Inquiries for my Fellow Men

Inquiries for my Fellow Men

I.

Why do we break the bodies
of those we claim to love,
leave them bleeding on the floor,
gasping for breath,
holding back tears,
ashamed,
as if it were their fault
and can’t bear to look up at us,
their aggressor, their would-be lover,
through tear-smeared makeup
and swollen bruises?

II.

Why should they be made to
feel as if they must ask for
forgiveness from God?
We are the ones who need
forgiveness, who should be
begging prostrate on the stairs
before the throne—or, rather,
in front of the gates,
which will never open for us.
We are the ones who deserve
no forgiveness, no pity,
and should wither away alone
in solitude, with no eyes
upon us, not even God’s.

III.

Some mistakes are
beyond human mercy.
Is this all you think
praying is for?

IV.

Gandhi once remarked that
an eye for an eye makes the
whole world blind, but
if we’re already blind—which,
surely, we are—then what
good do our eyes serve us?
If we see the stains of blood
and heaps of salt from
evaporated tears that our
brothers and fathers have
drained from our
mothers and daughters,
and do nothing to stop
this ageless cycle, then
why not gouge out our
eyes, so at the very least
we know the meaning of
undue pain and suffering?

V.

The Chinese sage Laozi believed that
“the hard and brittle will surely fall,
and the soft and supple will overcome.”
A twenty-seven century old wisdom
still waiting patiently to bear fruit:
how many more generations must pass,
how many more women must look
into the eyes of their son
and see their rapist staring back,
before we stop leaning on false hopes
and ancient doctrines, realizing that the
change we desire must come from within?

VI.

A father is a mold
A son is the clay
Elastic in March
Dry and brittle by May.

A mother is a cloud
A daughter is the rain
Falling down to earth, cold,
But destined to rise again.

Hey,

Good to hear from you. The Structure of this piece is very different. It definitely suits the title as it simply is food for thought. I guess I'll just go through it section by section and give you my thoughts.

I.

This is a good opening section as it doesn't require a lot of in depth thought to understand what you are trying to evoke within the reader. It's simply asking a rhetorical question that has a rather heavy effect. It's interesting that you've written something with this much violence. I find myself wondering what your position in a scenario such as this is. Are you the Aggressor or a bystander? Maybe you're neither, either way it is somewhat terrifying.

II.

This seems like a continuation from the first section. For me, I don't know why you chose to put the two one after the other because they are so closely related although I see why you have separated them. The movement from action to reaction is cool. I'm kind of so-so about the use of religion because I don't know how people of different religions who read it will react. There's nothing wrong with it and I know it's me being over cautious but I'm extremely careful about what I write. In saying that there is absolutely nothing wrong with what you've written and nothing that could offend. I wasn't sure if I should put that in but I thought I may as well.

We are the ones who need
forgiveness, who should be
begging prostrate on the stairs
before the throne—or, rather,
in front of the gates,
which will never open for us.

Very cool section. I like it.

III.

Short and sweet = Awesome! The first time I read this I thought that you were insinuating that prayer was for forgiveness for things that humans could not forgive but upon reading it again I realise you are trying to point out that prayer is not only for that purpose alone. It's very thought provoking, begging the audience to ask themselves why do they pray and do they only pray for the trivial act of making themselves feel better. It's very good.

IV.

Nice use of Gandhi! ^_^ Again, this is a very violent section. I'm still wondering why you chose to write about this. Here you say that we surely are blind but you haven't given any evidence as to why or what we are blind to. I guess it comes later but the line sat uneasy with me until I finished reading it. Never mind. =p I'm interested, also, in why you have made the female the victim again. It wasn't clear cut in the first section but here it is. It speaks a bit about domestic violence almost...

If we see the stains of blood
and heaps of salt from
evaporated tears

Heaps sounds too informal for the section. It's the correct use of the word but it feels inappropriate in this context. It's fine the way it is though.

why not gouge out our
eyes, so at the very least
we know the meaning of
undue pain and suffering?

Nice link back to the beginning.

V.

Again, nice use of quote. I don't have a lot to say about this section. I didn't really have much to say about the others besides my opinion. I like how you used the ancient quote to build what you are trying to say.

VI.

This is good. It's the first time we see the use of rhyme and structure which is a nice way to finish. It doesn't follow anything you've just said though. Besides the first two lines where I'm assuming you're insinuating that if a father is abusive they may shape the son to be that way also, I don't see a connection. Throughout the body of your piece you talk about how women are put down due to the violent actions of (and my assumption here) men. Here, however, you say that despite this women are destined to overcome their pain, the pain which the aggressor will never be forgiven for by person or god. It just doesn't fit quite right. In saying that I think this section is important because of structure and it sums up the piece while giving it a bit of an lift from the rest of the piece.

