Who is yer favorite poet and why?

Keats is the one I return to again and again. He has the pure intuition of the artist. Only Shakespeare can touch him in English.

You mustn't read much then

John Donne

Porn for the soul.

Him or Yeats, definitely an Irish bias thing, but Heaney's use of sound always draws me in

Rimbaud is sound too, OP

>inb4 Baudelaire

Auden. His thoughts sat easy on everything.

I like you

samuel taylor coleridge
dat meter

hart crane, walt whitman, edmund spenser, ezra pound, thomas campion, shakespeare. they're good

Plenty of his work rhymed, plenty of it used metre too. Just goes to show you don't actually read anything or you're incredibly stupid, probably both.

>keats
>Only Shakespeare can touch him in English.
>accuses other people of not reading
are you cosplaying a dumbass or is this your actual opinion? lol

the bard of salford because i'm stuck in fucking chickentown

What are we classifying as a poet?

Because Goethe wasn't a particularly prolific poet, but Faust tops everything.

Quality > Quantity

Nesimi, because his poems are perfect in shape and phonetically as beautiful as language gets.

My diary desu

Eliot because he is the perfect mix of traditional and avant-garde poetry.
He also has a very diverse style that progressed throughout his career.

Savannah brown

this waifu

I'm getting really sick of you. I hope you kill yourself.

Somewhere between John Donne and William Blake for me. They were both stupidly ahead of their time

He is a metrical virtuoso. Have you read Maud?

I'm on my own on this one, but Paul Durcan. Fite me puritans.

I've never been able to feel any emotions when reading poetry. It's too vague and abstract in it's wording for me to really understand what it's saying. Reading is so much different from listening to music. When you listen to music you just feel the music and you can stop thinking and just let your mind sort of coalesce with the sound waves. With reading it's just moment after moment of, what the fuck does this mean, what the fuck does this mean, what the fuck does this mean, what the fuck does this mean?

My favorite poet is Shakespeare, by far.

What I really love about his work is his metaphorical exuberance: you hardly find one line in his work where there is not an image, be it a simile or a metaphor. Since he is so found of imagery, to avoid repeating himself he is forced to use a vast warehouse of source material. And so he uses several animals (even the snail, the dolphin, small insects and crustaceans), a lot of plants and herbs, mountains, oceans, deserts, the private world of the inside of a house (kitchen, bathroom, bedroom, beds, plates, ovens, tables, forks, spons) and the public world of the court and the political buildings, and much more: he uses all of that as feedstock for his poetic imagination.

I also love the way he seems to be more concerned with his images, with his metaphors, than with the play he is working on, or the characters. He tries, of course, to do his best to organize a well-made play, or to make the characters act like different people, yet whenever he founds an image that he likes he is willing to forget play and characters and to explore the full potentials of the words.

Metaphors are themselves the aptest and clearest mode of expressing much in little. No other form of speech will convey so much thought in so few words. They often compress into a few words what would require as many sentences. So a Shakespeare play has oceans of material hidden between the folds, curves and edges of his verses. I don’t know of any other poet who uses so much imagery with the same beauty, inventiveness, boldness and strangeness.

I haven't read much by him, but from what i've read he is a shitty poet. No meter, no rhyme, just niggerness

Pleb tier

congrats, that's the dumbest shit I've read all day

>With reading it's just moment after moment of, what the fuck does this mean, what the fuck does this mean, what the fuck does this mean, what the fuck does this mean?

i feel so bad for you

Rilke, his Duino Elegies are one of the greatest things i have ever read:

. . . Wir, Vergeuder der Schmerzen.
Wie wir sie absehn voraus, in die traurige Dauer,
ob sie nicht enden vielleicht. Sie aber sind ja
unser winterwähriges Laub, unser dunkeles Sinngrün,
eine der Zeiten des heimlichen Jahres-- . . .

( . . . How we squander our hours of pain.
How we gaze beyond them into the bitter duration
to see if they have an end. Though they are really
our winter-enduring foliage, our dark evergreen,
one season in our inner year-- . . . )

Wordsworth, dunno why.

