Some people believe poetry shouldn't be punctuated and others are still taught to put a comma after every new line. So where is the balance? What does one - especially one new or growing in poetry - do? Well, that's simple: a poet must punctuate with purpose!

In order to punctuate with purpose, however, a poet must understand two things: what she wants to achieve with the poem and what a piece of punctuation can achieve in a poem. This means a poet must understand more than the common rules of punctuation; she must know the effect that certain punctuation points can have on a reader or in a text.

This overview tackles punctuation in poetry from a practical standpoint, but it's important to note that while there are "rules" for punctuation, and while there are even some "rules" for poetry, there are no set-in-stone conventional rules for punctuation in poetry.  There are schools of thought, and linguistic philosophy runs amuck, but there is nothing definitive to say "This is right!" or "This is wrong!"  

With that in mind, please approach the following as a general guide for making better decisions about writing.

Remember: real writing doesn't begin until you stop writing from instinct and start making decisions.


To Punctuate, or Not to Punctuate: that is the Question


No Punctuation

When first learning to perform Shakespeare, many students are (or should be) introduced to the concept of end-stopped lines and run-on lines.  A good teacher will explain that his sonnets and plays, though often (but not always) bound by meter, are meant to be acted and understood by following the punctuation - not (necessarily) the line breaks or rhyme schemes.  It's a difficult concept to grasp, when beginning to read Shakespeare aloud, because the end of a line seems like a great place to pause or take a breath; it feels natural, based on the way we read prose.

The concept works like this: an end-stopped line is a line where there is a punctuation mark or point at the end.  When reading these lines, the actor or student should pause with the punctuation - some sort of "stop" at the end - before moving on to reading or performing the next line.

A run-on line is, then, a line that "runs on" into the next line because there is no punctuation available, at the end, to invite a deliberate pause.  These are the lines that, despite a natural instinct or inclination to pause at the line's end, are asking the reader or actor to keep reading and wait to pause until she finds the next point of punctuation (sometimes, but not always, in the middle of the following line).

In fact, it is the "run-on line" that poets are referring to, or should be referring to, when they discuss the concept of enjambment - a word thrown around on the internet all too often.  Enjambment, in poetry, does not just mean "the end of a line," which is how many people tend to use it anymore; it actually refers to the "line break," or the point where the phrase, clause, thought or sentence is broken up - not by punctuation - but by the actual end of the line, with the thought being continued in the line or lines following it, until it comes to a marked (punctuated) end.  

That's a lot of technical jargon, I know.  All you really need to know is that some lines end due to punctuation, in which the poet is asking the reader to stop or pause, and some lines continue, without pause, breaking up what's being said and carrying it on through multiple lines.  When reading the lines that do not have punctuation at the end, the reader should not pause or stop; she should simply continue reading until the next punctuation point.

So why all this information about reading Shakespeare and grasping poetic terms?  I've found in teaching, especially when it comes to helping students find their own path to punctuation, that remembering the purpose of end-stopped and run-on lines can lead to better-informed decisions about where and why to punctuate poetry.  It's true that not every poem needs punctuation, and it's also true that not every line needs punctuation, but every now and then a punctuation mark is necessary to help the reader read the lines as intended or, more importantly, understand what's being actually said.

Let's take an example from the poem, Ode to Hair, by mintleaves:

Afternoon shines on your mask
Once dark bark-colored
Now masquerading as blond
Credit the bleach
For helping you fit in
With a thousand fake smiles
At a sweet sixteen

These lines, but for a hyphen, are not punctuated.  Were we to read them as end-stopped and run-on lines (again, just as an exercise and not because all poetry must be read that way), we'd find several ideas that "run on" into other ideas, much like you'd have with a run-on sentence in prose (where more than one complete thought is stated between the beginning capital of the sentence and its end punctuation).

Here is one thought I get out of the above stanza:

Afternoon shines on your mask,
Once dark bark-colored,
Now masquerading as blond.

I've added a lot of punctuation to these lines, which isn't always a great thing to do, to show how this poet is using the enjambment: the lines are being broken, here, to indicate a pause.  The trouble is that a broken line is meant to emphasize something, or to add suspense, etc.; it is not meant to ask the reader to pause.  

There is a reason for this, too.  

Notice that I added a comma after the first two lines, but I added a period after the third line.  I think we can all agree that a period and a comma are not the same thing; one is asking the reader to take a minor pause or small breath, and the other is asking the reader to stop completely (two breaths or beats in traditional acting) before moving on to the next idea.  

A line break cannot represent, all by itself, the difference between a pause and a stop.  It can sometimes indicate a pause or insert a brief one; it can sometimes, depending on context, use, and situation, represent an end or stop.  However, when the only tool you are using to ask your reader to pause is a line break, it cannot do the job of a period and a comma simultaneously.  It needs a little help.  

