Points:
Time spent:
Canary word: Present
Possible AI signals:
Original Text:
Are you sure you want to delete this comment? This cannot be undone.
Mark this comment as a review? Points will be awarded to the poster.
Your comment was posted, but it wasn’t long enough to count as a review. Reviews need about four complete sentences (at least 250 characters). Try writing another review that explains your thoughts in more detail — the author will appreciate it, and you’ll earn points for it.
125,008 Literary Works • 672,828 Reviews
Hannahbobannah,
I am finally here and I’ll just leap immediately in and say that I thought I loved this when I first read it. Now I’m reading it again and I love it considerably less. There’s something in the way that this poem runs which is moving in and out of focus for me, in the narration. I want to follow along but I’m being denied pretty heavily.
.
I don’t think this is because of your poem, necessarily, I think it may be because of me that I’m shifting away from liking this. I like what it’s saying, the relationship between characters and between writing and giving and keeping and expressing. This poem is about writing and it’s about giving back or giving to, or not doing what you need to be. And I love that, I love it incredibly.
I don’t like your last line, I think because I want blood to be first, even though it came second in the motion of the poem, I think ‘litter’ is surprisingly the harder word in this poem, usually I’d choose blood because of the congealing nature of it. I’d also consider some of the smaller words here, “really” throws the rhythm out of me as well (as does ‘all’ in the first stanza). I think it’s rhythm that’s putting me out here, I like it spoken because I like how rough and strong the narrator is, but I’m not comfortable with how flat it’s coming out for me. Why? I don’t know, really. I think the language is stilted in its own meaning. The complexity of your concept, the simple method of delivery are clashing together maybe? I know I sound terribly confused about this. It’s because I like it but it is getting to me at the same time.
I think this poem is litter and blood right now; it is the mixture of emotion and throwaway in lines and words. I want it all to be blood, because I’m brutal and vicious, but at the same time, I think the poem reflects your concept very well. I suppose I’m asking if you want to reflect that, or if you want it to be something else as well. I’m asking what your flutters ask in the poem, and I feel bad about that, but liberated.
Thank you for writing something I have to consider so deeply.
- ♥
I'll have to admit it, your title grabbed me. It just seemed so bizarre that i just had to check it out.
Good things: your imagery was fantastic. I especially enjoyed the comparison to chain mail. You did an excellent job with that. I pictured a duck passing over your head and questioning you accusingly. I could almost feel the guilt. The way you ligned the poem up caught my attention. Thw way you used a colin on the second last line caught my attention. Maybe i'm just obsessed with colins, but I liked the idea you put into place with it/
Bad Things: The title, though interesting, doesn't have alot to do with the poem.
haha, colons are really fun to use. i agree! thank you so much for taking the time to read my poem and leave a review.
Hey Hannah,
It's interesting that you chose the title of your poem from the stanza which held the least interest for me. The poem touches on a few ideas: how people change to please each other, how people often don't see the value in other people's ideas, how love is sometimes about being hurt over and over. But by only touching on these ideas, you never really develop any of them -- there's no core theme/idea of the poem and it's much weaker for it.
I love the image of paper cuts in the second stanza. That has real potential, but unfortunately you weaken it again by explaining it for the reader:
The fact that he's tearing them away shows his possessiveness and disregard for the voice's safety. The harm and the greed is already displayed -- I don't think the quoted line adds anything to the poem which isn't already there. As always, with unnecessary words, the pruning will improve it.
Bizarrely, the stanza after it is almost incomprehensible. There's a cool "inanimate object to animal" metamorphosis which, I guess, might mean something but it beats me. The imagery is almost entirely new -- in my eyes it doesn't fit with the rest of the poem at all. Even if it's meant to develop one of the themes above, it simply isn't effective because you've started building something entirely new. In my eyes, at least, it doesn't fit there. I'm utterly perplexed why it features in the title...
The final stanza is a bit of a let-down. You've demonstrated that you've got an ability to conjure fantastic imagery and extended metaphors with the "paper / papercuts / crumpled pages" stuff going on, but then your allusion to all that at the end is surprisingly weak. How does it tie in with the other things you've been saying? The blood: yes. This is good stuff because it follows from the paper cuts and the greed, but I think "litter" is too general to adequately show the link to "paper". There's potential here, but I don't feel that it's been realised.
The only last thing I can say (and this is even more highly subjective) is that I think you could be more wary of sounding pretentious. Sentences beginning with the word "and" automatically gain (at least in my mind) the air of an upper class hostess droning on and on at her dinner party, or that of a reading from scripture.
This line feels particularly guilty of that, but it might just be because I don't like that stanza. What I'm trying to say, is that with the talent and potential you've displayed, it would be a shame to cheapen it and waste it by mixing in nonsense that "sounds poetic" but in fact confuses the reader and weakens the poem.
I hope most of that made sense. If not, feel free to post on my wall or PM me with any questions!
hmm, you're absolutely right that that line is over-explaining, Charlie. and your review has definitely given me a lot to think about concerning where this poem needs to be injected with more vividness or more links between sections to follow my train of thought. thank you so much for taking the time to review!
This is a very visual poem and the way you write makes it easy to visually what is happening without getting confused.
But where you state:
"and my hand in yours
and we went out by the river."
It sounds a bit choppy and I had to go back a read it more than once to understand what you were saying.
If you changed it to something similar like:
"and with my hand in yours
we went out by the river."
or
"but you crumpled my pages all in your bag,
my hand in yours
we went out by the river."
This would also make your poem flow better. But, I liked how you used the same word to start multiple lines in a row it added emphasis to your writing.
thanks for your review, writtenlove! i wanted to keep the logical sentence progression of prose even though i had line breaks, so that's why i chose to lose a little bit of the flow there, but you're totally right and it made me consider and make sure that's what i wanted. thank you again!