Closed and open form

Once again, the concepts are simple enough that no lecture is included on this page.

Form is the way poems are put together. Do they follow a fixed format, with regular rhythm and rhyme? Notice the pattern in this old poem by Robert Herrick, in which he uses lofty language but a sexy subtext to describe his reaction to his lover's clothing:

Whenas in silks my Julia goes
Then, then, methinks, how sweetly flows
The liquifaction of her clothes.

Next, when I cast mine eyes, and see
That brave vibration, each way free,
O, how that glittering taketh me!

Or do the lines go their own way, following no particular pattern, as Sharon Olds' poems do? Here's the first part of "Rite of Passage":

As the guests arrive at my son's party
they gather in the living room--
short men, men in first grade
with smooth jaws and chins.
Hands in pockets, they stand around
jostling, jockeying for place, small fights
breaking out and calming. One says to another
How old are you? Six. I'm seven. So?

The first poem is in closed form. That's the term for a poem that has a regular rhythm and a predictable rhyme scheme. The second, as you have no doubt already concluded, is an open form poem. It does have rhythm, but it's not regular. And it doesn't rhyme at all.

So what?
What difference does form make? A lot. A rule of thumb is that "form should follow function," whether we're talking about furniture or cars or poems. You wouldn't expect a sports cars to have a big clunky body. Its form--sleek and streamlined--follows its function, or purpose: going fast and looking good. Similarly, a poem should be put together in the best way to convey its message.

It is true that before, say, 1900, most poems had closed form, and that today, many poets prefer open form. But there's no rule. Just keep looking for the answers to the same old question: how does each aspect of the poem help fulfill its purpose?