Sometimes that help can come when incorporating capital letters to indicate the stop and start of important thoughts but, when you choose to capitalize every line such as we see in the above poem (a perfectly acceptable practice depending on the poem and poet's style), a reader cannot rely on those capital letters to show new thoughts, either, and is still in need of help.  

It's the poet's job to provide that help.

Why the period after "blond" you may be asking?  Well, let's look at the lines again:

Now masquerading as blond.
Credit the bleach
For helping you fit in
With a thousand fake smiles
At a sweet sixteen

Notice that I would not choose to punctuate the last four lines of this stanza.  Here, there is no need for a pause, either in between or at the end of any of the lines.  One could argue for a period after "sixteen", and I wouldn't dismiss it entirely, but it would depend on the poet's intention with the next stanza, which begins:

At a sweet sixteen

Evening kisses what is left of you
Now shorter with chemical burns

This is where punctuation can really become important to clarifying author's intent.  Should this read:

At a sweet sixteen

Evening kisses what is left of you,
Now shorter with chemical burns.

Or should it read:

With a thousand fake smiles
At a sweet sixteen.

Evening kisses what is left of you,
Now shorter with chemical burns.

A stanza can represent a natural pause for the simple reason that, when reading, it takes you a little bit longer to jump down two lines of space than it does to move from one line directly into another.  It's logistics, believe it or not.  And much like some poets use enjambment to carry thoughts over into new lines, sometimes poets carry thoughts from stanza to stanza as well.  In Ode to Hair, it's difficult to know, without the help of some punctuation, which "reading" the author intends between these two stanzas.

What Now?

Punctuation is a very personal thing in poetry and, I daresay, prose.  However, when writing a poem, it's important to understand that punctuation is there to help, not to hurt.  It's not necessary in between or at the end of every single line, in most cases, and it's even possible to write a poem without one punctuation point and still keep it effective.  

That said, there are times when line breaks and capital letters simply cannot do the job of a well-placed period, comma, or other mark - and I see many examples of this in the above poem.  In keeping with the idea of end-stopped and run-on lines, I'd look for other places in the poem to insert a mark or two - perhaps not as heavily as I did above, but at least to draw emphasis or closure to images and areas where it'd be most helpful or significant to the intended meaning.

_{I do realize this is a revision, and I can see where the poem would have been heavily punctuated before.  I wouldn't go crazy with the punctuation, now, but I do think removing all of it is preventing the reader from getting the full effect of your words.}

Let's look at another poem that chooses to use very little punctuation only, in phillGH's poem, diminished abyss :proofread:, we see no capital letters as compared to mintleaves's decision to use capitals at the beginning of every line.  In other words: the two "capital" extremes.

the piano keys are playing yet no one is at the chair
crawling the halls is a man of button-eyes and wool hair
the sound draws the broken man near
he throws open the door yet there is no fear

the hands on the clock keep turning
yet somehow the fire keeps burning
walking the halls he degrades into time
ruining the place with his satin-belted prime

and so the stone killed the rat
and the destroyer laughed and grew fat
yet it's love that killed him
he has no one to call his little 'slim'
no one knew and no thought
his head is stuffed and lies and moths

Here, the author chose not to use punctuation because it was deemed unimportant or unnecessary.  Again, this can be the case in some poems, but is it the case here?  Looking at the first two lines, and in keeping up with the end-stopped and run-on practicality, we have:

the piano keys are playing yet no one is at the chair

and

crawling the halls is a man of button-eyes and wool hair

These are two complete thoughts that follow one another with nothing to separate them except the end of the line.  Were we to read them straight through, as in the case of run-on lines, they'd jumble together much like what occurred in the previous poem.  Whereas before we had all capital letters and therefore couldn't see the stops and starts, here we have all lowercase letters and seem to run into the same problem.  Sure, a sophisticated reader can create her own pause, but how much, as a writer, do you want to leave up to the reader?  If you leave too much to the reader, you might as well not write at all!

Remember: a line break, by itself, cannot represent the difference between a small pause and a complete stop.  

Let's assume, for a moment, that each line represents a complete thought and, therefore, the enjambment is serving the purpose of a period (sometimes acceptable).  This means we are still missing the smaller, and now more significant, pauses a comma can provide.  Observe:

the piano keys are playing, yet no one is at the chair (.)
crawling the halls is a man of button-eyes and wool hair (.)
the sound draws the broken man near (.)
he throws open the door, yet there is no fear (.)

If we work with the assumption that the end of every line is a period - that it intends a period-like stop or pause - then we will read this poem mechanically, especially without the inserted commas.  

Added to this is the rhyme scheme, which seems to reinforce the idea that each line is a complete thought unto itself - until you realize that it's simply couplets (two lines that rhyme back-to-back) which, on their own, would indicate that one complete subject or thought is addressed two lines at a time, not one line at a time.  That wouldn't work for the first two lines, because there are two separate subjects being addressed: the piano keys and the man of button-eyes.  We're simply left reading one-line stories that follow one another, which makes us wonder why this rhyme scheme at all - and what pause or stop to use.

