Robert, it indeed doesn't matter to me that I hear a range of 3 to 5 beats. In fact, that makes me like the poem all the more, because I like the variety from line to line. Assuming that we speak the language a little differently from Hopkins, the question then becomes, can this poem still be considered metered even though it doesn't have a consistent number of beats, feet or syllables per line? I think it can. It does have one thing which is more-or-less consistent: the length of time it takes to say each line. You will notice that the two lines which have 6 syllables -- the 11th and 13th -- both contain words which take longer to enunciate.
Timothy, I have a bunch of pet theories that I am hesitant to burden you with, but let me tell you at least one of them:
I believe that the human ear loves the sound of variety within a context of regularity. A line can be measured in many ways: the length of time it takes to speak it, the number of syllables, the number of feet, the number of beats, the relative width and narrowness of the syllables -- even the number of pauses. Lines which are entirely regular in every respect tend to be boring. The secret to exciting poetry, I believe, is to establish some kind of regularity, and then vary the other elements (according to the meaning). When the elements are made to play against each other, tension is created -- and tension is exciting! This poem contains a great deal of tension, which is perhaps why I love it so much.
|