To all Readers of Wyleian Sonnets.
My Muse and I feel that we should, at this time, explain where, why and how we are going with this series as some of you are asking questions which we hope the following will answer.
We have a mutual love of the Sonnet Form as one of the most beautiful, graceful and expressive forms of rhyming poetry but we wondered why it should always be anchored to the classic forms or to iambic pentameter.
It was never our aim to debase the Sonnet form but to develop and expand upon it.
Our first essays were in the classic forms to develope our joint ‘mastery’ of the Petrarchan, Shakespearean, Spenserian, and Miltonian styles where the main differences lie in the rhyming schemes.
We, only then, began experimenting and have, together, produced Sonnets written in hexameter, pentameter, septameter and in mixed meters.
So far we have adhered to iambic meters because we considered those almost sacrosanct to the Sonnet but we may, in future, experiment with other than iambic meters.
Only those of our experiments which we mutually consider still retain the grace, beauty and style of the Sonnet have been posted.
Whatever we have written in Sonnet form has been a statement of our mutual understanding of subjects, philosophies, places or time.
We hope that our essays to date have proved interesting and enjoyable (because they are intended to be that - although they are experiments) and we have appreciated your feedback and the comments that they have attracted.
We intend to continue with our work and hope you will continue to enjoy the results of it.
The term "Wyleian" is not intended as an attempt at self-aggrandisement but it seemed to me that to write sonnets and state that "this is a Petrarchan, or Shakespearean, or Spenserian, or Miltonian (etc.) Sonnet" was, in fact a mild offence to those greater poets. For this reason I gave my own name to my somewhat inferior writings and the inclusion of excellent works by other of my AP friends has enhanced the collection considerably.
Thank you all sincerely for reading our Sonnets and commenting and we hope you will continue to do so.
Sincerely, Hugh Wyles, Muse and friends.
PS: If there is any way in which we can help you to increase your understanding and enjoyment (of Sonnets in particular), please do not hesitate to send us an IM or, better still, email me at: h.wyles@clear.net.nz
PPS: Our Wyleian and other Sonnets posted to the ALL POETRY site may be found in the Collection entitled “Sonnets & Sonnaiku” at:
Hugh Wyles: allpoetry.com/ list/6810
or Hugh's
"Wyleian Sonnets": allpoetry.com/ list/9954
''
Included in the list
Add a comment
Comments
1 - 18 of 18
-
Dear NaDP,
If you have completesd 91 sonnets, it seems to me that we should become acquainted and I will certainly visit your Author's Page at an early opportunity.
Perhaps you would be kind enough to IM me some selected links to save me a lot of hunting for your best ones?
BTW I think "Lynneian" has a splendid sound.
Thank you for your comment from which I see you have felt the same urges which plagued me about 'plodding' iambics. I have also gone quite far afield with sonnet rhyme schemes although my latest ones are fairly formal.
I look forward to getting to know another sonneteer.
Regards, Hugh. -
well-said
Kind of figured that might be the case. Your work is too good to have been subjected to unintentional error-laden recidivistic tendencies. I wish I had been directed to that spot before I read your sonnet because I would not have felt the need to be aware of conformation to form and simply enjoy the content, which I did. I also have felt the need too modify the structure of the sonnet after having completed 91st one and indeed becoming tiresomely entrenched in the omnipresent iambus. There are sufficient variations in the rhyme scheme to satisfy my need for variety without having to resort to a Lynneian version; however, I will not rule out that possibility some time in the future if and when the urge strikes. Again, thanks for the insight and clarification. It was as I had suspected, hinted at, and hoped. -
I suppose it is just a collection then. Thank you for this info Hugh. I have learned this form from Mary and so happy to have written some (although my earlier sonnets don't follow any meter!) I will be browsing into your collection now.
Cheers! Eris
-
Dear Terry,
I should perhaps explain that the term "Wyleian" is not intended as an attempt at self-aggrandisement but it seemed to me that to write sonnets and state that "this is a Petrarchan, or Shakespearean, or Spenserian, or Miltonian (etc.) Sonnet" was, in fact a mild offence to those greater poets. For this reason I gave my own name to my somewhat inferior writings and the inclusion of excellent works by other of my AP friends has enhanced the collection considerably.
Your comment emboldens me to reach further into the exciting spheres of experiment and I shall try to trace some of yours first.
Any links you provide will be welcomed.
Love and hugs, XXX Hugh.