Again, when using the end of a line to represent punctuation, it often cannot accomplish the job without help - at least not in a way that represents the sophistication of our language and speech.  Here, the rhyme scheme might be helping to make those line breaks significant stops, but does the theory of "line break = period" work for the next stanza?

the hands on the clock keep turning
yet somehow the fire keeps burning
walking the halls he degrades into time
ruining the place with his satin-belted prime

The short answer is no.  At first glance, we can continue to observe the long period stop/pause at the end of each line, but words like "yet" at the beginning of a line and the fragment beginning with "ruining" tells us that this stanza is not to be read in the exact same way as the stanza that comes before it.  In other words, the use of the line ends in this poem is inconsistent.

The problem with being inconsistent is that you are often keeping your reader guessing - and not in a good way.  A reader shouldn't have to adjust how she is reading each stanza, especially in a longer poem, on her own.  If the poet is going to change the "rules" from stanza to stanza, then it is the poet's responsibility to indicate this change in some way.  The second stanza, on a technical basis only, reads:

the hands on the clock keep turning,
yet somehow the fire keeps burning.
walking the halls he degrades into time,
ruining the place with his satin-belted prime.

versus

the hands on the clock keep turning (.)
yet somehow the fire keeps burning (.)
walking the halls he degrades into time (.)
ruining the place with his satin-belted prime (.)

Read the above examples using a two-beat pause for each period and a half-beat pause for each comma.  In other words, count to "two" when you see a period and wait a half-second with each comma.

Both readings can work, but one flows differently than the other.  The first reads swiftly in places, with an appropriate pause between two separate ideas (i.e. the rhyme scheme is working effectively for this stanza, in that sense); the second is, again, very mechanical.  An author might, then, say that he or she intended the first reading - obviously - but, unfortunately, due to no punctuation and a reinforced rhyme scheme, it's not actually obvious how to read or approach these lines.

Moving on, we see that the third stanza changes some of what was established in the previous two, and with little warning:

and so the stone killed the rat
and the destroyer laughed and grew fat
yet it's love that killed him
he has no one to call his little 'slim'
no one knew and no thought
his head is stuffed and lies and moths

Again, the rhyme scheme and the line ends are trying to carry the (lack of) punctuation, but is it effective?  We start to see a problem with "yet" in the third line.  The word "yet" indicates a change of pace all on its own - a switch in directions; it's a conjunction that asks us to pause and consider something else. But if the poet has told us to read the end of each line as a period, then we are not giving that transition the respect it's due.

Let's try something different:

and so the stone killed the rat,
and the destroyer laughed and grew fat.
yet it's love that killed him:
he has no one to call his little 'slim'
no one knew and no thought -
his head is stuffed and lies and moths

Especially with the last lines of the stanza, where the meaning is not immediately clear, a little punctuation could help the reader along.  Please note, however, that the punctuation I used above is not the only option for this poem.  Much like the previous poem, a poet has to determine what he means and how to convey that to the reader.  Instead, this was my "best guess" as to what the poem was trying to say and how to better say it.  But do you really want it left up to your reader to guess that much?  Before you rush to answer, consider the fact that it's the poet's job to communicate the feeling or message effectively.  ;)


So what's the prognosis for this poem?  Apart from several couplets being reworked to represent the appropriate use of this particular rhyme scheme for this particular poem (one complete thought carried over two rhyming lines), I do feel as if this poem suffers from a lack of punctuation.  There are strong lines, and it's a fine story, but as it's currently written it reads like a bunch of rhyming one-liners and is not very effective.  In other words, punctuation is actually very important.


Punctuation-Ho!


Now that we've seen a few poems with little punctuation, let's look at a poem with a lot of punctuation.  In No One Knows... by Imperial-Obsession, we see a similar rhyme scheme as that used by phillGH, but we also see punctuation at the end of every line:

I've noticed as I lie in bed, awake,
And look beyond the glass for old-time's sake,
My eyes focus on the nighttime sky
To count falling stars as they shoot by.

Their little cries all reach my ears--
No one knows they're dying, here...
And every night I watch and cry
As more of those dying stars pass by.

No one knows the stars are dying,
No one knows, and no one's trying;
No one knows they've lost their worth
As one by one they fall to Earth.

And we even see punctuation at the beginning of some lines, here:

Though these stars have watched their time unfurl,
We find we're still looking for our place in the world.
And even as they fall, we humans will rise...
...Despite the heaven's unyielding sighs.

And here:

Pray it stays there with all your might--

--For a reason to smile when you look outside,

Beyond that, this poem uses more than just a comma and period; it's a punctuation smorgasbord!  Which brings up a great point - and an area of confusion for many poetry students.  What does each mark actually do?


