What do you think?
Rate this book
Reading poetry
Witty, direct and articulate, Peter Barry illustrates the key elements of poetry at work, covering many different kinds of verse, from traditional forms to innovative versions of the art, such as 'concrete' poetry, minimalism and word-free poems. The emphasis is on meanings rather than words, looking beyond technical devices like alliteration and assonance so that poems are understood as dynamic structures creating specific ends and effects.
The three sections cover progressively expanding areas – 'Reading the lines' deals with such basics as imagery, diction and metre; 'Reading between the lines' concerns broader matters, such as poetry and context, and the reading of sequences of poems, while 'Reading beyond the lines' looks at 'theorised' readings and the 'textual genesis' of poems from manuscript to print.
Reading Poetry is for students, lecturers and teachers looking for new ways of discussing poetry, and all those seriously interested in poetry, whether as readers or writers.
The three sections cover progressively expanding areas – 'Reading the lines' deals with such basics as imagery, diction and metre; 'Reading between the lines' concerns broader matters, such as poetry and context, and the reading of sequences of poems, while 'Reading beyond the lines' looks at 'theorised' readings and the 'textual genesis' of poems from manuscript to print.
Reading Poetry is for students, lecturers and teachers looking for new ways of discussing poetry, and all those seriously interested in poetry, whether as readers or writers.
- GenresPoetryNonfiction
232 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2014
8 people are currently reading
64 people want to read
About the author
Peter Barry
14 books18 followersPeter Barry is Professor of English at the University of Wales, Aberystwyth
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews
December 31, 2015
It's impossible not to compare this to Terry Eagleton's "How to read a poem". Both authors had previously written popular introductions to literary theory before turning to a book about how to read a poem/poetry.
I think Eagleton's is awful. Unless it's an unannounced parody, in which case it's brilliant. It's one of those books that makes you wonder about the ethics of publishing. All the poems are from teaching central, though often the discussion is of bits of poems, almost nothing from the second half of the twentieth century, nothing that might be considered experimental, avant-garde or post modern, and women don't seem to write poetry. Reading the Eagleton way requires a reference library and a commitment to the appropriate political attitudes. It's fine if you're Professor Terry's post grad student and you think all poems are essentially coded political messages that have be decoded and then diffused.
Barry avoids these problems, almost to the point where I wondered if he was using HTRAP as a negative example. Firstly, his approach would be useful to that mystical figure 'the general reader' who enjoys reading poetry but wants some help, as well as a student of literature.
The advice is sane, which probably lacks wow value and isn't going to win any prizes amongst the ideological brethren. One of the most important pieces of advice is that to read a poem you read to the punctuation. Sounds obvious, but how many people don't, and how many readers are baffled by poems because they don't. For Barry reading a poem is a conversation. He demonstrates how to pay attention and what to pay attention to.
The book discusses, in some detail, a wide range of complete poems, from Wyatt to concrete poetry. And part of the strength of the book lies in the logic of its title. 'How to read a poem' suggests all poems can be read the same way. Which is daft. It's like saying there's no real difference between Led Zeppelin and Thomas Tallis it's all music. 'Reading Poetry' is a more fluid, active and varied process which allows for the similarities and differences between individual poems and types of poems.
Barry achieves what Eagleton most suprisingly failed to do. Firstly he demonstrates that context is useful, but not essential. Then he demonstrates how you could use 'theory' to illuminate a poem as part of the conversation between reader and poem. There was a time when the lines were drawn in academic circles between close reading and theory. Barry demonstrates that both can work together. If you wanted to, and perhaps Barry's most radical suggestion is that it's optional, you could use 'literary theory' as a way of reading a poem. He demonstrates ways that don't simply conscript the poem as an example of the theory or damn the poet for not sharing your politics.
Above all Barry manages to do all this while keeping in mind that probably the only reason to read poetry unless you're a professional student, is that it is enjoyable. What this book does, is provide information that might help someone get more enjoyment from the process.
I think Eagleton's is awful. Unless it's an unannounced parody, in which case it's brilliant. It's one of those books that makes you wonder about the ethics of publishing. All the poems are from teaching central, though often the discussion is of bits of poems, almost nothing from the second half of the twentieth century, nothing that might be considered experimental, avant-garde or post modern, and women don't seem to write poetry. Reading the Eagleton way requires a reference library and a commitment to the appropriate political attitudes. It's fine if you're Professor Terry's post grad student and you think all poems are essentially coded political messages that have be decoded and then diffused.
Barry avoids these problems, almost to the point where I wondered if he was using HTRAP as a negative example. Firstly, his approach would be useful to that mystical figure 'the general reader' who enjoys reading poetry but wants some help, as well as a student of literature.
The advice is sane, which probably lacks wow value and isn't going to win any prizes amongst the ideological brethren. One of the most important pieces of advice is that to read a poem you read to the punctuation. Sounds obvious, but how many people don't, and how many readers are baffled by poems because they don't. For Barry reading a poem is a conversation. He demonstrates how to pay attention and what to pay attention to.
The book discusses, in some detail, a wide range of complete poems, from Wyatt to concrete poetry. And part of the strength of the book lies in the logic of its title. 'How to read a poem' suggests all poems can be read the same way. Which is daft. It's like saying there's no real difference between Led Zeppelin and Thomas Tallis it's all music. 'Reading Poetry' is a more fluid, active and varied process which allows for the similarities and differences between individual poems and types of poems.
