- Revised, tweaked and improved March 24 2009.
- I have also written a Guide to Haiku and three follow up guides, Iambic Variants, an examination of Shakespeare’s Iambic Pentameter Sonnet 116, the soliloquy To be or not to be, his Iambic Tetrameter 145, and his furious 129, the meter of Emily Dickinson, and Thomas Middleton’s Blank Verse (this last post examining some outlying Iambic Pentameter variants). The opposite of an Iambic Meter, by the way, is a Trochaic Meter - I’ve looked at an example by Burns and, more successfully, Millay.
- February 22, 2009 – If you enjoy Frost, you might like reading Birches along with a color coded scansion of Birches included in my post on Frost’s Mending Wall. To find all the posts I’ve written on Robert Frost, click here.
- After you’ve read up on Iambic Pentameter, take a look at some of my poetry. I’m not half-bad. One of the reasons I write these posts is so that a few readers, interested in meter and rhyme, might want to try out my poetry. Check out Spider, Spider or, if you want modern Iambic Pentameter, try My Bridge is like a Rainbow or Come Out! Take a copy to class if you need an example of Modern Iambic Pentameter. Pass it around if you have friends or relatives interested in this kind of poetry.
First Appearance
Iambic Pentameter is the meter of Blank Verse, most Sonnets, and a variety of verse forms starting in the14th and continuing through the 21rst Century.
Iambic Pentameter is closely associated with Blank Verse, which some websites credit as having first been written by Henry Howard, Earl of Surrey. The assertion is incorrect. Chaucer was, in fact, the first poet to write Iambic Pentameter and examples can be found with the prologue of the Canterbury Tales.
Whan that aprill with his shoures soote
The droghte of march hath perced to the roote,
And bathed every veyne in swich licour
Of which vertu engendred is the flour;
Whan zephirus eek with his sweete breeth
Inspired hath in every holt and heeth
Tendre croppes, and the yonge sonne
Hath in the ram his halve cours yronne,
And smale foweles maken melodye,
That slepen al the nyght with open ye
(so priketh hem nature in hir corages);
Thanne longen folk to goon on pilgrimages,
And palmeres for to seken straunge strondes,
To ferne halwes, kowthe in sondry londes;
And specially from every shires ende
Of Engelond, to Caunterbury they wende,
The hooly blisful martir for to seke
That hem hath holpen, whan that they were seeke.
Although, at first glance, this may not appear to be Iambic Pentameter, it is. We’ll get back to it in another post.
What is Iambic and Pentameter?
All of Elizabethan, Jacobean and Restoration Drama, written in verse, is written using Iambic Pentameter (Blank Verse) – this includes all of Shakespeare’s Plays and Sonnets. Milton’s Paradise Lost is written in Iambic Pentameter. Keats’ Sonnets & Hyperion, along with most of his major poems, are written in Iambic Pentameter. Almost every major poet , prior to the 20th Century, wrote Iambic Pentameter when writing their best known poetry. Exceptions would be poets like Walt Whitman (free verse), Robert Burns (who wrote a variety of metrical lines – mostly iambic), and Emily Dickinson (whose meter is derived from hymn tunes, which is why so many of her poems can be sung to Yellow Rose of Texas).
Iambic is an adjective. Iamb is the noun and is short for Iambus. Iambus is from the Greek and refers to two. Therefore, Iamb refers to any two syllable “unit”, referred to as a foot by metrists, consisting of an unstressed syllable followed by a stressed syllable (or ictus).
What is a Foot?
A foot is defined as a group of syllables (unspecified in number) comprising a metrical unit. In the case of an Iamb, the metrical foot contains two syllables.
In the following example, I’ve bolded and italicized the stressed syllables.
To be or not to be
The bolded and italicized words receive greater stress, when speaking, than the words which have not been bolded or italicized.
Now, if we break this line into feet, we end up with following:
To be | or not | to be | that is | the question.
Except for the last foot, each foot consists of two syllables. The last foot is a variant called an amphibrach (in that it varies from the first four iambic feet). The amphibrach is a foot (a metrical unit) consisting of an unstressed, stressed, and unstressed syllable.
A strictly iambic line would be:
Of hand, | of foot, | of lip, | of eye, | of brow (Shakespeare: Sonnet 106: Line 6)
What is Pentameter
The Greek prefix Pent- or Penta-, means five. Pentameter therefore means a line of verse consisting of five metrical feet. Remember, a metrical foot contains an unspecified number of syllables until it is modified by an adjective like Iambic.
What is Iambic Pentameter
The adjective, Iambic, modifies Pentameter to mean, a line of verse consisting of five Iambic metrical feet [feet containing an unstressed and stressed syllable].
