All you poets who know it, don’t blow it

Enough about movies for the moment. I received this e-mail this morning from someone wanting to know more about the 8th Annual Spokesman-Review Limericks Contest .

Dear Dan,

I’m a bit confused about the limerick form, having seen it in two ways. The first is as you demonstrated today (There was a young lady from Kent).

The second is demonstrated in the two below (the first one – so clever – is from “All About Limericks” by Nancy Ness , Digital Passions Poetry Magazine.
The second is from this Web site .

so-you-WANT/to-know-HOW/to-write-LIM/ricks,
and-you-THINK/i-can-SHOW/you-some-QUICK/tricks
you-can-ASK/all-you-MIGHT
but-your-OWN/you-can-WRITE
for-there-REAL/ly-are-NO/sec-ret-GIM/micks!!

There once was a miser named Clarence
Who simonized both of his parents;
“The initial expense,”
He remarked, “is immense.”
But it saves on the wearance and tearance.”

So, is there one form or two? Frankly, I’m confused and curious. I sent in one (for the contest) about Sacajawea modeled on the form of the two above. But I’ve also written others based on form one.

Like to clarify? I always like to learn.

– Deborah Chan

Nancy: You can go to 15 different sites and get 15 different definitions. Here’s how the online version of The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition defines the form:

“Lim-er-ick (n.) A light humorous, nonsensical, or bawdy verse of five anapestic lines usually with the rhyme scheme aabba.”

It goes on to define an anapest as, “1, A metrical foot composed of two short syllables followed by one long one, as in the word seventeen.”

“2, A line of verse using this meter; for example, ‘Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the house.’ ”

So, that’s the form that I think we should work with. However, as I have always said, strict adherence to form doesn’t mean as much as cleverness.

Hope this helps.

– Dan Webster