I liked the piece but i think i liked reviewing it more. In reviewing it I made myself think about it which was your intention but the piece lacked that something that made me want to keep reading. The darkness of it was intentional I think but for it work properly it needed to be reflected in the title maybe. It was a really good way to get people thinking. Good work.

I apologise if this wasn't really helpful. I'm really tired today and this was my procrastination from studying. Catch you around the forum.

BeckFletch. xx

Hello!

I.

I liked your opening. There seems to be a very clear sense of detachment within it - which I like because it seems to tie in with your title 'Inquiries'. I don't feel like you have a particular place in this scene yet - a nice way to create an inquiring tone rather than a voice of personal experience. The detached sense somehow adds to the gravity of the scene - there doesn't seem to be much bias which is nearly more terrifying than if it were first person. The question seems simple, at the start, leaving room for more.

II.

Really nice development here, as you place the narrator in a position. Something I really like it the conciseness of your writing - it is not pretentious, merely down-to-earth and almost factual in it's delivery. You come across as very self-assured, which adds a gravitas to your poem that not many have. I'm not such a fan of your repetition of 'We are the ones' later on in the stanza - although it does add emphasis, I think it may be more effective to play around with that a little more to avoid bringing the cool tone of the poem down a little. The end of this section is very effective, and nicely done.

III.

It feels like a transition period. Not a section I particularly enjoyed, as it feels like your previous tone has slipped a little bit - in a way it's good, like a mask slipping away, but it feels to brief and almost self-indulgent. However, as a way to move the poem on it works well.

IV.

The beginning of this section doesn't really work for me. It seems a little pretentious and unexplained, whereas previously I'd enjoyed the succinct way you'd expressed everything. Your question becomes a little wordy, and I think it could be played around with a little to flow better and fit in more with the tone you previously used. 'Heaps of salt from evaporated tears' is very evoking and well thought out, but some part of me wishes it was developed a little more - 'evaporated' has this sense of loss and longing that could be expanded on somehow. The violence returns here, yet self-inflicted this time - I think this is really well done, and adds to the idea of 'cycle' that you've begun.

V.

Loved. It all seems to be coming together now, and the stanza incorporates the conciseness that I've admired throughout. Nothing else to say, really.

VI.

A very original and unexpected way to end the poem. I'm not sure if it's the way I would have done it, but that's pretty much a compliment, I guess. I'm not sure if the sudden change in structure and tone really worked for me - I like it, but at the same time I don't know if I would have liked another way more. Perhaps I would be more 100% on the ending if it tied in more with the rest of the poem, but for me it doesn't tie it all up as neatly as I would have liked. The major themes, whilst there, aren't greatly incorporated, and I would have liked it if you'd perhaps brought everything together for the finish. That said, it was well written and quite an original thing to do.


Overall:

Wow, I feel like a useless reviewer. If I'm honest, this was more my thoughts than anything else. Your poem seems incredibly thought through and precise, which leaves me with little to criticise or help improve. I really hope to see more of your work around, and I seriously enjoyed reading this poem. Even if this was a little useless, I hope it may have helped you in some way. Feel free to send me a PM with any questions or comments.

-Amy

I like this a lot, I've only got one thing to pick on

"Gandhi once remarked that
an eye for an eye makes the
whole world blind, but
if we’re already blind—which,
surely, we are—then what
good do our eyes serve us?"

I don't like the way you introduced the quote, i think you could rearrange it a bit and make it a lot more poetic. That's just my thought.

Best of luck, lots of love,
Alice

IceCreamMan this is a great piece, it echoes many of my own thoughts but you put them in such a way I stand at awe. I'm LastPaladin and I shall be your reviewer for today. As you already guessed I'm impressed. A poem I reviewed today had questions not being answered, but rather than this annoy me like the other did, your doesn't as the questions are age old and someone yet to answer them in such a way that we all understand. On with the review.

I love your use of historical figures Gandhi an old one, but never heard Laozi, so I'm impressed inserted some originality into your thought process. And I like how you begin with a sense of utter disgust and anger at how we do this, but also sense of 'why?'' it doesn't make sense. We don't need to do it, but we do. The passion is clearly there, and the amount of thought gone into this, is about as much that goes into thesis or essay. I even like how it's split into numbers. Which gives me a suggestion for a challenge to you, do another poem like this, but focus on the ten commandments and use them as a guide for each stanza. Just a suggestion.

Overall: This piece earned my like before this review, it earned my like after finishing reading it. It's that good and that deep. I've no problems with it.

Congrats!