There are also examples of poems written in trochaic pentameter. In this case, the term would mean a line of verse consisting of five trochaic [metrical feet [feet containing an stressed and unstressed syllable]. (Note: The stressed and unstressed syllables, in comparison to Iambic, are reversed.) It would also be possible to have amphibrachic pentameter. To my knowledge, no poems have been written in this meter. If any reader knows of one, let me know!
The line:
Of hand, | of foot, | of lip, | of eye, | of brow
is strictly Iambic Pentameter because each foot is strictly an Iamb and there are strictly five feet.
The line:
To be | or not | to be | that is | the question.
or
To be | or not | to be | that is | the question.
is not, strictly speaking, an Iambic Pentameter line, because the final foot is amphibrachic and the fourth foot may be read as being trochaic. However, it is considered an acceptable variant of the Iambic Pentameter line. In the second scansion of the line above, putting the emphasis on is might sound awkward, but imagine an actor speaking the line. The second scansion gives the line a different emphasis. It all depends on where the is is.
Perfect Iambic Pentameter?
After having written this, I’ve noticed various websites who (not to put too fine a point on the matter) get it wrong. Frostfriends.org, for example, writes the following about the closing line of Frost’s poem Birches:
Birches: “It’s when I’m weary of considerations.” This line is perfect iambic pentameter, with an extra metrical (feminine) ending.
Their statement is incorrect. This line is not perfect iambic pentameter (and this is more than just splitting hairs). A perfectly iambic pentameter line would not have a feminine ending (an amphibrach) in the final foot. The correct thing to say would have been – this is a perfectly acceptable variant within an iambic pentameter pattern.
More on this poem, and its scansion, can be found at my post on Frost’s Birches.
Symbols used in scanning Metrical Poetry
Lastly, the symbols used to denote stress in a line of verse are as follows:
This symbol denotes a weak stress.
This symbol denotes an intermediate stress.
This symbol denotes a strong stress.
This symbol denotes the division of a metrical foot.
So, the line above would appear as follows:
Note: I’ve scanned that as receiving the stress although I believe that the word is should receive it. For more on this opinion and why, visit my post on To Be or Not To Be.
And consider the following scansion:
In the scansion above, notice that the word sweet receives an intermediate stress. This means that most readers would probably put less stress on sweet (saying it less loudly) than on the syllable si- of silent. Try it out. Also, importantly, notice that the feet divide the words. An iambic metrical foot consists of two syllables, not necessarily two words. Thus, count two syllables and mark off a foot, count two more syllables and mark off a foot, etc… Mark off every two syllables regardless of the words. If the lines contains more than 10 syllables, as in the scansion of “To be or not be”, one of your metrical feet will not be iambic.
A Ten Syllable Line is not the same as an Iambic Pentameter Line
It’s also possible that just because a line has ten syllables, it might not have 5 feet. It might have four feet with two anapestic feet. And this is where science becomes art. There is an art to scansion, but it is not hard to learn. While metrical feet may divide words, the placement of metrical feet is not insensitive to phrasing. In other words, sometimes it may make more sense to recognize a phrase as being anapestic or, as with feminine endings, amphibrachic.
(My next post answers what to do when considering such variants.) In the example above, the last foot was not iambic. In other examples, the first, second, third or fourth foot might not be iambic. When I write my next post, on variant lines, we’ll figure out how to tell which foot gets the extra syllable.
Two More Symbols: Elision
There are two more commonly used symbol to consider. One is the symbol for elision. Elision means that instead of pronouncing a word as having, say, two syllables, it is pronounced as having one. Likewise, a word that appears to have three syllables, might be pronounced as two.
This symbol denotes elision.
Consider the following line:
This example is taken from George T. Wright’s Shakespeare’s Metrical Art. Only the first foot is scanned. Notice that -lier of livelier may be pronounced with two syllables -li-er or one -lier. If the reader wishes to maintain the iambic rhythm of the line, the whole word livelier would be pronounced with two syllables. If the word were pronounced with three, then the line would be considered dactylic – a strong stress or syllable followed by two weak stresses or syllables.
Two More Symbols: The Missing Syllable
Finally, a less common but equally useful symbol designates a missing syllable.
It is useful when discussing variant lines, such as the following from my blank verse poem My Bridge is Like a Rainbow:
The symbol indicates a missing syllable in an otherwise fully Iambic line. The line itself is called a headless line, but more on that in my next post.
The next post will deal with sorting out variation in the Iambic Pentameter line – how they can be read, how to know, and if you can know.