Barry achieves what Eagleton most suprisingly failed to do. Firstly he demonstrates that context is useful, but not essential. Then he demonstrates how you could use 'theory' to illuminate a poem as part of the conversation between reader and poem. There was a time when the lines were drawn in academic circles between close reading and theory. Barry demonstrates that both can work together. If you wanted to, and perhaps Barry's most radical suggestion is that it's optional, you could use 'literary theory' as a way of reading a poem. He demonstrates ways that don't simply conscript the poem as an example of the theory or damn the poet for not sharing your politics.
Above all Barry manages to do all this while keeping in mind that probably the only reason to read poetry unless you're a professional student, is that it is enjoyable. What this book does, is provide information that might help someone get more enjoyment from the process.
March 28, 2018
Whatever stage we are at, poetry reading is a topic about which there is always something more that can be said. [pviii]
Poetry readers do not have to acquire the techniques of the Bletchley Park code-breakers of the Second World War because poets do not encode their meanings in that way. [p6]
My own feeling is that if a word in a poem draws unique attention to itself for any reason (including its precision or its dazzling aptness) then there may well be something wrong with it, because all the words in a poem should be working together to produce an integrated effect, not (so to speak) putting on an individual display. [p7]
...the dichotomy between showing and telling is not absolute and it makes sense to recognise that in poetry we always need both the saying and the showing, just as in grasping an argument most of us require both a proposition (which is usually abstract and generalised) and an example (which is usually concrete and specific) before we can truly comprehend what is being said. [p15]
An important secret of reading poetry and making sense of it is to pay more attention to the full stops than the capital letters. We must read sentence by sentence and not line by line, and I have nothing to say in this book which is more important than that. [p16]
...good poetry readers are usually slow readers, at least of poetry... In front of an audience, professionals say, it is almost impossible to read out a poem too slowly. [p35]
Viewers of large paintings instinctively begin by stepping further back, rather than moving closer in, so as to appreciate the impact of the whole picture, and get a sense of its overall structure. Only then do they move closer and begin to scrutinise particular details. Poetry readers should do the same... The critical habit of plunging into ultra-close readings of small parts of poems, far from being a virtue, can be symptomatic of an unease about poetry, since an effective way of avoiding with poems as poems is to concentrate instead on isolated textual details. [p75]
One way of putting this is to say that poems have to be both looked at (we look at static entities) and watched (we watch moving entities). Somewhere in the interaction between the seen and the watched is the poem as a whole. [p85]
Firstly, it is worth admitting at the start that minimalist poetry often seems to generate and require ‘maximalist’ commentary. [p164]
The effect is rather like that of the musician John Cage’s 1951 composition 4’ 33’’ ... which requires a pianist to sit in front of a piano for that length of time without playing it, thereby making the audience listen to all the ambient noises of the concert hall as if they were music. [p167]
Those who are not poets tend to regard the writing of poetry as an act of the utmost privacy. But poets themselves often view writing as more of a social affair – there are plenty of poets’ workshops in which members (who are often published and established writers) meet regularly to read out drafts of poems in progress and respond to criticism, discussion and suggestions. [p196]
Poetry readers do not have to acquire the techniques of the Bletchley Park code-breakers of the Second World War because poets do not encode their meanings in that way. [p6]
My own feeling is that if a word in a poem draws unique attention to itself for any reason (including its precision or its dazzling aptness) then there may well be something wrong with it, because all the words in a poem should be working together to produce an integrated effect, not (so to speak) putting on an individual display. [p7]
...the dichotomy between showing and telling is not absolute and it makes sense to recognise that in poetry we always need both the saying and the showing, just as in grasping an argument most of us require both a proposition (which is usually abstract and generalised) and an example (which is usually concrete and specific) before we can truly comprehend what is being said. [p15]
An important secret of reading poetry and making sense of it is to pay more attention to the full stops than the capital letters. We must read sentence by sentence and not line by line, and I have nothing to say in this book which is more important than that. [p16]
...good poetry readers are usually slow readers, at least of poetry... In front of an audience, professionals say, it is almost impossible to read out a poem too slowly. [p35]
Viewers of large paintings instinctively begin by stepping further back, rather than moving closer in, so as to appreciate the impact of the whole picture, and get a sense of its overall structure. Only then do they move closer and begin to scrutinise particular details. Poetry readers should do the same... The critical habit of plunging into ultra-close readings of small parts of poems, far from being a virtue, can be symptomatic of an unease about poetry, since an effective way of avoiding with poems as poems is to concentrate instead on isolated textual details. [p75]
One way of putting this is to say that poems have to be both looked at (we look at static entities) and watched (we watch moving entities). Somewhere in the interaction between the seen and the watched is the poem as a whole. [p85]
Firstly, it is worth admitting at the start that minimalist poetry often seems to generate and require ‘maximalist’ commentary. [p164]
The effect is rather like that of the musician John Cage’s 1951 composition 4’ 33’’ ... which requires a pianist to sit in front of a piano for that length of time without playing it, thereby making the audience listen to all the ambient noises of the concert hall as if they were music. [p167]
Those who are not poets tend to regard the writing of poetry as an act of the utmost privacy. But poets themselves often view writing as more of a social affair – there are plenty of poets’ workshops in which members (who are often published and established writers) meet regularly to read out drafts of poems in progress and respond to criticism, discussion and suggestions. [p196]
April 2, 2023
Incredible book. If there is only one book you read about understanding poetry, this is it. Whether you don't "get" poetry, or want to update your perspective on poetry after having been out of university for a while, this book has so much that will help. Best of all, Barry covers all the major approaches while avoiding ideological rants. Pretty and understanding it, enjoying it better, is always the focus.
Displaying 1 - 3 of 3 reviews