form. One must select a form like one selects a vehicle. Where am I going? Why am I going there?
If I am transporting a family of six, the Volkswagon beetle will probably prove itself less fit for the cargo and less fit for the nature of a ten hour drive than the van which is made for such journeys and deliveries.
The shot glass is less satisfactory than the pint glass when delivering a guiness to the palate.
My dad used to say that every job had an appropriate tool to its doing. EXACTLY.
Part of the art of effective communicating lies in the talent of appropriately selecting the agent of transportation. So much of worthy communication (thought, experience, and feeling) is lost when the sender is unaware of the importance of form and tries to Fed-Ex a lunar module. The result is frustration and isolation rather than the communion which is the most reasonable and desirable objective of all human discourse.
Know first with whom you wish to communicate. Then be clear about just what it is you wish to transport. Finally select the vehicle which best maximizes hope of delivery. The gap between one’s self and the other is closed best by the poet/artist. And make no mistake, it is an art, it requires artistry, and some ARE better at it than others. Any petulant refusal to recognize and accept the truth of this, in no way diminishes the truth of it.