Why do so many people who want to create poems today didn't even try to make them rhyme?

Another retard. You confuse lyrical tropes with foundations of a given art. Consonance and harmony (and therefore rhythm and rhyme) both lie in the essense of poetry. If a poem is devoid of these two, it's simply a set of words written in a column. Even a vers libre poem have a certain tempo in it.

>Why do so many people who want to create poems today didn't even try to make them rhyme?
I dislike rhymes, rarely do they not come of as pleasant. Poems aren't happy.

I guess you missed the part where I said *standard* rhyme. As in end rhyme on a metered line, following a set pattern.
Of course rhythm is important. The poem should still sound good (consonance, harmony, etc.), but it has to be done in a new way or its bound for the dump.

And I'm talking about the common ugly syllabic rhymes. Not other forms.
Alliteration and half-rhymes are beautiful.

There is nothing wrong with standard rhymes. It all depends on execution. End rhymes are especially important as they are a major component of poem's musicality. Without them a poem simply loses it's structure, it's outline. They are like musical notes.
I don't understand your contempt for classical patterns. Of course it is improtant to invent new schemes or to come up with an unconventional approach but they will too someday become "patterns". Patterns are not boundaries — they are simply 'rules' for the game. Think of haiku, one of the most rigid form of poetry. Why would japanese poets still stick to it and create great poems using this seemingly ancient form?

Because i don't want to rhyme.

I'd unironically delve into hiphop if you are into that. Complex rhyme schemes make a tale much more fluid, immersive and interesting, plus wordplay can make the small details in a poem stand out more.

I don't have any contempt for classical poetical structures. I love them and some of my favorite poets and poems use them masterfully. But I would never write a poem like that today. Unless you do something new within the old structure the poem is bound to be boring. A sonnet can still be used to great effect.. as long as there is something else to make it interesting. To separate it from the millions of other sonnets.

There has been lots of inovation in haikus too. Modern haikus increasingly don't use the standard 17 on (syllables) and frequently don't use nature as the subject.

Seconded
youtube.com/watch?v=G7UuBuLqHRM

But you can take an old structure and fill it with "modern" content.
As I said before, poetry has a double nature. You can be innovating by using unconventional images and meanings or by putting an intricate wordplay within a typically classic rhyme scheme. Novelty is not only in form but in content too.

I know, I said that too

So you do agree that one can still write "a great new poem" using standard rhymes?

So the only thing that's ever interesting about a poem is it's structure?

I said
>A sonnet can still be used to great effect.. as long as there is something else to make it interesting. To separate it from the millions of other sonnets.

I've written hundreds of sonnets (and other classic structures). Because they are great for new poets to perfect their skills. Like picaso was a great realist painter before he started cubism.
But none of my poems that I have submitted to be published, or show to anyone are in classical structures. It's possible to be innovative within those forms, but there's more room for innovation outside of them.
Personally I believe art should strive to be new. Respect and understand the traditions of the past, but move on.

Did you even read the post?

A prime example.

They think poetry is saying some "deep" platitude.

Hello r/eddit. Nice of you to visit.

metre and rhyme are rebellious and unorthodox and must be punished. freeform is the only acceptable kind of poetry. all dissenters will be eliminated. do not write using "classical" forms unless you wish to face the consequences...

This is partly true.

It decreased the relevancy of meter because in recorded recitation (as opposed to say writing) you can arbitrarily subdivide a syllable's delivery into halves, thirds, so forth, to create rhythmic flows that a reader of poetry on paper wouldn't know how to create.

Meter exists because the reader doesn't know the intended flow, and has to go with something standardized.

However in music you can have one line with 14 syllables and another with 18, but still have the same rhythm/time signature because you arbitrarily speed up or slow down syllable delivery. Rap codified this in a really obvious way but it always existed in recitation and singing.

There's a shitty vox video that explains this in a really liberal pleb way:

youtube.com/watch?v=3la8bsi4P-c

...

This satire/critique is actual poetry

Step aside plebs

Posting on Veeky Forums
"No u"
"Mark twain was a meme"
All that good shit
My post gets a you
On tab 72
A reply in a thread
To a 400 word critique about a book I haven't read
"None of that happened"
Kek he actually reads books