Walls

The burning wall –
it seems ignited,
with ice, emitting smoke.
The cold biting through
skin;
his, mine,
ours.
For hours,
it has been.
Truth?
Not welcome!
Pretend’s an easy game,
why can’t he play?
Hushed moans,
silent whimpers.
No beating
can be heard.
Not even within walls,
these four corners,
Can love ever stand
still.

Alright, it's a bit confusing, but don't be insulted. It may be I'm reading it wrong.

"The burning wall – ---burning kind of contradicts the ice later. .
it seems ignited,-- ignited means to cause fire. . . so that's mixing up two elements again, maybe change it to bursting, or something.. .
with ice, emitting smoke.
The cold biting through --- awkward pause between through and skin, just add skin back to this line.
skin;
his, mine,
ours.
For hours, ----- lots of awkward pauses, perhaps keep for hours, it has been together.
it has been.
Truth?
Not welcome!
Pretend’s an easy game,
why can’t he play?
Hushed moans,
silent whimpers.
No beating
can be heard.
Not even within walls,
these four corners,
Can love ever stand
still."--- are you complaining that love can't stand still? I don't really know. I'm sorry If I'm being a bit harsh, I hate it when people flame my work, but I'm just trying to help. It seems like a poem with tons of potential! Anyways, good job!
-LLW

Hey LittleLionWoman,

Thanks for the review, although you're right about not reading it right. Well, everyone's entitled to reading poetry in a particular way but I feel that mine was heavily misjudged.

First of all, it's quite obvious that the sensation of "burning" and ice is contradictory. That was intended to play out the intensity of the situation and later on you'll understand (as i explain further) why two opposite elements can be used as as a metaphor to describe a particular situation. In a sense, you're right about "ignited" meaning "bursting" but it's more of "enticed"; and i used "ignited" to intensify it, does that make sense? You know how ice emits smoke when it's super cold? That's basically where those two different elements can be sewn together. But anyway, perhaps it would be clearer if you understood what the poem is about:

Basically, it's about two people having sex (thus: hours, skin, hushed moans, silent whimpers). The female persona wants to extract romance from the experience, even if it's just pretend. The male persona however (just as men are commonly portrayed), only see it the way it is - just sex. This is why cold and heat are used simultaneously despite being opposite. The coldness pertains to the lack of emotional attachment while the heat pertains to lust - thus, the walls (or bodies) are in heat or are "ignited". "Walls" was also used in a different context, i.e. as a "room" - thus, 4 corners. That's the picture I intent to leave with the readers, that even within the walls of a bedroom (or a motel room), love can't exist. That's what i meant about "no beating can be heard", i.e. no hearts are beating pertaining to the idea that there's no love. Perhaps you can say that the female persona is emotionally attached but the point is that "love" cannot exist or "stand still" if there is no mutual attachment.

Regarding the structure or "awkward pauses", haven't you ever read contemporary poetry? They usually don't follow the classic stanza blocks. Well, this is my first "contemporary" poem, and i understand where you're coming from. I used to be really particular about syllabication and rhyme. I'm just trying something new. Read the poem again, you'll understand (well i hope you would) why each particular line was divided from the other - to add more tone to it. example: "his, mine | ours" "Ours" was separated in order to add more intensity to the two entities as a collective. lol, i dont know if im now making sense to you, but i hope i do.

Anyway, thanks again for reviewing. I guess I learned I ought to make my poems less vague so that more people can understand it.

- bailecielo

I liked it, but it didn't seem to have a lot to do with the tilte. But I did like it.

Quite the, er.. intimate choices for subject matter. I respect you for it, mind you, but, of course, I will have to admit that even I had to read it a couple of times to even realize how this poem had anything to do with sexual intercourse. For a greater portion of the time I spent analyzing, I was convinced it had something to do with some form of mild abuse (ie. No beating can be heard).

Which brings me to my first point. Subtlety. When is there enough and when is there too much?

Now, as a poem on the difference between love and lust, I will agree that playing this game subtle will better suit your purposes rather than simply stating the idea with sharp, almost disconcerting metaphors. So I respect that and I respect your choice, though I will continue to admit that this was a bit too subtle for me.

Onto my next point, of course. You used a very... well known contradiction. The comparison between fire and ice. Now, as someone who sees people struggle to put even some form of metaphor into a poem, I find that I expected a bit more from you with how well worded your diction was. That being said, fire and ice is overused and an image that has become so known and so... basic that it doesn't really suit your purposes well. Just like a flower losing its petals or rain symbolizing sadness. These are all images we are familiarized with rather than giving new, vivid images that will effect the reader in a way that is purely original and memorable.

So, what I want to say is try a little more originality in that aspect.

Now, as the subject pertains to sex and the struggle between love and lust, I'm a bit stumped at why you would choose some of the wordings you did, such as;

No beating
can be heard.

and this one;

Can love ever stand
still.

Poetically, both sets of lines are interesting to read and interesting to say aloud, but do they really have anything to do with the subject at hand? I'm not quite sure what kind of sex you're talking about but the idea of beating can take on very different aspects, such as the beating of one's heart next to the beating and battery of one's physical self. What image are we, as readers, supposed to get from that, and to what purpose? Neither really suit your ideology well.

And love. It is not merely love standing still, I'm afraid. more or less, if one experiences love whilst the other lust, does that constitute love at all? I understand that the person experiencing love should feel at a loss when they realize there is no love on the other side, but it still does not make much sense to me that we are looking at love as something that should be constant or ever was. That's the beauty of it, really. That love changes and grows and becomes more or less. If it stood still, one would never love.

Of course, I'm over-thinking this.

Now, as a whole, I respect this. I like the fact that you worked with an interesting structure as well as metaphors and imagery. Just that there are definitely places worth working on a taking a look back on. It is all clear to you because you are the writer, but to a reader, there are many area's that are either iffy or unexplained. Open ends, if you will.

You have me intrigued.

~Walker

I have to admit, I had no idea it was about sex either.
Maybe you could insert words that kind of bring that forth more.
The "Why can't he play?" part almost seems like the opposite of the subject you're trying to get across.
I think the rhythm, is cool. It's different.
I also like the contrast with burning and ice, kind of like two forces joining together to make something ultimately neutral and good.

I feel like you could add a lot more, but I'm more of a wordy writer, so that's just me.
Overall, I think it has potential!