TheRainMan
black & tan
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Posts
- 1,497
sandspike said:I would drop the third verse. 1, 2 and 4 have some great lines that keep
this poem together. I see nothing in the 3rd to tie this work together. This
poem has good visuals for me as long as I read 1,2, & 4.
sandspike: I agree that third verse is the least essential, and I did try it that way. The final result did not feel right to me, and I write a lot by 'feel' alone. I think it made the relationship described in the poem seem more like a crush, or infatuation, than the real thing. The third stanza (rewritten a bit now) serves the purpose of adding depth to the relationship itself, which I think adds a bit of depth to the poem.
*Catbabe* said:Rainman: I liked the poem as a whole and it worked for me. Here are some things I might change.
-Cat
-I would drop the ‘of our souls’ in the title
- I think maybe ‘hold her’ for you might be stronger in the last line and I am not sure you need ‘for you’ at all.
-I’m not sure you need the “But”
-could you say ‘with leftover eggs, covered
spring by spring
-I am not sure you need the sense of dialogue that your first words bring… I might move right into the lines so I would get rid of the ‘No”
-could you say ‘after our crumbling bridge collapses
and the current can’t be crossed, I look down…”
-I am not sure if you need the starlit night part
-I don’t think you need tight
- I don’t like the word tang reminds me of orange drink crystals…that of course is a personal connotation but wrecks the word for me
how they subtract not add
a face from the dark
and you from me.
*Catbabe*: I did drop "of our souls" from the title, as you and many others suggested. I do think the new title works better, considering the poem itself. I also agree with your recommendation to get rid of the word "No" and the entire sense of dialogue it created, as well as agreeing that 'tight' was superfluous in the last stanza. The word 'tang' does bring to mind that awful orange drink, but it has so many other connotations to me, and I would hope to most readers, that it is still there to bother you.
twelveoone said:No doubt about it, you are a good writer for women - I am not the target audience, as said. I think the last set of lines are the tightest, and a bit of summing up of the rest.
that hurts, but understands why the s on understands?
stands no more and current this is a nice play on the word current
after the crumbling bridge that joins us nice line, as is and in context
the whole thing does a nice dance, between past and present. of acceptance and rejection - up and down-
"...I look down
and watch what would have flowed
beneath it pass by, and up
on starlit nights at what I threw away, "
is a little shopworn, but serviceable. But with the combination of trashed and leftover eggs I arrive at "what I threw up", would reconsider this combination of word choices, at least changing "up" on the end line.
"cedar" has no emotional resonance for me - again, not the target audience.
"tang" - yeh, orange crystals come to mind, don't object, as it has so many other resonances also
"flattened delicately between
the pages of a book
no one but me will ever read. No,"
possibly good lines for audience? looks a little too old, too coy
There are no strong lines here, nothing that burns through, that you can't escape from, this comes closest:
"a cedar said yes,
if you have time and a knife
I will wear her for you on my skin."
but it is quite strange - you are talking to cedars, the cedar would wear her skin, for you? the cedar has skin? Looks like bad Neruda, Lorca. A little too strange in the context of the rest of the poem. Here is what prompted the "What the fuck are you talking about?" comment I think. I would rethink, reword.
I think you did rather well, considering some of it dips into the stock footage, it has a unified feel and tone.
twelveoone: The "s" on understands is because the subject it is matched with is "place," not "I."
You are the only one who noticed (or at least mentioned) the ambiguity in the double meaning of the word "current." It is one of the things that makes it necessary to keep that stanza, I think.
I see what you mean about having 'up' at a line's end. It did not strike me until you pointed it out. It has been covered by other words to take that punch away.
"Cedar Box" was meant to convey a picture of one of those secret boxes many people keep their precious things in, a box they hide somewhere, on an upper shelf closet covered by spare sheets, perhaps.
I agree the whole "flattened delicately" run in the original was a bit shopworn. I think "flattened delicately" is perfect, but I pared the rest some.
As this early stage of a writing life, I'll settle for reading like 'bad Neruda.' His kind of polish only comes with time, and sweat.
champagne1982 said:Hello Rainman, I enjoyed your poem and I've italicized my thoughts on what I would try to do for improvement of the piece. This is only one Canadian girl's opinion, feel free to use the suggestions as you like.
In the Cedar Boxes of Our Souls A shorter title would work here, just Cedar Boxes, let the reader decide if it's a box of your soul or not.
