This ought to get some attention... maybe. At least I hope it does. Here goes.

Free Verse is not poetry. Free verse is some ass rambling on and pressing the 'enter' key whenever it looks convenient. And though it doesn't go hand in hand with free verse, 'I'm Crazy' poetry is also not poetry. It's stupidity. No, blood is not good, no there aren't voices in your head, yes you're just starved for attention. 

Besides, using poetry to get attention is old school. Especially 'dark' (Translation: Idiotic) Poetry. It's hilarious that noncomformist poets are just conforming to a different social group. 

Back to the point. Free verse is not poetry because it generallly lacks poetic elements. Metaphor and simile appear occasionally, but meter and rhyme don't. Therefore, it's not poetry... you can't leave out elements and still call free verse poetry. It'd be like me writing a short story that was four thousand pages long and saying 'it's a short story, just without the short'.

Thoughts?

Free verse is not poetry because it generally lacks poetic elements. Metaphor and simile appear occasionally, but meter and rhyme don't. Therefore, it's not poetry...
  I disagree that such elements are left out. Though free verse poetry does not require a specific arrangement of rhyme and meter throughout the poem, it still uses vowel sounds, pacing, and the emphasis of syllables to create a mood or emphasize a word or line. For these purposes, some free verse poems go so far as to use highly noticeable rhyme or meter in one or two selected places.
  I also don't believe that free verse poetry's division of lines is pressing the "enter" key whenever it looks convenient. A new line has to come up somewhere, and just as a sonnet writer doesn't waste a line just because he needs to make it rhyme, a free verse poet also uses line breaks to add some punch, create pacing, and make each thought count.

  So I would have to conclude that free verse is poetry and even stands up to your attacks on it.

Wow... I had forgotten even making that post. How many months ago was it, I wonder...?

Free verse is the poetic equivalent of a stick figure in that it requires the least talent and ability to create it in a competent fashion. You can do some pretty cool stuff with stick figures, like the various stick flash animations around the net, but in the end, they are just lines without any substance. Like free verse. ^^

  Actually, both free verse and formatted poetry only require that one knows how to speak, though writing ability helps.
  The earliest poem I remember creating was before I could read (or read a clock, for that matter), though I knew some numbers. I looked at a round-faced clock at 9:50 and said,
Ten-ten.
Ten to ten.
This poem incorporates both rhyme (in the form of repetition) and meter (I paused between the two "ten"-s in the first line, so the second line had the same pacing; of course the "ten"-s were the emphasized syllables). I don't say this to play genius, but rather, to show how little ability a formatted poem requires.
  On the other hand, children tend not to learn free verse until they've been writing formatted poetry for quite some time. This is because the patterns in the words are less obvious, although they are there. It takes more skill to recognize them, and likewise, to make them of course.
  Both free verse and formatted poetry have plenty of substance. I find this hard to argue, since it feels so obvious to me, but here it goes...
Both types of poetry have room for poetic devices.
Both types have meaning.
Both types use words in a musical manner.
Have I missed anything?

*applauds*

Very well said and supported. Thank you very much, you have no idea how happy it makes me to hear, not only a response, but a thoughtful one!

^^

  YaY!
  Thanks a lot. I thought I should get to you before the I-write-free-verse-because-I'm-too-cool-for-snobby-formatted-poetry snobs, who won't even argue their points.

I write free verse quite often. I think it takes a real talent to pull it off well however. Tis no different than bad poetry or stories. It all depends on the particular taste of the reader.

I'm sure this is from ages ago and the conversation has long gone flat, but I just have to throw my own two bits in ^_^.

I must say that, though I disagreee with you, I can fully seem your point. The majority of free verse floating around is, as you eloquently put it, "some ass rambling on" about love and how it sucks, I bet you would group my stuff in with the category of ramblers, even though it doesn't fit the bill exactly.

But have you looked at any of the notable published poets who write in free verse? Billy Collins, Ted Kooser, I think for rambling it's pretty darn good. But, I suppose that my definition of poetry goes beyond metre, rhyme, and metaphor. There is something about *good* poetry that catches the eye, no matter what form it's written in.

*grins* I wondered if anyone would ever ask. I hardly ever read 'professional' poetry. Mostly with that post, I was hoping to get some people to stand up and tell me 'why' free verse isn't a heap of simian excrement. ^^ 

I probably did an awful job of it too!
^_^

Free verse poetry can go two ways:

1. The typical, stereotyped teenager way:
"he broke up w/ me cuz i
was not good enuff for him
to luv me like i wanted 2 b luvd" stuff, that generally is something people spit out to get it off their chest (not necessarily a bad thing, mind), or write to get attention (ooer!), then we have...

2. The 'professional' poet, or basically someone who isn't a complete amatuer, and writes poetry to prove some sort of point, whether to themselves to someone else:
"My love broke my heart
now my soul sings in rage".

Kind of off-topic, but that's how I see free verse. A good chunk of it is gonna be about romance, but that doesn't make it all bad.