Other Symbols, Other Systems
It’s worth noting that there are other systems and symbols used to denote stress patterns in English Language Poetry. The one that I’ve presented here is the most universally used and recognized. There may be slight differences. For instance, Lewis Turco, in his book The Book of Forms, doesn’t use the intermediate symbol that I provided above – he uses a dot instead.
Symbol used for Intermediate Stress in Lewis Turco’s The Book of Forms.
Besides the difference in this one symbol, however, Turco uses the same basic system I have been describing. You may run across other symbols or, if you are researching this as a part of a class, you may have an instructor that prefers one symbol over another. All that matters is that you understand the basic ideas that these symbols represent. The symbols themselves are secondary.
Beyond this point, the fights between metrists can get ugly. There is no end to the precision to which some metrists aspire. Some detest the basic system of scansion described above. Some dispense with the symbols altogether and opt to typographically move individual words up or down (in relation to each other) according to how much stress they believe each word should receive. My own view is that these systems of scansion lose sight of their original purpose. They reflect a sort of obsessiveness that has more to do with linquistics than with poetry.
- Note: There are critics & poets who deny that meter “exists”. I tend to group them with flat-earthers and moon landing denialists. Dan Schneider, of Cosmoetica, is one of them. If you’re curious to read my response to some of his writing, read Critiquing the Critic: Is Meter Real.
(This is the short form, for a slightly more detailed description, try Wikipedia.)
Feel free to comment if you have questions or suggestions.
this is a very informational artical
THANK YOU
Thanks Allen,
It’s nice to hear from a reader.
You have done such a thorough job of explaining the basics. Thanks. The phrase Iambic Pentameter is, itself, nicely poetic.
Quite a patient and lucid presentation. Top shelf!
I’ll keep returning for articles such these.
Thanks Joseph.
Comments like yours make the effort worthwhile.
This is very helpful. I am a student and really struggling with this form of poetry. Thanks for the help – I hope I can figure it out!
Móna
Mona,
If there’s any information that confuses you or that you would like to see added, please let me know. The best improvements I can make are those suggested by my readers. :-)
Patrick
This explains everything thoroughly.I’m absolutely sure that if I, as an eighth grader, can get it anyone can. Thanks!
I’m glad to hear that! As always, your comment makes writing these worthwhile.
Thank you for such a well written explanation of iambic pentameter. I read somewhere that the iambic pentameter is also called the ‘divine’ meter. Do you have any info on that? Please share with us if you do. Thanks.
Pingback: WB Yeats ❧ Sailing to Byzantium « PoemShape
Pingback: One Stop Poetry Form – Triolet by guest host Shan Hendry | One Stop Poetry – Where Poets, Writers & Artists Meet…
Pingback: A Musical Triolet « Words Asunder
Do you know how you recognise it when its written down? Because surely it’s down to interperatation which words you stress and don’t, so how do you know that your not just using Iambic pentameter to something that was not meant to contain it? or is it up to the read or actor to decide whether ot not to add the use of Iambic pentameter-or is it that it was simply sound odd if you added Iambic pentmeter to everything?
//Do you know how you recognise it when its written down? Because surely it’s down to interperatation…//
No, it’s absolutely not a matter of interpretation. English, like other European languages, is an accentual language (unlike, say, Chinese). This means that, as part of the way our language is spoken and communicated, we choose to emphasize some syllables more and some less. If you’re curious, I’ve had this argument with Dan Schneider and you can read the results here. You will find, if you research the subject, that linguistics during the past century, has “shown convincingly that many aspects of poetic form are merely extensions of natural processes already at work in language itself” – this from the Princeton Ecyclopedia of Poetry and Poetics. This is not to say that certain words might shift their ictus over the centuries, but they are the exception to the rule. I can’t think of any poetic passage which could be (or ever was) misidentified as Iambic Pentameter. In fact, there are some passages in Shakespeare which were wrongly written as prose, when they were obviously intended to be verse. Lastly, it’s not up to the reader or actor to decide if the given verse is Iambic Pentameter. That was decided by the poet when he or she wrote it. What is an interpretation matter are instances when one word could be emphasized rather than another, as in the line “To be or not to be, that is the question.” Does one emphasize ‘that’ or ‘is’?
Pingback: Quick Read ❧ Sidney’s Sonnet 64 « PoemShape
An excellent article!
