Yo you writer person. Let's dissect your piece and make rainbows with its bloody dismembered bits (okay bad imagery but das da point, man).
MATTER
Obviously, this is a retrospective piece. Title confirms: it's about the past. The writer's past, specifically, expressed in the first and second stanza. The latter stanzas are concerned mostly with the act of remembrance, how it can reinforce already strong marks/wounds/whatevs and stand in the middle of dark and light. I love the subject matter(s). The two ideas work together well. Having only remembering would make it boring, and having only remembrance makes it too tell-y. So yeah, good choice.
CONTENT
I get that it's a museum, so a lot of it must be telly. However you used sounds at the first stanza, subverting my expectations. Good work yo. Thus, I'd like the imagery of the first stanza. What I'm not happy about is how it is devoid of relevance. Okay, so there was this newborn creature, then a nine-year old cretin and this weird adult form, but what's the use of telling them? You didn't hint anything significant about them for them to be worth remembering. Emotional projection relies on what makes a memory memorable. The mere mention of them doesn't produce much effect. On a good note, the crossing of the past and present in your last line is cliche, but cute.
Second stanza: Where did his feet come to? You were talking about sounds, so a visual imagery is just too out of the blue pour moi. This is where I begin babbling about using the museum idea to the fullest. Know how museums are filled with doodly oodly interesting stuff? Why not bank on that? On the fact that a museum is filled with many objects the AUDIENCES--in this here case, the readers--want to see. Be its curator; fill it with everything you like in a very artistic fashion.
Your third stanza lost it however. I like how forgetting is represented as concrete (although more might do good), but the two following images, the light and the incense sticks seem to not do much together. Personally, the last image is great, but the three of them together, no. There's no progression or thread of idea. They also don't bolster the point of remembering. What are you trying to say exactly? Note them down and give them enough words or lines to fully express them (even three words would work, as long as they're strong).
Last line is cute. It's perfect. The idea of leaving with taking something with you (that's not the cliche "memory" or photo) is wonderfully stretched here. THIS line is what you should aspire to put into action onto your other stanzas. You didn't need to say that certain memories fell stuck on you as you finish your nostalgia moment (the trip to the museum). No need to tell, just show, that's what you need to capture.
LANGUAGE
I don't like the idea of term-dropping. Nostalgia? Time? Use other words to describe or replace them. Also, I'm still debating with myself whether this
the perfume still stuck to my clothes.
is great. Grammar says it's "on my clothes" not to. Still, it might achieve poetic effect, because to as a preposition gives the idea of activity. Meh. Just judge it with your own eyes, yo. Also, capitals.
FORM
Again, the two idea combo is waw. Your use of free verse doesn't invoke much things to talk about, though.
ROOM FOR IMPROVEMENT
MEAT, you, MEAT! Make the content more concrete and abstract at the same time. Concrete by tapping on the senses, and abstract by using figurative language and other techniques. Again, emulate your last stanza.
So yeah, sorry for the long review. Hope it helps, yo.
Ur doge 5ever,
Alfie
Points: 25520
Reviews: 308
Donate