Commas


You can read a very brief, bare bones guide in this journal, but it's often better to see these things in action.  Most people know that a comma represents a brief pause - even if they are not sure exactly where the comma goes - and they also know what the major points of end punctuation do (like the period, exclamation point, or question mark).  So let's look at some of the commas in Imperial-Obsession's poem and see if we can figure the little bugger out.

I've noticed as I lie in bed, awake,
And look beyond the glass for old-time's sake,
My eyes focus on the nighttime sky

First things first: each of the three commas in the first two lines are being used correctly.  That doesn't mean that they are necessary, it simply means that, based on the rules of punctuation, they are correct.

One way to know if you need a comma is to look at what's around the word or phrase in question.  If we took out the word "awake" in the first line, would the first part of the line still make sense?  Examine it: "I've noticed as I lie in bed,"  Yes, it would still make sense.  However, the poet chooses to further clarify that the speaker is lying in bed awake when s/he is noticing something.  Because the sentence doesn't need the "awake" to make sense, it is correct to include the comma before and after the word.  Think of those commas as hooks that you can use to lift the unnecessary word out of the sentence or line.

In a similar way, "And look beyond the glass for old-time's sake," is also unnecessary for the sentence to make sense.  Look again: "I've noticed as I lie in bed, my eyes focus on the nighttime sky."  Yup, it sure does seem to make sense without L2 to me!  This means the same guidelines we used above apply to the entire statement: you can put commas around the statement because, were it completely removed, everything would still make sense.

Notice, however, this doesn't say the poem would be better without the word or phrase - and also notice that we're emphasizing the correct usage right now and little else.  What we have to ask, once we decide that the commas are technically correct, is whether or not they are completely necessary to the poem.  So, are they?

I've noticed as I lie in bed, awake,
And look beyond the glass for old-time's sake,
My eyes focus on the nighttime sky

Here, the commas offsetting or surrounding, "awake" are not necessary.  It comes down to the poet's personal taste.  I would agree, however, that the comma after "sake" is needed.

Let's take another comma:

No one knows the stars are dying,
No one knows, and no one's trying;

The is one thing a comma cannot do alone - under any circumstances - is separate one complete thought from another.  That is the job of end punctuation (period, question mark, exclamation point) or the semicolon (;).  In looking at the lines above, the comma after "dying" is acting as the separation between two complete thoughts: "No one knows the stars are dying" and "No one knows, and no one's trying."  In this regard, the comma after dying is incorrect.  It should be either a period or a semicolon.  (No worries: we'll tackle semicolons soon.)

But wait!  I hear you say.  What about the next comma?  Isn't it doing the same thing?  The answer is no.  It is not doing the same thing as the first comma because it is not acting alone.  In the second line, the comma is getting help from a conjunction, that coordinating conjunction being "and", in order to connect the two complete thoughts.

The general rule for commas and coordinating conjunctions is that they must work together - and the comma should come before the coordinating conjunction in almost all cases - when connecting or coordinating two separate thoughts.  In this circumstance, the comma after "knows" is completely correct and, I daresay, necessary.

There's more!  Let's look at another comma:

Though these stars have watched their time unfurl,
We find we're still looking for our place in the world.

Once upon a time, there was a guideline running around that said if you used more than five words to introduce a point to a sentence, you needed to offset those first five-or-more words with a comma.  It's not a bad guideline, but it doesn't always work.  Why was it invented?  Well, it was to help people locate "subordinating conjunctions" at the beginning of sentences without knowing what a subordinating conjunction is or how it works.  

In the lines above, "Though" is a subordinating conjunction. This means that what comes after the "Though" statement is more important than the "Though" statement itself.  The "Though" statement is under, or subordinate to, what comes after it.  
In order to emphasize this different level of importance, and in keeping with the theme that commas help to surround phrases that aren't needed for a statment to make sense, we insert a comma after the less important statement to act as the calm before the more important storm so that the reader doesn't miss the important part in a gigantic jumble of words.

That was a mouthful, right? The easiest way to know when to use a comma with a subordinating conjunction is just to start realizing when you're using those conjunctions.  If it seems like it's a whole mess of words, or one of the known conjunctions, or if there's an important point you don't want you reader to miss, err on the side of the comma: keep it in.  In the lines above, the comma after "unfurl" is both correct and necessary.

Want to see these same three uses in action in another poem?  Great!  videotape, by videotaped, also has correct comma usage down.  Observe:

sepia-toned memories of
you and me
play through my head,
distorted and grainy.

Here, again, we see a comma offsetting a part of the sentence that could technically be removed and leave a statement that still makes complete sense.  The comma after "head" is not only entirely appropriate, but it's also necessary in regards to the current line breaks.

But there's more!

i wish you would take the painting you left,
and take the last bit of you away.

Remember those coordinating conjunctions?  There's the "and" again and the comma before it - always before it - used correctly and placed in a great spot to convey meaning.

And, almost like providence, we even see subordinate conjunctions and introductory clauses, much like we saw with Imperial-Obsession's poem:

underneath the gilded-gold frame,
the lily-printed wallpaper is dark.