Thanks John, just happened to be sitting here when your comment showed up. :-)
Pingback: Mother’s Day, Father’s Day…and Disciplining Your Poems | Hearth Bard
I have been working, almost half a decade running now, on adopting the celebrated names in the Bible into literary characters. So far, I have been able to develop twenty five plays from the rich hostorical account of the Bible, in collection of plays appropriately I have termed EDEN TO CALVRY; though after the trilogy of JESUS OF NAZARETH, not to exclude from stage, proceeding his death, the deeds of his followers, I attempted and included also ACTS OF THE APOSTLES. When I commenced the project, I was so chiefly concerned with executing the work, I gave no thought to attempt first study of the forms of metric lines. In fact, I was not aware there were such things. I had reckon with good study of the complete works of Shakespear and Milton, I would have at my disposal, the head of Medusa for pen to overcome any Crackon of a play I decide to develop. I even took on two Greek plays from the movies TROY and CLASH OF THE TITANS. I have the manuscripts. Lead merely by shere zeal, I carried on the work of transforming the notable sagas in the Bible into literary forms; and years into my performance met with surprise article on Shakespeare and ussual format of his lines. It never bordered me then. I continued my work, content with opinion that, insofar as my lines are ten syllables each, they are okay. Yet I felt something was missing. Though I improved considerably over the years, as can be noted when I compared my initial works and the later ones, I still felt I have to study the iambic pentameter if I might hope to be reckoned even as the least of the Elizabethan playwrights. With such agitations within, I decided to look for materials online and found your page. Once after protracted while, a dreamer saunters into the world: and, though he comes from the last place expected, he thinks it his duty to advance the next step on behalf of all men from where last the great predecessor stopped. My curse is that, I am such dreamer; and, that “fool who rush in where angels dare not tread.”But contending these years in my private world with the great bards of the Elizabethan age, I am sensing how my hand is gradually adjusting to the strength of some of their immortal names. I yet can not tell what is stress or unstress in English language; I have poor command even of English language, since all I speak or write, I merely do from experience and intuition, not from expertise. I need help, and from people like yourself. I will appreciate any support you may avail me. I will submit here later some lines for your scrutiny. Please, please, please,please, be not scared when you discover that I am actually from Nigeria, and a Nigerian, and corresponding from that shore. I write under this pen name. If my motives are questionable, a thousand and one ways I could have concealed my identity. I will send you some parts of my work to examine. Sometimes I fear me how Ralph Waldo emerson can predict everything about my come to last detail in most of his essays. I shudder thinking about how direct about myself sometimes he writes. “Supply, most kind gods! this defect in my address, in my form, in my fortunes, which puts me a little out of the ring: supply it, and let me be like the rest whom I admire; and on good terms with them.”CONSIDERATION Ralph Waldo Emerson. My prefered email contact: uranusgemini@gmail.com
Eve:
As each day summon by thirst,
To quench it I stroll to the flowing brook,
Plodding here by this tree prohibited from touch,
I do sense how particularly within its ambience
Soft carressing fingers of mild-tempered gust,
As if to entice me halt and tarry a while
In this same place, perceptibly fondle my skin.
Also, I have noted, exhuded here
From many spewing pores of this strange tree,
Like necter from flower, is surplus ooze of balm,
Which atmosphere here in heart of Eden
Has enrich with fragrance that to nostrils
Is distinctly piquant and appealing.
Many fowls of the air and ground-crawling creatures,
Captivated by it, shiftlessly loll about this place,
As presently this teem of them have done.
If honesty speaks, I now must admit
That like these creatures, of late I have become fond of
Slacking here my pace and idling in this vicinity.
In heart of admirer, close association
Is breeder of contempt; while estrangement
Or placing beyond reach by prohibition,
Nurishes appetite and intollerable
lustFor such, which pronounced forbidden, should disgust.
This forbidden tree in middle of Eden,
Howbeit a thing unconscious of existence,
Maintains here such a mysterious presence,
It comfounds opinion and attracts from view
Dread and awe mingled with admiration.
That it knows not itself, it is not shrewd,
Has no speculation or character,
Cannot devise or move like common beast,
Yet, in very middle of paradise,
Brags a haughty stand; and pass for sole thing
That can procure for human mortality.
For posing as emblem of life and death,
Indeed it should inspire in our bosom,
Shudder and fear neighboured to deep regard.
Henceforth, I shall advise heels to shun this place,
Ere repeated chance and growing count of visit
Invents fittest instance for temptation,
Through teasing sight of this forfended fruit,
Blind eye of my judgment, ensure I chew,
And accost that most to be rued fatal fall.
From ADAM AND EVE
Snake:
Is it not selfsame fruit,
That myself mere asp, lowest of earth’s creatures,
Long time ago did eat: and after delightsome meal,
As due reward for overcoming apprehension
And subjecting myself to the common test,
Among beasts alone was granted enlightenment?
