Streetlamp Heroes

These knights wore blue jeans,
and leather jackets,
and courted,
the looking-glass queens.
They speak not in prose,
but in their pocket a rose,
to give to the girl,
of their fancy.
Their duels to the death,
of fist-fights and pocket knives,
are fought,
in the back alleyways.
The highway-men rob,
convenience store clerks,
and run at the sight of the cops.
And the looking-glass queens
adorned with perfume and lipstick,
they gossip,
as they always did.
As they watch their men die,
under the light,
of the cold streetlamps.
thus are their lives,
as they,
live and fight,
and in the end are met,
with the icy embrace,
of an early grave.

God wrote:These knights wore blue jeans,
and leather jackets,

Are these supposed to be Greasers? In any case, the beginning is overly simplistic for what I'm beginning to expect is a representational piece. Knights only wear blue jeans when they are symbolic of the loving-hating thugs of the street, and any reader should be able to figure that out from your poem without you making it so obvious.

and courted,
the looking-glass queens.
They speak not in prose,
but in their pocket a rose,
to give to the girl,
of their fancy.

It's difficult to critique the content of this section when it's conventions are so haphazard. This poem is halting along, stumbling across the page like it hits a rock every five seconds and has to right itself. It's disturbing, and not in a good way. Smooth it out - don't isolate phrases like "of their fancy" unless you have a point, and you seemingly don't.

Their duels to the death,
of fist-fights and pocket knives,
are fought,
in the back alleyways.
The highway-men rob,
convenience store clerks,
and run at the sight of the cops.
And the looking-glass queens
adorned with perfume and lipstick,
they gossip,
as they always did.

There is a severe disconnect between the themes of this section and the one before it. Even if it's intentional, you went about this in a way that leaves the reader lost and frustrated that there is no bridge to cross, no sign to point the way to what you're trying to say. The looking-glass ladies apparently don't change an iota throughout the poem, while the men do. At first, the men fight for their women, then they go and rob convenience stores; yet, the women are the same. If you have a reason for this, make it clear.

As they watch their men die,
under the light,
of the cold streetlamps.

A streetlamp's temperature is of no relevance to the poem. If you use cold to describe the world's feelings, this is too subtle.

thus are their lives,
as they,
live and fight,
and in the end are met,
with the cold embrace,
of an early grave.

Ah, so the cold was intentionally used twice. Very well, but it still defies logic how you at first apply it to a physical object and then to an idea. The rest of the stanza is hard to decipher because it jolts so often that it's unnerving.

perhaps, my good friend, the poem only seems jolting to you, because you are assigning to it a rhythm that is not there... try reading it in a different way, or learn to read my poems... (which I have been told, while they have rhythm the rhythm is a little scattered and hard to detect at times)

most people don't like my poems. they cant understand the rhythms

and I will write my poems.
you are attempting to add meaning to a poem where there isnt meaning, and taking things out of context...
At first I was talking about the "knights" who wore blu jeans and leather jackets. and then about the "highway-men" who rob conveinience stores.
two different groups there, thank you very much.
in fact, there are at least three different groups here (not counting the clerk) the Knights, the Highway-men, and the Looking-Glass Queens.

I am not talking about "greasers"
i happen to wear both blue jeans and a leather jacket, but I am not a greaser, but i am considered a gentleman, and much old fashioned, so these ideas should not be needlessly tied to the stereo-type of greasers.

If this poem needs any more explanation, well, just say it isn't worth it any more if it needs more.

Peace all.

oh, and just to cover all the bases, I really did find your critique moderatly useful, you pointed out one thing, and i will change that, but well, thanks anyway.

Peace.

Hello!

At first I thought this was interesting and in some points it has a Rebel without a cause feel (I think it was the fist-fights) but overall it feels empty to me.

First off I want to say some of your line breaks are jarring. In some places you just have two words in a line. You said in your reply to the previous review that he should just learn how to read your poems. That seems like a bit of a silly way around something like strange line breaks or awkward rhythm. Now, I didn't find awkward rhythm, but those line breaks are awkward. Do they have a purpose? Is it important they break there, and only with two lines? If so, and I'm missing it, then leaving it, but it seems needless to me, and again it's incredebly jarring and makes this difficult to read.

thus are their lives,
as they,
live and fight,
and in the end are met,
with the icy embrace,
of an early grave.

I particularly wanted to pick a fight with this stanza, hah. First off you didn't capitalize the first word of the sentence, and yet you do this in other lines so it seems like an error. Also you can remove the comma after "they" as it is not needed grammatically and only makes an incredebly awkward pause right in the middle of your sentence.

To be honest, I didn't like this poem. You're making an interesting connection between the archaic and the new, but I don't see the point of it, or the poem. You tell a story, but you're not saying anything or showing anything or presenting any sort of theme. To me, this is a vital part of a poem, and without it it's just words flopping around on the page. A poem should have an effect on the reader; I should think something, feel something, learn something, anything. This didn't seem to have anything in it, IMHO. Maybe you can add something to it, but without that, it feels like it's missing a level, and it makes it weak.

If you have any questions feel free to ask!

Thank you ms. Suzanne for the quite... honest... critique.
Well, lets start off with the line breaks.

they really have no point, other than thats how I thought the poem, and thats how it sounds in my head, so thats where I put them.
for my poems, at least, line breaks are very closely tied to rhythm,

and I am very sad to say, that this poem, at least, was not written with any particular point in mind, it just kinda... wrote itself.

ah well,

this poem is not, admittedly, one of the best I have written,
(I happen to be quite fond of "Hand in Hand")

it was never supposed to be a real great one, just something I jotted down,

so long!
Au Revoir,
Adieu,
Fare thee well,
and so on and so forth.

Knowing that this wasn't written with any purpose other than to express yourself, I like this poem. I don't get much from it, though, but I like the comparisons between the people of today and the people of old. It's also interesting to note that the modern knights of your poem are average people, as are the "queens" (that's my interpretation, anyway), whereas the knights and queens of old were far from ordinary. I don't know if this was coincidental or intentional, but it perhaps shows that, rather than the old social archetypes no longer existing, they have merely become more or less common.

I also like this poem because, as a Sociology student, I can link this to my work.

What are "greasers"?