Again, the statement after the comma makes perfect sense standing alone - thus making the comma necessary and correct.

Had enough of commas?  Let's move on to something a bit more complicated!


Semicolons and Colons


We talked above about semicolons being one of the few punctuation marks that can properly separate two complete thoughts; it is also one of the most abused punctuation points, especially in poetry.  The tricky thing about poetry is that certain images, while technically fragments, clauses, or phrases, stand alone as a complete thoughts or impressions that the poet wants to convey.  

To understand the semicolon, then, we first have to understand that it has two specific purposes: to separate items in a complicated list and to separate two complete-but-connected thoughts.  It should never separate an incomplete thought from a complete thought or an incomplete thought from an incomplete thought and, if any other piece of punctuation would work just as well or better, a semicolon should not be used.

So how does that translate into poetry?  Well, let's take Parabola by infrangiblegreen:

Autumn smoke curves achingly up,
towards distant cloud wisps.
Wood sparse and damp;
there's only smoke without the fire.

_{Before tackling the semicolon, let's examine that first comma after "up" - is it necessary?  Technically speaking, the line could do without that comma; my advice would be to remove it.}

In infrangiblegreen's example, we see the problem alluded to earlier: here is an image that seems to stand alone ("Wood sparse and damp") as a thought, but which is, technically, a fragment.  The semicolon is followed by a complete thought ("there's only smoke without fire"), but what should be done with the first part?  Is the semicolon correct?

The better question to ask is whether or not it's appropriate.  Remember, there are not "set rules" for punctuation in poetry.  It's important to recall that a semicolon should only be used if there is no other punctuation point that would or could be considered more appropriate.  Unfortunately, in this example, there is a punctuation mark that would be more appropriate.  It's called the colon.

One use of a colon is to separate an incomplete thought from a complete thought (or vice versa), such as we see here.  The complete thought that follows the colon is supposed to offer insight and clarification about the incomplete thought that comes before the mark, as it does in this case.  In this instance, I'd approach the stanza thus:

Autumn smoke curves achingly up
towards distant cloud wisps.
Wood sparse and damp:
there's only smoke without the fire.

For an example of a well-placed colon, let's take a moment to look at the opening lines of this same poem:

Angles
and austere equations
plotted on nature's paper:
white flesh and perpendicular veins beneath
grey-on-gold leaves biting into branches slicing
into desiccated trunks carving into tired earth digging into--
smoke.

One of the uses of the colon is to represent an inviting pause - the sort of pause that asks the reader to continue reading on a quest for clarification or further elaboration/description about the opening statement.  That is exactly what we get here.  

_{That said, the lines blend and bleed together in giant gasps of breath, with no relief between the colon and the dash - which leads to a quick period.  If we're recalling comma uses, I might suggest the following:}

Angles
and austere equations
plotted on nature's paper:
white flesh and perpendicular veins beneath
grey-on-gold leaves biting into branches, slicing
into desiccated trunks, carving into tired earth, digging into--
smoke.

At first glance it appears I've added quite a few commas - perhaps too many - but broken up this way it makes the poem, on a practical level, easier to read and digest.  When considering the enjambment (which makes a fine use of emphasizing the final words of the line and letting the lines stand alone - as well as fitting into the poem as whole), and when noticing that each line tends to get longer as the stanza continues, the commas separating items in a list (which is what this, technically, is) provide much-needed relief to a reader trying to experince the imagery.  

The good thing is that the commas are hidden inside the lines, instead of standing out at the end, and so they do not distract as much from poem's formatting or structure.  Sometimes enjambment is made more effective by allowing the possibility to hide punctuation that would otherwise stick out.

Another fine example of colon use, if we can take a step back, is found in the opening lines of GaioumonBatou's poem, Lines:

The rains have come:
oak branches bend, weighed
down by soggy leaves intent on
falling, and he watches them through
two layers of glass, both refracting clouds.

Again, we see the descriptions following the colon emphasize, enhance and further clarify what came before the colon. Again, we are invited to read on in order to discover more.  This also represents a major difference between the semicolon and the colon: the semicolon implies a connection between what comes before the semicolon and what comes after it.  The colon clarifies and elaborates on the connection between what comes before and after the mark.

But let's return for a moment to the semicolon, as we've yet to see it used effectively.  GaioumonBatou attempts to use one later in his poem:

limp onto his bed. Outside, showers;
he will sleep well tonight.

What do we have here?  Just that terribly confusing and all-too-common situation again where the image seems to stand alone as a complete thought but, structurally, it represents a fragment.  It really is a tricky decision to make in poetry - how to punctuate lines like this - and it will eventually boil down to personal preferences.  However, in keeping with the rough guidelines we've been building, let's see if there are any other punctuation points that might be used in the semicolon's place.

limp onto his bed. Outside, showers:
he will sleep well tonight.