God himself knows that who eats of this tree
Shall experience death merely of ignorance,
But shall awake to glorious life of secret knowledge;
And shall become like God, knowing good and bad.
If in thine heart against my submitted words,
The voice of caution urges undue misdoubt,
Examine evidence in my condition.
With beaming eyes gazing at mere serpent;
And with attentive ear, hearing from it speach,
Has thou unravel mystery behind it?
If though being human and heir to quiant thought,
As this instance shows, thou cannot avail
Proper answer to the marvel before thine eyes,
Should it not incite thee, if naught else does,
To leap over barriar of unnecessary fear;
And drag not feet about eating fruit of this tree
Ere thy partner man may chance to arrive;
And by me acquainted with this hidden secret,
As is his wont, take precedence over thee
To grab first knowledge that makes mere mortal god?
Eve:Prodigious sight it is
For mine eye to view serpent uttering words;
Yet even more strange is realization,
That here in Eden, serpent articulating thought
And boldly voicing sentiment, actually possess
Secret intelligence undivulged to satient man.
Is it really fruit of this forbidden tree
That beautiful thought wrought animate this beast?
Stand this serpent or otherwise God for truth?
His he friend of God or an adversary?
Is there such subsisting dispute here in paradise
That involvement of man craves to choose side,
As I do suspect is seething in covert rift
Between strange tongue of this snake and word of God?
The answers to all these, a thousand morrows,
Countless years and ages shall fritter away
Seeking redress from mankind: and this guiless earth
Shall ever begrudge ease till the mystery is solved.
Eve, why hesitate and later involve thy offspring
In conroversy over enlargement
Or not of human grave decision and will,
When even now, at risk of thy single soul,
Solution may come if thou dost dare pluck and chew?
(She plucks fruit from the tree and eats. Her eyes become open. She realizes she is naked and hides behind the tree. Enter Adam.)
I will appreciate greatly any honest comment you render me with regard to the excepts I have pasted here for your view. As I have acknowledged, my understanding of metric lines is poor; and my execution wholly has relied on intuition. I want you comment about the lines; and if it is feasible, your assistance in getting me linked up with person or group that can help me with the twenty five plays. Though the verses, whether they be blank or free, is difficult for me to conjecture, yet express they not to considerable extent the minds of those characters as near as possible as we may think their true ones did in Eden? My aim is to bring upon the shelves of readers, in literary character, such notable names like David, Solomon, Moses, Abraham, Jesus and many others. I have all of these and many others who partook of intruiging events with them in twenty five manuscripts. As may be expected, some parts of the works may be most poorly rendered, yet their would be also others that would interest and entertain good verdict. I anxiously await your reply. Thanks.
Email. Sheathswordnazaritus@yahoo.com and uranusgemini@gmail.com.
Thanks for sending me some of your work. Unfortunately, I’m not your best audience.
The Bible bores me to tears. There are some beautiful passages in the King James translation, but it’s solely the language that compels me. In all honesty, I think those days are long past. What you propose to do isn’t all that different from the thousands of medieval mystery (or miracle plays) written prior to morality plays and the later Elizabethans. They were all plays drawn from passages in the Bible. You’re at least some 600 years late.
You might get some small recognition in some small circles.
The larger problem is that you simply can’t write like this. It’s dated. You throw in a few dusty touches here and there – the auxiliary do-form, the inverted grammar (even Miltonic inversions), the thee’s and thou’s — but it’s like trying to animate the dead. The culture and language from which this kind of poetry and language sprang is long gone. You’re not even writing blank verse, but a free verse affectation.
If you really want to compete with the Elizabethan poets and playwrights, you don’t do it by imitating their language but by imitating their ambition. The Elizabethans didn’t go about trying to imitate the drama of the Middle Ages or the verse forms of the 12th or 13th century (or the Angle Saxons for that matter). The days of mystery plays, cantatas and Biblical epics are behind us. Learn to elevate the language that is spoken today. Write about lives and characters that are — to us today — what the characters of the Bible were to the people of the Middle Ages.
Lastly, study the difference between writing poetically and writing poetry. Your verse is full of tired adjectives, adverbs and mannerisms. For example: “Cannot devise or move like common beast…” “Common” is a tired adjective we might expect from an Elizabethan writer sleep-walking his way through a given passage. It’s an antiquated commonplace — hackneyed. Your writing is full of similar mannerisms.
My advice is this: whether you decide to write free verse or blank verse, learn to work within a modern vernacular. You’re not living in the 16th century.
All that said, you clearly have tremendous talent and drive. Not everybody can write a pastiche like yours. There’s something there, you just have to pour it into the right bottle.