Introduction

In this blog I aim to provide a fairly comprehensive description and exploration of iambic pentameter from the ground up, in simple, easy to follow segments.

We will progress from what is meant by ‘iamb’ and ‘pentameter’, to what defines ‘stress’, to different types of ‘feminine ending’, to simple variant ‘feet’ (a ‘foot’ being the smallest possible metrical component), to the ‘figures’ formed by combinations of feet, to ‘displaced beats’, to the interplay of rising and falling rhythms, to more unusual variations, to looking at how to deliver certain lines that may not appear to be metrical, and then onto exploring meter in more extended passages of verse, starting with Sonnet 1 (which is as far as I’ve got so far!). I also provide a separate glossary, which you can refer back to at any point along the way! (In this, and all future posts, you can click on any word highlighted in blue to be taken to another one of my posts – to the ‘glossary’ if not otherwise indicated. For a concise summary of the technical principles of iambic pentameter, I would refer you to one of my answers on Quora: Shakespeare’s rhythm. You can also find links to all my most useful answers on metered verse at the bottom of my profile.

Much of this knowledge is not readily available, and I feel it’s important that it should be! You can only make an informed decision about whether to follow the meter in Shakespeare’s work if you first understand the meter – and hardly anybody understands meter as well as they think they do (this includes even the best known Shakespearean actors and directors).

What is more, there is a pervasive myth that Shakespeare created expressive effect by alternating between following the meter and breaking the meter, which is a myth I would like to dispel! He certainly created expressive effect by varying the iambic pattern – but he did so within the constraints of meter, according to specific metrical principles, and this is often not appreciated. Many actors, teachers and directors misread lines due to their lack of comprehension of meter (as well as the principles by which words can be expanded, contracted or glided together to fit the meter), and as a result, identify irregularities which actually don’t exist – and then read some expressive significance into these non-existent irregularities. The fact is, when you simply break the rules of meter, you are no longer playing with the constraints of meter, which is what Shakespeare did so artfully (the frequent irregularity in meter among many of his fellow playwrights shows up their comparative lack of skill).

The traditional approach to scansion (‘scansion’ is the process of marking the metrical patterning of a passage of verse) is to simply divide the line up into individual ‘feet’ (a ‘foot’, as I mentioned, is the smallest possible metrical component, and always contains one beat). My approach is a little more sophisticated: my emphasis is on the metrical patterns formed by the various combinations of feet; once you familiarise yourself with these patterns, you can start to read a passage of verse, with all it’s repeated and contrasting metrical patterning, in much the same way that you would read a piece of music (this can also help you to decide which syllables to stress when there is more than one legitimate choice, as it then becomes far more clear how the individual lines fit together to form a rhythmic composition). And if you are not yet at the stage where you can recognise instinctively whether a line scans, without having to laboriously demarcate and count each individual foot, I believe familiarising yourself with these patterns will help you get there more quickly!

Meter provides lift and rhythmic momentum: it is heightened speech. However, simply choosing the right syllables to stress does not, in itself, guarantee that your delivery will sound rhythmic, or have a rhythmic flow. A concrete example is the common mistake of excessive lingering or pausing on the first syllable of a choriamb (this is the ‘DUM-di-di-DUM‘ pattern that you will frequently encounter), which spoils the expressive rhythmic swinging movement Shakespeare intended. And even beyond this, in order for the verse to truly lift, you need to be guided by a feel for the metrical rhythm, rather than merely relying on stress placement. For this purpose, I have experienced a recognition of the metrical patterns formed by combinations of feet to be far more useful than simply cutting up the lines into individual feet.

One more very important clarification: when I talk about being ‘guided’ by the metrical rhythm, this does not mean simply imposing the metrical rhythm onto the line – in fact, mechanically imposing the metrical rhythm is fatal. If you simply impose the iambic rhythm onto the line it actually kills the expressive effect of the verse. In practice, iambic pentameter verse never sounds exactly like ‘di-DUM, di-DUM, di-DUM, di-DUM, di-DUM‘; the speed and rhythm of the line is affected by all kinds of factors, such as: punctuation and phrasal junctures within the line; the presence or absence of consonant clusters; the use of long or short vowels and consonants; the use of mono- or polysyllabic words; the use of words and phrases within the line that have a contrary, falling rhythm, and span the foot divisions; etc. As well as where you happen to feel the impulse to vary the tone, speed and emphasis in performance! (This, incidentally, is the most obvious difference between poetry and rap. With rap, the beat is insistent: the pumping, heavy beat is the driving force behind the line delivery. With metered poetry – and especially with the five beat pentameter, which is much less insistently regular in it’s rhythm than the four beat tetrameter – the rhythm floats on top of the line. It is more subtle and sinuous: the rhythm is there to serve the line rather than command it; it is a guiding force, rather than a driving force. Having said that, here’s a fantastic example of a Shakespeare sonnet being delivered as a rap!: Sonnet 18 rap.  And here’s the full video it was taken from: Hip–Hop & Shakespeare. I am not, by the way, saying that rap is less expressive than poetry: it’s just a different form of expression, and actually a very exciting art form).

In the hands of a skilled poet, the pulse of the metrical rhythm complements and heightens the sound and texture of the words: once you really feel the metrical pulse, the words lift off the page. This is why an effective delivery sounds both rhythmic and textured. Simply imposing the rhythm onto the line kills it, while if you ignore or lose the rhythm, you will lose the heightened expressiveness the words would otherwise impart. The more pleasure you take in the texture of the words, the better – and the easier you will find it to allow the rhythm to provide lift and forward momentum to your delivery. Reading my analysis of Sonnet 1 might give you some idea, but I would also highly recommend learning Arthur Lessac’s ‘linking’ method (a method I will probably outline in a future post – though, by contrast, I also discuss ‘separations’ in Shakespeare’s verse in my first post: Iambic pentameter & the principles of metrical variation: part 1 – feminine endings & simple variations).

Finally, I would like to share an extract from Alexander Pope’s An Essay on Criticism, which I feel is very much in the spirit of what I am trying to achieve with this blog: to explain ‘the rules of the dance’, reveal its techniques, and share its beauty!

---

True ease in writing comes from art, not chance,

As those move easiest who have learn’d to dance.

‘Tis not enough no harshness gives offence,

The sound must seem an echo to the sense.

Soft is the strain when Zephyr gently blows,

And the smooth stream in smoother numbers flows;

But when loud surges lash the sounding shore,

The hoarse, rough verse should like the torrent roar.

When Ajax strives some rock’s vast weight to throw,

The line too labours, and the words move slow;

Not so, when swift Camilla scours the plain,
Flies o’er th’ unbending corn, and skims along the main.

---

I hope you enjoy my posts. Please feel free to give feedback – whether it be praise, criticism or suggestions!

N.B. Future posts will include an exploration of the principles by which words can be expanded or contracted to fit the meter, and a full analysis of Sonnet 116 (one of Shakespeare’s most popular sonnets, frequently recited at weddings – but which has been, in my opinion, very much misinterpreted, partly as a result of not following the meter!).

{P.S. You can navigate this site by either clicking on the small picture of the skull towards the top left hand corner of the page, to see all the posts displayed, or you can choose one of the categories underneath the small skull picture}