Companion to the Five in Five

[Tzara]

Congratulations, Nala. Stuff like this:

...............I learned to save jars
and boxes and other containers to hold
precious treasures; to de-bone fish
and remove scales so the skin is slick.​

made your series awesome.

Well done.

 

[sassynyc]

&

I could live with you
like an ampersand, twisted
back upon myself

an iron-wrought conjunction
between
our two proper nouns

but if in the style book
of your life
you find this me too brief

I’ll with a fine blue pencil
draw one thin line
and write my needs out right

Tz, I am liking this, lots. Simple, yet elegant.


And, I'll be damned....thought provoking. Poetry on the 'and' sign. Who'da thunk it....'sides you?

 

[Eluard]

Sassy you did some amazing riffs on those pictures. Pretty damn incredible. When you locked into them it was terrific.

 

[sassynyc]

Thanks El. You picked some pretty stimulating art. I'm doing my 5th on the first picture you posted, since I didn't start until the 2nd pic was up.

 

[nickdelight]

These poet's entries before me leave me in awe and fear to go further. There is so much to learn, so many ways to see things, I feel I should just sit and read without ever writing.

Sloughed off, are these dead leaves
lest they hinder eternal growth
in the tree of life.

I like that last part of your poem the best Sassy, the first line in particular it sounds so smooth to say out loud.

And I have to add that Eluard's artwork helped inspire my entry. That heart in the raven just kept my attention. Also thanks to PureAdoration for her critiquing.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

The 5/5 is being absolutely stunning these past few days. Just amazing, all of you.

*blown away*

bj

 

[Sara Crewe]

I could see number three very well and I like that in a poem, T. Do you need the 'that' in the second last line?

Yours in-a-pain-in-the-butt-kinda-way,

SC

 

[Tzara]

I could see number three very well and I like that in a poem, T. Do you need the 'that' in the second last line?

Yours in-a-pain-in-the-butt-kinda-way,

SC

No.

And now that I look at it again, I think "were" in the last line should more properly be "was".

Danke.

 

[Sara Crewe]

No.

And now that I look at it again, I think "were" in the last line should more properly be "was".

Danke.

I think you are right.

Bitte schön.

 

[Eluard]

I think you are right.

Bitte schön.

Well, I don't want to interject another pain in the butt criticism but 'was' reads rather awkwardly. — it maybe semantically correct, but you have to stop and calculate its corrrectness.

Like the poem, though.

And I agree with bj, you are all doing some great things in this little gallery. Makes a thread-starters heart glad.

 

[Sara Crewe]

Well, I don't want to interject another pain in the butt criticism but 'was' reads rather awkwardly. — it maybe semantically correct, but you have to stop and calculate its corrrectness.

.

I know what you mean but I thought maybe it was only giving us readers pause because we saw 'were' first. No?

 

[Eluard]

I know what you mean but I thought maybe it was only giving us readers pause because we saw 'were' first. No?

Nope, I missed it when it was first up and only saw the revision.

 

[Sara Crewe]

Nope, I missed it when it was first up and only saw the revision.

Okay. That blows that theory outta the water. I just took another look at it. Is the problem maybe that the last two lines are passive?


Could you say:

Thank God I scorched more
than just my fingertips

 

[Eluard]

Sassy — that is a damn fine final poem. Really good work — I can hear you stretching all the way from Australia!

 

[Eluard]

My second thoughts are that 'were' was right after all — because 'fingertips' is plural.

Just two more cents for the fire.

 

[sassynyc]

Sassy — that is a damn fine final poem. Really good work — I can hear you stretching all the way from Australia!

*yaaawwwwn, stretch*

Why thank you.

*curls cat tail, rolls back over to sleep*

 

[Sara Crewe]

My second thoughts are that 'were' was right after all — because 'fingertips' is plural.

Just two more cents for the fire.

But in reality, fingertips are not the subject of that sentence as it is written. The antecedent for the verb is the word more used as a pronoun for other parts of his body with 'than my fingertips' as a modifying phrase.

Having said that, on further reflection, when we use 'more' in that way, I think you have to use it with a plural verb.

But it's late here and I may be on crack.

I'm not really trying to tear at your poem, T and not trying to argue with you either El. I just like to think about things like that. I know. Odd.


I will now go back to acting like a goof.

 

[unpredictablebijou]

But in reality, fingertips are not the subject of that sentence as it is written. The antecedent for the verb is the word more used as a pronoun for other parts of his body with 'than my fingertips' as a modifying phrase.

Having said that, on further reflection, when we use 'more' in that way, I think you have to use it with a plural verb.

But it's late here and I may be on crack.

I'm not really trying to tear at your poem, T and not trying to argue with you either El. I just like to think about things like that. I know. Odd.


I will now go back to acting like a goof.

you are completely perfect in every way.

bj

 

[Sara Crewe]

you are completely perfect in every way.

bj

Yes, I am. As long as you also are on crack and not looking at my many faults. I don't even hide them behind the curtain. I hand out pamphlets and then dare people to still be my friend. I have the long pamphlet for potential close friends and the one-pager coloured pamphlet for potential acquaintances.

