Thorn's Roses

Thanks for posting this poem about the rose. It brought to mind the statement that a rose by any other name is still a rose and would smell just as sweet.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_rose_by ... l_as_sweet

Your poem appears to be an effort to convey how the rose is beautiful despite its stem and thorns. To me this seems peculiar since the beauty of a rose is never an issue. Only if the rose has been described as ugly would a rebuttal seem necessary.

So the attempt at convincing that the rose is indeed beautiful seems quaint. But then again you seem to be telling us that the only part of the rose that should be considered beautiful is the part that isn’t the stem that has the thorns.

The problem I see with that is that if that visually there is no pain involved. So it doesn’t take way from the visual beauty. In short, no one will consider a rose ugly because it is connected to a branch that has thorns.

But I understand the concept that you are trying to convey. If I stupidly reach out and grab a rose by its thorny stem, then there will be injury and pain. But even still, the beauty of the rose isn’t affected. That would be like saying that the majestic beauty of an Eagle is affected because it has a beak and I offer my unprotected hand. Now the eagle is ugly? Or that the majesty of a predatory animal is affected because it has claws and it clawed me when I touched it. The animal loses its majesty?


Suggestions


One thing to keep in mind when writing poetry is that poetry must differentiate itself from prose. One way that poetry does this is via the usage of metaphor and simile. Prose on the other hand tends to be didactic and to state things in a very direct manner. Although this piece has imagery, the methodical unemotional way that it presents the imagery is in a list-like prose manner.

Now, imagery in itself isn’t bad. In fact, it is essential in making a poem come alive. However, if used in a straightforward manner then it can become similar to reading a description of vegetation off a textbook on botany. A textbook on plant-life will tell us every single anatomical section of a plant in the same straightforward manner. Yet, we would never confuse such a textbook with poetry. So to distinguish our description from a description of a textbook, the imagery must take on a symbolic meaning and not just merely be a list of features for the reader to understand as making up part of a plant.

Also, a basic principle in writing poetry is to show and not just tell. Please don’t tell the reader that the rose is beautiful. Let the reader feel and see the beauty via description. But telling us that it is beautiful just doesn’t cut it.

Rhyme can also be very useful in poetry. However, in this particular case the rhyme seems to suddenly appear out of nowhere in such a hokey-poky way that it seems as if it is artificially tagged on. In fact, there is nothing in the words "choke" and "poke" that support the previous statement that the rose is beautiful. Instead they seem to immediately contradict it.

Then you have a logical coherent development problem starting in the next stanza. The phrase “beautiful as is." is a fragment which just hangs there meaninglessly.

The statement "So chose the rose!" is grammatically incorrect. What you seem to want to mean is "So choose the rose!" Or at the least: “So I chose the rose.”

------------------------

Nevertheless the subject has potential and the effort is commendable. Looking forward to reading more of your poetry.

I'm really no good at reviewing poetry...so bear with me...

The Thorn, the Branch, the Rose, the Bush
These are all the components of Rose.
Beautiful beyond the world, but

They hide and poke.
They slide and choke.

Beautiful as is,
A Thorn will always hurt.
A Rose, beautiful as is, without the pain.
Without the hurt.

Beauty lies from within.
So Chose the Rose,
And not the Thorn.