Pound is way overrated, at least anyone I've ever spoken to with literary sense says so.

A lot of people like him based on his political views though.

Muh nigga

>metaphorical exuberance
fuckin a. well said, noone did with language what he did. noone can touch his level of creativity. you get the feeling, from reading him, that he was really having a good time whenever he wrote. its a shame Veeky Forums dont read him though.

Holy shit stop posting.

This board gets worse every day kek

türksen?

Valéry, [Saint-John] Perse, Rilke, Montale, Celan

This is part of elegy # ... ?

Wallace Stevens, Hart Crane, Walt Whitman, William Carlos Williams, William Blake, Edwin Arlington Robinson

>hart crane, walt whitman
>Wallace Stevens, Hart Crane, Walt Whitman, William Carlos Williams

whack a mole, guess an american

>in many of his poems, especially his earlier ones, rhyme is very present
i take it that "no other poet comes close to his technical ability" due to those earlier poems of pound?

Blake, because his stuff is weird as hell.

>worst trip on this board

You aren't kidding.

here's your attention

no, srs, i snorted at the idea that no other poet comes close to pound by his technical ability (it's literally what is said here ) since pound was a known proponent of free verse, and if you are going to defend him on the basis that "but his earlier poems had rhyme" which you apparently think is enough to claim him the very technically best poet in the history of the literature, you should said something more substantial than "here's your attention" when you are called out on it

filter'd

wilfred owen
just perfect

what a stupid thing to say

you have similar taste to mine and it is therefore good

lately it has been Pessoa, no I don't read portuguese and i don't care. Rilke has been a longtime favorite also

Emily Dickinson

This. Shakespeare somehow ruined other poets for me; unconsciously I keep expecting the same Amazon forest of imagery, but it never flowers in the work of other writers.

did you just fucking "yer"?

ye got a problem with that?

>I also love the way he seems to be more concerned with his images, with his metaphors, than with the play he is working on, or the characters
The trouble is when directors start treating his words with such careless abandon in regards to character that it completely ruins the drama.

>"That which is now a horse, even with a thought The rack dislimns, and makes it indistinct, As water is in water."
>mfw I watched an adaption of Anthony and Cleopatra in which they made this profound line into a fucking joke about Anthony getting distracted by clouds

Mind to rec other poets you think I might enjoy?

Pound is overrated, but in a lateral sense. His poetry often isn't very "good", by whatever metric you'd normally use to guage that sort of thing. What he always is, though, is impressive. Regardless of which Canto you're reading, even if it's not "good", it's impressive. Personae less so, but Personae is largely more consistently "good". Pound was a visionary, he had incredible scope. As a writer he was great, as a poet he was impressive.

You have no clue what you're talking about. I'm not going to say he's "technically unmatched", that's not true. But what I will say is that you're greatly uneducated. "Free verse" isn't free in that it doesn't use metrical feet and structure; it uses a lot of metrical feet and a lot of structure (or at least, Pound, Crane, Eliot, and others of the period). It's "free" in its use of metre, it's not a rigid pattern of pentameter or what have you. All of the early 20th free verse poets used metre for intended effects, purposely. It's much more loose, they're liberal with their form. That's why it's "vers libre". You should stop posting for once and maybe read a little closer before you begin making a dumbass of yourself, with a trip on at that.

Goethe said a writer shouldn't read more than one Shakespeare play per year.

He basically explains that Shakespeare is so complete that a young writer can only feel powerless after reading him too much. It's like everything has been said, so there's no point trying to write after him.

This is somewhere in his Conversations with Eckermann.

Can anyone say where is this Shakespeare monument from?

I've definitely felt that.