Again, the colon would work just as well here - if not better - than the semicolon.  Considering, too, that the colon is already used effectively in the beginning of the poem, it draws a fine parrallel: both are used when discussing rain, etc.  

I think of colons as a deep breath before a revelation, and I often read them that way.  I know, when I see a colon, that what comes after it should be profound or illuminating.  By comparison, when I see a semicolon, I begin looking for connections between two developed ideas, and I rush to find those connections because the pause I take for a semicolon is never, and should never be, as long as the pause given to a colon.  

In other words, the colon is asking you to pause for a more dramatic effect because it's about to deliver a punchline or point of clarification - something that works very well for the end of this poem - and the semicolon is simply asking you to pause for a brief moment before moving on.

We see in inspiredimperfection's poem  a similar example where the semicolon, as it's being used, could be replaced with a more appropriate punctuation mark.

This morning, I lean over the sink
eyes half closed, dreams
undissolved;
waiting for that familiar reflection--

If we look at the way we've been using commas - namely to offset various words or phrases - we might be able to punctuate the above lines like so:

This morning I lean over the sink,
eyes half closed, dreams
undissolved,
waiting for that familiar reflection--

On the basis of technicality alone, the semicolon after "undissolved" did not separate two complete thoughts; instead, it acted as a buffer or pause between the descriptions ("eyes half closed" and "dreams undissolved") and the end of the action ("lean over the sink...waiting").  A comma is the most appropriate way to represent such a buffer or pause because, again, these are statements that can be removed from the poem and still leave something behind that makes sense.

Let me reiterate that this does not mean the lines should be removed, only that they could be - on the basis of practical punctuation.  I should also note that I removed the first comma after "This morning" not because it was incorrect, but because it seemed like comma overkill.

However, as mentioned above, too much end punctuation (or too much punctuation of the same kind) can often be distracting.  Are there ways around this?  Absolutely!  Enjambment can play a large role, as hinted at above, in helping to hide or place punctuation, as can experimenting with the lesser-used punctuation like dashes, colons, and semicolons.  

This morning, I lean over the sink -
eyes half closed, dreams
undissolved -
waiting for that familiar reflection.
Behind me, the shampoo on the wall
squints into recognition;
together we greet the mirror,
half empty.

Aha!  With a little experimenting, we start to see a spot where a semicolon might be of some use.  (Ignore the dashes right now; we'll get to them in a minute.)  Just as too many commas can be distracting, so, too, can too many periods.  However, there are times when we have complete thoughts begging for a separation but still not ready for the "full stop" - thoughts that are connected, that are working together to build one image instead of two images working together to build one idea (such as you see with a colon).  This is where the semicolon comes in.  

When used with discretion, and used properly, a semicolon can act as a subtle-but-necessary pause between two complete, connected ideas.  It's not something you want to drop down between every sentence a la Charles Dickens - especially in poetry - but a well-placed semicolon can scream sophistication.


The Dash


In brytning's poem, Punctuating with Purpose, we see quite a few colons being used.  However, much like the semicolon, if another punctuation mark could easily take the colon's place, the colon shouldn't be used.  We find an example of this right away:

like so many stars shattered
on a single night:
the night I made my new bed
dry.

In the above lines, the pause needed between "night" and "the night" is not a revelatory pause or an inviting pause; it's a pause for shock value.  It should be dramatic, sure, but it's implying a connection between the image and the event, not clarifying the connection or elaborating on it.  This means we can look to the semicolon, but then we see that these are two incomplete thoughts; therefore, a semicolon just wouldn't work to connect them.  What, then, is left?

This brings us to the dash.  Often referred to as a "super-comma", the dash is another punctuation mark that should only be used if nothing else seems appropriate.  This means it should be used sparingly, though there are some who definitely like to go "dash happy" and drop them just about everywhere.  As with al punctuation in poetry, a little discretion and a quest for subtlety goes a long way.

So what does the dash do?  Well, one thing a dash can do is show a break in thought or a shift in tone - a changed direction.  It can also offset parenthetical thoughts (or thoughts you'd be able to put in parentheses) and "afterthoughts" or thoughts you're adding to a statement or sentence at the very end to bring clarity or to elaborate on something further.

One example of the dash being used to offset a parenthetical statement occurs in the suggested edit to inspiredimperfection's poem:

This morning, I lean over the sink -
eyes half closed, dreams
undissolved -
waiting for that familiar reflection.

The commas would've been too weak or too much and the semicolon just wouldn't have worked, but the dashes really help the lines stand out and leave their impression.

Indeed, the dash is typically introduced to a poem (or in prose) when a period will make too strong a statement, but a comma just isn't enough.  In truth, a dash can do the job of any number of punctuation points, such as parentheses or colons or commas or periods, which is why it should be saved for significant moments to avoid overuse and abuse.