Edited on May 18, 8:43 p.m. because ''. -
AS one who has beem writing SortaSonnets for years, after a series of the orthodox kind, I find it interesting to have found a parallel movement already in force. My sense of it was that since Petrarch's earliest form in the 1300's, there had been no change until Milton's and Wordworth's English sonnets of the 16th century, it seemed odd that we had been held in the bondage of old convention for so many centuries. Not sure who antedates whom here, but it doesn't really matter since the goals matched well. Mine have gone farther afield in many ways--rhyme schemes, use of anapestic and dactylic meter, and the like, terrible things only an ignoramus would call a sonnet, but undaunted, I am beginning to feel vidicated as well.
My thanks are eclipsed by my delight to find one of mine here!
Terry -
Dear Del,
No apology whatever is needed. I was honoured that you wanted to put your mixed Sonnet into the Wyleian series and was sorry that it didn't fit Susan's and my criteria. Your poem itself is what, in NZ, we call "a hoot" but maybe you would call it "a beep".
Best regards, Hugh.
Edited on Mar 17, 9:10 because ''. -
My dear friend,
I am at once, enlightened and embarrased to have not read this prior to my posting of the entry to Cheryl's contest. It seems my attempt at humor was misguided by my lack of consideration and I apologize to you here publicly. I shal rename the entry and remove all reference to your form as soon as I leave this post. Thank you for the heads up link, my friend.
Del -
Dear Jane,
I am not sure what your comment is meant to convey because, prior to September 15th, Gen and I had already posted sixteen Wyleian Sonnets since the first of the series was posted on July 25th and these were preceded by several in regular 'classic' styles including the trilogy "Seascape".
We would have thought this would give ample opportunity for folks to "get the enjoyment first and then the explanation" and this is the whole idea and purpose of our above statement.
We are not sure who 'featured' this statement but would like to thank the kind person who did.
Love and hugs, XXX Hugh.
Edited on Sep 23, 6:04 because ''. -
An interesting article, Hugh, and very informative as to your and nogenreneeded's sonnets.
I sometimes think I should learn different forms and in fact have made an attempt but somehow it just doesn't seem like me. I guess I'm just a free style 'writer', and try to do my best at that. You do inspire me though, Hugh. And maybe I'll surprise you someday
Love and
Dee
-
I appreciate this information and the links to your sites. I have been afraid to try to write sonnets in any form because they just look to hard to me. I guess I am just too lazy, and free verse is my strong hand. Thank you for featuring this. Maybe between this and reading my friends wonderful sonnets, I may get enough courage to try a sonnet soon.
Cheryl
-
I'm wondering why this is being featured rather than some of your fine examples? Shouldn't folks get the enjoyment first, and then the explaination? And once they have soaked up the joy of them, have a link to this?
Just seems the apple is before the cart. lol
Hugs,
Jane -
I really dont know muvh about the different forms of poetry... or even what makes a sonnet different from another form of poem, but I do know that everything I have read of yours I have enjoyed very much, Mary
-
I like the sonnets that the two of you write, as for meters? Blah not to break either of your hearts I haven't really a clue about other than what Nam has taught me. And I know many times he has been left banging his head into a wall. ha ha I just don't get forms. But that does not deter me from enjoying your writes, if anything it spurs my "little" education on. Take Care the both of you and Be Safe, Catressa
-
Please dont take offense when I say this, but having no understanding of the various forms of poetry I would not be able to pass judgement on any of your sonnets. Having said that, I hasten to add the fact that to me what makes the poem is the way it flows from the mouth when spoken aloud. Sonnets to me have to be one of the most beautiful presentations of words that I have encountered since my arrival here at AP. I thank you both for your beautiful works .
-
I thoroughly enjoy the iambic meter and use it for all kinds of writing, so I appreciate your decision to retain it for the sonnet innovations you are making. I've only read a few of your experiments because my early inquiries were not answered. This column goes a long way toward satisfying my curiosity. Thank you!
-
I wish to echo the above comments. I love reading your sonnets (I have always enjoyed rhythm & rhyme)and find your subjects chosen fit the form beautifully. Keep them coming.
XXOOXX Anne -
very well written
Hugh and Susan, you have both created such beautiful Sonnets, even though I don't understand all the meters, I have enjoyed reading them, the words and the subject have been wonderful, each one you do Hugh, either by yourself or with Susan I have enjoyed them, as they are Masterpieces and a part of who you are.Love and kisses~Bea
I applaud you -
I know not much about meters, but I do know that the sonnets you two write together (or apart) read very good. Not only the form makes from them a pleasant read, the subjects you choose are always excellent.
You two keep on writing, we the humble public will keep on reding
K&L,
Mari
Adding your comment:
1 - 18 of 18