Vicente Huidobro

Pablo Neruda

I just found this passage where Goethe talks about Shakespeare (Conversations with Eckermann, 12-25-1825):

>Goethe then showed me a very interesting English work, which illustrated all Shakspeare in copper plates. Each page embraced, in six small designs, one piece with some verses written beneath, so that the leading idea and the most important situations of each work were brought before the eyes. All these immortal tragedies and comedies thus passed before the mind like processions of masks.
>“It is even terrifying,” said Goethe, “to look through these little pictures. Thus are we first made to feel the infinite wealth and grandeur of Shakspeare. There is no motive in human life which he has not exhibited and expressed! And all with what ease and freedom!
>“But we cannot talk about Shakspeare; everything is inadequate. I have touched upon the subject in my ‘Wilhelm Meister,’ but that is not saying much. He is not a theatrical poet; he never thought of the stage; it was far too narrow for his great mind: nay, the whole visible world was too narrow.
>“He is even too rich and too powerful. A productive nature ought not to read more than one of his dramas in a year if it would not be wrecked entirely. I did well to get rid of him by writing ‘Goetz,’ and ‘Egmont,’ and Byron did well by not having too much respect and admiration for him, but going his own way. How many excellent Germans have been ruined by him and Calderon!
>“Shakspeare gives us golden apples in silver dishes. We get, indeed, the silver dishes by studying his works; but, unfortunately, we have only potatoes to put into them.”

From the Shakespeare Birthplace Museum (or something like that) in Stratford-upon-Avon.

Under-f***ing-rated post!

I have always wondered if he is any good. Everyone puts him on their top poets lists and all. Bloom even included him in his list of 26 essential authors in his WESTERN CANNON. Despite all that I'm not convinced because he hasn't achieved meme status, probably because he is so well regarded by the mainstream.

tl;dr whys Neruda good

obv troll.

still cant find it...I am way to fucking dumb

Personally, I've never been interested in him because my high school Spanish teacher went on about him and she was retarded so I just assumed he was like Maya Angelou-esque normie tier shit. But if Bloom likes him I might give him a shot.

But you hate yourself, user.

I was pointing out that your statements about the lack of rhyme and rhythm in Pound's poems were wrong, not trying to prove his technical capabilities, which, to the average, normal, non-retarded person, is pretty obvious considering how simply and explicitly worded it. My statement still holds: you are, by a wide margin, the worst trip on this board--possibly the worst it has ever seen, actually--so I advise you to remove the trip, and, for the sake of all of our faiths in our species (however strong or weak they may be), let all of us assume that your posts are separate, isolated events.

Yeats

>and why

what you say here i think could be applied to emily dickinson, my favorite poet, who was an rapt student of mister shakes herself. yet her works are even stranger, and as cryptic, beautiful and bold. i love how seamlessly she weds play, thought and feeling. her poems are better than most works of philosophy. she is the absolute best!

>her poems are better than most works of philosophy.
TRIGGERED

okay most works of modern philosophy rather.

P-plase, spoon-feed me just this time: I would like to get other pics from this monument but I dont know where it is located.

As a native Spanish speaker, I have never come to like him. Though it's fair to mention I've merely read one of his anthologies. If it's worth mentioning, I did enjoyed his 20th poem from 20 poems of love and a song of despair.

>Not posting Baudelaire

It's stupid to say anything else to this braindead tripfaggot.

my butt haha
*fart* haha lol

Said every FUCKING poet ever

Maaaaaaah nigga. Read some Traherne. Predated romanticism by two centuries and still has all the checks of metaphysicals.

Rumi
If thou wilt be observant and vigilant, thou wilt see at every moment the response to thy action. Be observant if thou wouldst have a pure heart, for something is born to thee in consequence of every action.
and
Edgar Allan Poe
From childhood's hour I have not been
As others were -- I have not seen
As others saw -- I could not bring
My passions from a common spring --
From the same source I have not taken
My sorrow -- I could not awaken
My heart to joy at the same tone --
And all I lov'd -- I lov'd alone --
Then -- in my childhood -- in the dawn
Of a most stormy life -- was drawn
From ev'ry depth of good and ill
The mystery which binds me still --
From the torrent, or the fountain --
From the red cliff of the mountain --
From the sun that 'round me roll'd
In its autumn tint of gold --
From the lightning in the sky
As it pass'd me flying by --
From the thunder, and the storm --
And the cloud that took the form
(When the rest of Heaven was blue)
Of a demon in my view --