I find myself scribbling your name It's nice that you find yourself at the very beginning of your tale. Could you think about rephrasing that? I scribble your name would work as well, I think.
on napkins at breakfast
and walking this morning
a cedar said yes, Since you are personifying the tree here, I would try to arrange the cedar's words into quotes or maybe italicize its speech. If you do that, though, don't forget to insert the comma between said and a capitalized "Yes"
if you have time and a knife
I will wear her for you on my skin.
But I know where you’ll wind up. I am confused here as to who is speaking. Is it still the tree or have you taken up your narration here? That is why I recommend you devide the tree's speech from your voice, somehow.
Not crumpled and trashed
with leftover eggs and coffee grounds
or disappearing spring by spring Disappearing doesn't create the imagery for me. I know what you mean but the word is weak. The use of spring isn't enough either, you seasonalize your love with it. Would you consider that the scar fades year after year?
inside a carved heart, not even
flattened delicately between flattened delicately seems a bit of an oxymoron. I'd consider saying that you pressed delicately evoking an image of a flower as a metaphor for her name.
the pages of a book
no one but me will ever read. No,
after the crumbling bridge that joins us If you are scribbling her name and carving initials in a tree over this person, why is the bridge crumbling. The adjective is wrong for the state of your relationship as I see it. Do you really need an adjective at all in front of bridge?
stands no more and current
can’t be crossed and I look down Think about dropping the word and in this line. Try inserting a period or link your thoughts about the bridge and the river with a semi-colon.
and watch what would have flowed Are you standing on the bank since your bridge can't be crossed? If you want us to see a solitary figure on a dilapidated old bridge, you'll have to get him to the middle of it. Solidify the bridge so you can stand on it and maybe make her end of it barricaded or something.
beneath it pass by, and up You could glance up at the sky, because as the number guy said, I link this thought and the next as "threw up".
on starlit nights at what I threw away,
I’ll lock you tight in a wooden place I know you're drawing parallels between the tree, a keepsake cedar chest and a casket, I'd still change the word place to box.
that hurts, but understands
the mathematics of the morning after,
how they subtract not add—the tang zest?
from a tongue, a face You're in the dark, instead of telling us it's her tongue and face, could you show us? Feel the wetness of her tongue and the softness of her cheek.
from the dark. You, from me.
champagne I agree, with you and others, on the title. I like the original title very much, but I don't think it is quite appropriate to this poem.
The first line I find myself scribbling your name is far different than your suggestion of I scribble your name, in that the former implies it is an involuntary action, something done without realizing it. That is what I want, and it would be lost by removing the words "find myself."
I definately agree that the tree's 'words' need to stand out, as both you and annaswirls suggested. That has been done. That also clears up the point you made about not being certain who is speaking in the second stanza.
To me, flattened delicately describes perfectly how someone hides the petal of a flower inside a book, as it they can somehow preserve what it is, even pressed flat. It conveys 'intention' more than anything.
The bridge is crumbling because the writer is acknowledging that that is what happens to relationships, at least his - the inevitability of it, as if it is taken for granted...and yes, he is on the bank, looking down and up. The bridge is no longer there.
The 'threw up' question has been solved, I think.
The word place is used instead of box for the very reason that it is vague. The place she is to be hidden is inside himself, the cedar box we all have in there for secrets, and by using the specificity of the word 'box,' I think that would be lost.
I am so fond of the last stanza, I am wary of doing anything else to it. I do understand what you mean by adding the specific of 'wetness,' but it feels so right to me the way it is.
annaswirls said:Sometimes getting many opinions makes things very confusing. My suggestion is to print out the critiques, read them and write notes. Cross out the comments you totally disagree on. That might help simplify the process.
In the end, you have to make the choices. It is not easy to do, but seeing your level of writing, I am sure you have learned these lessons before.
I have only a few comments:
I do not like the title. Everytime I see Souls or of our souls, I just get this grating feeling like someone is going to try to be deep and philosophical and painfully corny.
Just a bad start in my opinion.
I always thing that a poem will take itself to the soul if it is done correctly. It is a word better experienced than read.
Why not just In the Cedar Boxes.
In the Cedar Boxes of Our Souls
I like how you have action in your writing instead of dreadfully beautiful wonderous gorgeous description of the environment, which is so boring to me!
I like the image of scribbling the name at breakfast
and I LOVE the image of the cedar saying yes
However, the transition between the one and the other is very unclear.
