Svein,
I don't go about writing a FV poem by thinking, "Ok, now I'm writing a NOT THAT." My argument is simply this, how I do it: the poem I am writing will circle this thing, this thing, or it will circle these things, and this set of conditions might or might not include a regular metrical pattern. I dislike the randomness many FV poets display in their poems; I find them to be boring and pointless. The Crane poem you mention is a case in point(s).
I'm not sure the wall metaphor is best for describing the method of creating all poetry. For instance, aren't chemical compounds often formed by the combination of different elements arranged in non-linear fashion? The joining of these elements might occur via physical laws which are "linear," in that they always work in a repetitive, linear fashion; but such compounds, viewed on the level of their constituent elements, are not. It's a matter of perspective.
The definition of FV is commonly made as you've described it: NOT-metrical verse. This is a negativa, but only if we assume that metrical verse is the absolute reality, the base, by which all poetry must be defined. It's a circular argument built around an assumption.
Curtis.
|