It's the shift, however, that's most important to the dash.  There are many ways to use it, sure, but few come off more effective in poetry than a single dash to show a switched direction.  Returning to brytning's poem:

like so many stars shattered
on a single night -
the night I made my new bed
dry.

There is a clear shift here - a clear change in direction and tone - that the colon just wasn't doing justice to.  Nothing is further explained, as we stated above, and the thoughts are incomplete, but a comma would've made the connection and the implication too quick and too weak.  The dash achieves the dramatic effect and creates the connection between image and idea without having to introduce or abuse the colon and semicolon.

There's another place in brytning's poem where a colon could be replaced by a dash - and for several reasons:

dry then: a lie.
dry since: sometimes
(depending on the condition of my eyes).

The first colon is used correctly, and it works well with the overall structure of the poem.  However, two colons so very close to one another are terribly distracting and, in many ways, overkill.  Also, the first use with "a lie" brings closure - helps achieve and make a statement.  The second use after "sometimes" seems to trail off into other ideas (there's even a parenthetical phrase being used) instead of really bringing closure.  Because of this, the colon is inappropriate.  The reader has received no clarity and, in truth, little elaboration.  

And yet, the practical idea of the pause is very similar to the pause the poet's going for in the first line.  This makes it a perfect place to try that dash, especially since the "sometimes" feels like an afterthought:

dry then: a lie.
dry since - sometimes
(depending on the condition of my eyes).

A reader can almost picture the actions accompanying the colon versus the dash, were this being read aloud or performed, and it's a great example of how punctuation can help a poet achieve a particular tone.

However, brytning does make very good use of the colon in other places, so let's review them:
Here:

things that actually happened,
and things that didn't.
things I wish I could forget,
and things I desperately cling to
for some semblance of meaning.
meaning:
I'm lonely.

This example is probably one of the most traditional and correct uses for the colon, whether in poetry or prose.  It's used to clarify and further extended the meaning of something, such as you'd see before a dictionary definition.

heat
and battle:
please let me forget the particulars
and remember just enough
to keep myself from mistakes.

Again, we see an introductory phrase or image ("heat and battle") further explained after the colon - a very appropriate use, and one of the most common in poetry.

It's important to not that there are times when a colon's use can be rendered redundant by the words around it, and we witness this at the end of brytning's poem:

it isn't real.
just keep telling yourself that:
it's.
not.
real.

The colon actually implies, includes, or presupposes the "that," so when you include the word "that" it often makes the colon unnecessary.  In this poem, were I to suggest an edit, I would remove "that" and keep the colon. I believe the punctuation achieves a more dramatic effect than the word alone, but I believe the colon is overkill with the word included.

But let's return to dashes!  Nefex, in the poem I Have My Receipt, introduces a dash in the very beginning:

Hello there, I'm just returning this--
Yes, I bought this heart
around the time of my conception,
when it was shining and new,

You can see that the dash represents two things here: a cut-off thought, such as one might get in dialogue, and a shift in direction or approach on the speaker's part.  In other words, it's used effectively.  There are few punctuation points that could achieve what the dash achieves here, save the ellipsis.

However, in using the dash, we do want to keep in mind that it should be seen sparingly and, as always, should not replace more appropriate punctuation.  Let's examine the following:

It fizzled like some cheap contraption,
and ate my mind with the given time--
I convulsed there in my electric chair,
ensnared by the thoughts it gave:

Believe it or not, this would be the perfect opportunity for a semicolon!  The break between "time" and "I" shows, not simply a shift in thought, but an entirely separate-yet-connected thought ("I fizzled..and ate" to "I convulsed...ensnared").  Whereas before the dash was showing us the appropriate pause and the changed direction, here we're making a brief pause to appreciate the implication behind the two related ideas.  Observe:

It fizzled like some cheap contraption,
and ate my mind with the given time;
I convulsed there in my electric chair,
ensnared by the thoughts it gave:

What we do see, however, are several lines full of similar end punctuation.  This is something that many poets loathe, especially when the rest of the poem is not as heavily punctuated, and often indicates an area where some revision may be necessary.  That said, I would still include the semicolon for these lines.

Let's look, one last time, at inspiredimperfection's original poem, which also incorporates dashes:

This morning, I lean over the sink
eyes half closed, dreams
undissolved;
waiting for that familiar reflection--
behind me, the shampoo on the wall
squints into recognition--
together we greet the mirror
half empty.

As noted in the suggested edits, I removed both dashes. In the first case we do see a shift, but it's not a shift in direction as much as it is a changed subject, image, or focal point.  In this way, I think the poem is best served by a period - the one punctuation mark meant to put an end to a complete thought before a new thought is introduced.

In the second case, it's much like what Nefex was doing with the dash after "time".  Here we have two complete thoughts, which are undoubtedly related.  The dash simply cannot tackle the role better played by the semicolon here because, as previously stated, it's one of the semicolon's traditional uses to connect two separate-but-related thoughts whereas the dash's primary purpose is to represent the shift we've been talking about.  We are not really shifting gears so much as drawing on relationships between images and descriptions and, when it comes to relationships, the semicolon is often a poet's best bet.


