[Ned Balbo]

I agree with Sam: "the breaking of groups of words (phrases, sentences) would seem to indicate a type of verse."

Ted, thanks for reminding us of Lew's terminology. I was too lazy to look it up! He really knew how to spark debate.

Even so, the question of whether free verse is poetry or prose seems like kind of a dead end--to me, anyway. It risks defining poetry by a single aspect: how lines are determined, broken, or enjambed. All the sonics that matter in poetry--as well as its crucial foundation in syntax, pacing, and aural density--are given short shrift. Should we call it "free" verse? "Non-metrical" verse? Who knows? I'll let others sort it out! :-) I'll just keep writing--and, especially, reading--both.

For a more informed perspective than mine, check out Ellen Bryant Voigt's The Art of Syntax: Rhythm of Thought, Rhythm of Song.

[R. S. Gwynn]

Ted, I did know him, but we hadn't spoken in some years because of this free verse/prose argument, about which Lew could be doctrinaire and unyielding. My point was that free verse was lineated and that prose wasn't; a piece of prose in a newspaper is chopped into 30-space lines; the same piece reprinted in a book may appear in 60+ space lines. Prose in print is usually righthand-justified. None of these changes affects its status as prose.

When we see a passage of verse inserted into a prose sentence, its line breaks are indicated by the / (virgule). If the quote is longer than a couple of lines it is indented and printed as it originally appeared. If the lines are measured in some pattern, it's metrical verse; if they're not, it's free.