I find myself scribbling your name on napkins at breakfast and walking this morning
sounds like you found yourself scribbling her name on napkins at breakfast and while walking this morning. try to simplify the sentence structure to make sure it is clear that they are two different actions.
Do you need "at breakfast" and "this morning" Just a thought
a cedar said yes,
if you have time and a knife
I will wear her for you on my skin.
gorgeous. I always like when writers put new voices (like the cedar) in italics. It gives a visual reinforcement that someone new is speaking.
But I know where you’ll wind up.
Not crumpled and trashed
with leftover eggs
or disappearing spring by spring
inside a carved heart, not even
flattened delicately between
the pages of a book
no one but me will ever read. No,
after the crumbling bridge that joins us
stands no more and current
can’t be crossed and I look down
and watch what would have flowed
beneath it pass by, and up
on starlit nights at what I threw away,
I’ll lock you tight in a wooden place
that hurts, but understands
the mathematics of the morning after, consider looking over the line breaks here. Breaknig Understands from mathematics makes it confusing to me to readhow they subtract not add—the tang
from a tongue, a face
from the dark. You, from me.
A very lovely poem, very moving. I would not yet send it to Ploughshares but why not-- just read this out loud. Set the alarm for 3 am and read it before you go pee and get a drink of water. As if you are another person. Give it to a stranger to read out loud for you, see where they stumble and make it more smooth.
(I am writing down these suggestions as I need to follow every one of them)
Thanks for giving us this poem to learn from, as I feel writing critiques is sometimes more educational to the reviewer. Makes us think about what we believe to be important. Forces us to try to live up to our own advice.
Passing on a piece of advice I have gotten several times, let me recommend an activity. Change this poem around (not for good, just for an exercize) and get rid of all of the "ing" verbs.
I have found that simply by doing this, I can make my poems more readable, more accessible.
Also with this one, consider shortening your sentences-- I think some of the confusion comes along with not having a break. Just a thought.
all the best,
as
annaswirls:Thank you for the title suggestion. I agree, and it is the one I think is best now.
The transition problem you spoke of between scribbling and walking was correct, and has been repaired by a simple comma, at the end of line 2.
The reason 'breakfast' and 'morning' are there is to convey the thought that the first thing in the morning this happens, as in 'before anything else,' and also involuntarily, thus magnifying its importance.
Putting the cedar's 'words' in italics, as both you and champagne suggested, was a marvelous idea. It works much better.
I've been through the whole "ing" thing before. I think "ing" verbs (or verbs used as gerunds, or participles) only becomes a problem if overdone. It is easy to string them out, one after the other, and if you do that there is no doubt you lose punch to your words.
I realize I do write with somewhat longer sentences that many poets, with frequent punctuation. It has become a matter of style, and changing it changes the impact of my words, and changes my poetry too much. I know, because, I've tried.
ishtat said:Anna Swirls analysis is excellent but I would like to qualify one point she makes - about long sentences.I have noticed that you tend (not just in this work) to use a lot of verbs sometimes in not particularly long sentences.The sentences in reality may not be all that long but several verbs make them seem so.
However the changes those fairly frequent verbs make can in turn make it less easy to read sometimes than it might be. This is not incorrect at all in fact your writing is rather particular in its accuracy/punctuation etc but I do feel that the rythmn of the work can sometimes be tricky to pick up. I might be being a bit picky but I think your work is worth it.
ishtat: You and the comment you made on the poem itself are one of the main reasons I put it up here in the first place. Thank you for that.
I agree that I write by rhythm. I can feel it when I read my own poetry, and I do try to pass it on. To make it a less complex rhythm would be ideal. Now, to figure out just how to do that.
Thank you all so much, and please do add more comments if you wish.
Here is the rewrite, as it stands now (still, not done, I'm sure):
In the Cedar Box
I find myself scribbling your name
on napkins at breakfast,
and walking this morning
a cedar said yes,
if you have time and a knife
I will wear her for you on my skin.
But I know where you’ll wind up.
Not crumpled and trashed
with leftover eggs
or fading spring by spring
inside a carved heart,
not even flattened delicately
between pages no one reads. After
the crumbling bridge that joins us
falls and current can’t be
crossed, I’ll look down
at what would have flowed
beneath it pass by,
and up on starlit nights
at what I threw away, and hide you
in a wooden place that hurts,
but understands the mathematics
of the morning after,
how they subtract not add—the tang
from a tongue, a face
from the dark. You, from me.