The Ellipsis

Let's take a moment to explore a bit more of Nefex's poem.  Above we noticed that the opening dash was well-placed, but I also mentioned that it was a role that might have been filled by the ellipsis.  This is only partially accurate.

The ellipsis should be used when the idea or thought is trailing off but could possibly be picked back up again.  We see this most often in dialogue, but a well-placed ellipsis can make its mark in poetry, too.  Is it working for Nefex?

But then the fizzle became a drizzle
of tears and new fears.
and soon I decided . . .
I'd like to return this heart--

It's broken.

Yes and no.  The ellipsis often looks out of place in poetry, and as it's such an involved punctuation mark (three periods and two spaces, making it five characters long where every other mark is only a single character), it's very hard to hide or miss - whether in the middle of a line or glaring at the end.  For this reason, which becomes mere aesthetics, many poets avoid the ellipsis when they can.

That doesn't mean, however, that a poet shouldn't use the ellipsis if it's appropriate and, sometimes, it is appropriate.  In the above example, the speaker is very obviously trailing off and, much like the ellipsis promises, the speaker picks the thought back up again in order to complete it.  What we want to ask, then, is whether or not the pause is necessary to the poem.  Do we really need such a long, trailing break to create the correct mood or tone?

Honestly, I don't think so.  When you have two dramatic pauses at the very end of a poem, one is usually in the poet's head and one is usually necessary.  In this case, I can read the poem and understand that there is a decision being made - an internal conflict occurring - between "decided" and "I'd" without needing the ellipsis to prove it to me.  The word "decided" coming after "soon" already does what the ellipsis is doing; it already sets the mood and the pace.  So when you stop me there and then stop me again in the very next line, I become impatient instead of anxious for the punchline.  In this example, I think the ellipsis should be removed, and I would not suggest anything in its place.  The words do enough talking all by themselves.

Which brings us back to No One Knows... by Imperial-Obsession - the poem with all that punctuation!

First things first, punctuation to begin a line in poetry is something that should be avoided if possible.  That doesn't mean it never happens, or that it couldn't happen, but most instances are unnecessary - especially when considering the words and punctuation surrounding the line.  Let's test the theory with 's work:

Though these stars have watched their time unfurl,
We find we're still looking for our place in the world.
And even as they fall, we humans will rise...
...Despite the heaven's unyielding sighs.

Have you ever heard someone tell you that one ellipsis (three dots) in plenty?  Has someone told you or pointed out to you before why more than three dots (such as going ........................) are inappropriate?  Well, in ending one line with the ellipsis, it is inappropriate and incorrect to begin the very next line with them.  It's like writing "......" in prose or, perhaps more visible, using two commas ,, or two colons :: to make a point.  You wouldn't use a double comma to represent a longer pause, so do not use double ellipses - either at the end of a line, beginning of a line, or anywhere else in writing poetry or prose.

To go a bit further, perhaps to avoid the confusion, let's examine the way the first ellipsis is being used.  Is it appropriate?  Actually, it's not.  The thought is not trailing off at all; there are no parts missing from it only to be picked back up later.  Instead, it's simply being continued - and pretty normally - on the next line.  If a dramatic pause is necessary here (I am not certain it is), it would be the job of the dash and little else.

Speaking of the dash:

So next time you see a falling star,
Thank the world for who you are;
And the next time you wish on a star at night
Pray it stays there with all your might--

--For a reason to smile when you look outside,
Or for something to follow when you can't decide;
Wish for a motive to keep on trying...

...because no one knows the stars are dying.

Again, ending and beginning the next line with the same punctuation is akin to inserting two commas in a row (,,); it should never happen in Standard written English.  But just to be on the safe side, let's consider those dashes.  Do either of them work for the poem?

Truthfully, no.  Because the idea picks back up in the very next line, which also happens to be the beginning of the next stanza, I wouldn't actually include any punctuation after "might".  Remember that a stanza can represent a natural pause simply for the sake of having to skip a line to read on and, in this case, I think letting the pause happen naturally - instead of dictating it - works much better for the poem.  Similar can be said for the ellipsis after "trying", especially because the final line represents a stanza unto itself, due to the formatting, and therefore begs that brief pause as well.

A brief edit:

So next time you see a falling star,
Thank the world for who you are.
And the next time you wish on a star at night,
Pray it stays there with all your might

For a reason to smile when you look outside,
Or for something to follow when you can't decide.
Wish for a motive to keep on trying

because no one knows the stars are dying.

There are many other changes I might make in Imperial-Obsession's poem, as there is a lot of punctuation happening and a lot of different punctuation happening, but as there are not set rules to punctuating poetry these changes will always remain the poet's decision.  If you'd like to view some of my specific suggestions to Imperial-Obsession, or you'd like to make some of your own, check out this link.