Faults are listed in alphabetical order starting with acerbic

*takes tongue outta her cheek*

And licks Bijou

 

[Eluard]

But in reality, fingertips are not the subject of that sentence as it is written. The antecedent for the verb is the word more used as a pronoun for other parts of his body with 'than my fingertips' as a modifying phrase.

Having said that, on further reflection, when we use 'more' in that way, I think you have to use it with a plural verb.

But it's late here and I may be on crack.

I'm not really trying to tear at your poem, T and not trying to argue with you either El. I just like to think about things like that. I know. Odd.


I will now go back to acting like a goof.

Yup, completely correct. More has to at least allow for a plurality of more things, so the verb has to be the plural 'were'. If one is to say was one should be specific and say 'one more thing was burned'. But you can't have more and was together without alarms being sent out that something is wrong in the implications of the sentence.

Phew — I think that gets to the bottom of it! Tzara, what do you think?…*peers into darkness* Tzara??

Oh, he's staring at Sara's legs!

 

[Tzara]

Yup, completely correct. More has to at least allow for a plurality of more things, so the verb has to be the plural 'were'. If one is to say was one should be specific and say 'one more thing was burned'. But you can't have more and was together without alarms being sent out that something is wrong in the implications of the sentence.

Phew — I think that gets to the bottom of it! Tzara, what do you think?…*peers into darkness* Tzara??

Oh, he's staring at Sara's legs!

Actually, he was out to dinner.

Thank you both for your comments. Obviously it is a problem point in the poem. I rephrased it from were to was because if you recast the sentence into the equivalent form thank god more was scorched than just my fingertips, I think it's clear that were doesn't sound right.

The real problem is that in using more as a pronoun with no clear referent it is ambiguous as to whether a singular or plural verb form is needed: More (stuff) was scorched vs. More (things) were scorched. Combined with the sloppiness of having the immediately previous noun be plural, though not the antecedant of the verb, just mucks things up generally.

So how about changing more from pronoun to adjective and making it clear (or clearer) what I meant:

thank god more skin than just my fingertips
was scorched​

We happier with that?



I not only don't mind having the poem picked at, I quite enjoy it. Helps me see things. Thanks.

 

[Sara Crewe]

Actually, he was out to dinner.

Thank you both for your comments. Obviously it is a problem point in the poem. I rephrased it from were to was because if you recast the sentence into the equivalent form thank god more was scorched than just my fingertips, I think it's clear that were doesn't sound right.

The real problem is that in using more as a pronoun with no clear referent it is ambiguous as to whether a singular or plural verb form is needed: More (stuff) was scorched vs. More (things) were scorched. Combined with the sloppiness of having the immediately previous noun be plural, though not the antecedant of the verb, just mucks things up generally.

So how about changing more from pronoun to adjective and making it clear (or clearer) what I meant:

thank god more skin than just my fingertips
was scorched​

We happier with that?



I not only don't mind having the poem picked at, I quite enjoy it. Helps me see things. Thanks.

Dammit! My legs always lose out to food.


That doesn't make it any better for my ear, T, but I think I am really hung up on the passive construction of the line now and so nothing but turning it active is going to smooth it out for me.


I get why you wouldn't want to. Scorched is a powerful final word. For me final words or lines being slap you silly good sometimes aren't that important. I think sometimes the more powerful image happens before the final line--kinda like cutting the engine of a boat ten feet away from the dock and then letting it glide in quietly on momentum for the last bit.


That's just me though and it's a style comment. Thanks for letting me pick.

 

[Tzara]

Dammit! My legs always lose out to food.


That doesn't make it any better for my ear, T, but I think I am really hung up on the passive construction of the line now and so nothing but turning it active is going to smooth it out for me.


I get why you wouldn't want to. Scorched is a powerful final word. For me final words or lines being slap you silly good sometimes aren't that important. I think sometimes the more powerful image happens before the final line--kinda like cutting the engine of a boat ten feet away from the dock and then letting it glide in quietly on momentum for the last bit.


That's just me though and it's a style comment. Thanks for letting me pick.

I understand what you're saying about passive voice. The whole damn poem is in passive voice, which is a problem. But you're right, I want to end on the word scorched which follows from slapped and smacked earlier.

Also, the passive form makes the rhythm sound right to my ear, which is sometimes my overriding concern. Not that that's particularly smart or effective, but that oftentimes tends to be the controlling effect in how I structure things.

We is just all different in how we view things, I guess.

 

[Homburg]

See, this is why I say that I'm not a poet. I just write, and don't think once about voice, construction, etc. Hell, half the time I put in line breaks only because Anschul chided me about it.

<---- not a poet

 

[Sara Crewe]

I understand what you're saying about passive voice. The whole damn poem is in passive voice, which is a problem. But you're right, I want to end on the word scorched which follows from slapped and smacked earlier.

Also, the passive form makes the rhythm sound right to my ear, which is sometimes my overriding concern. Not that that's particularly smart or effective, but that oftentimes tends to be the controlling effect in how I structure things.

We is just all different in how we view things, I guess.

I know what you mean about the rhythm. I think that's what adding the extra words wrecks for me.

Yep--without difference there would be one book of poetry and it would be boring.

Anyway, good stuff. I always envy your succinctness, Mistah T.