As I sat in class today, I overheard somebody describe poetry as music with a missing piece. They said it wasn't as meaningful because it had no rhythm; no beat.
Is it only me who disagrees with this?
I am not a talented musician; the few pieces I have composed would not make sense if heard because I can't seem to obey the laws of music.... my self-expression seems to obey no laws. But beautiful music is a gift no-one can deny; it is somebody, somewhere, directly expressing how they feel.
But the rhythm; the beat; whether the music is in minor or major; its tempo...it all determines the tone, mood and interpretaion of the song to the listener. The composer, through these components, is trying to influence the listeners into feeling how they feel. Into interpreting the song how they need it to be interpreted.
This is why poetry is so beautiful to me. It is more free. The reader of the poem can make their own rhythm, beat, tempo; can decide the music for the poem in their own heads, and therefore make it their own. Poetry can be whatever the reader needs it to be, rather than whatever the writer wants it to be.
To me, music is self-expression. It is a face showing only a few emotions; the emotions the composer intended.
But poetry is just expression. It is your face, ready to share your unique emotions. Not influenced by anybody else.
Raw, and free.