Warning: This work has been rated 18+ for language.
Deleted at author's request.
Points:
Time spent:
IP address:
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.
139,792 Literary Works • 672,769 Reviews
oh my god, wow.
Hey Lumi, take and leave what you will.
Now I want to start off saying a couple of things you probably know but have ignored or neglected for whatever reason. The number one thing is any rhythm what-so-ever.
is really;
make my death beautiful [pause] make it [pause]
tragic and [pause] slow so my children [pause]
may watch my eyes cloud [pause] make it [pause]
so that my lips are dusty golden a [pause]
midwestern dry spell trapped here[pause]
Hence there is no rhythm here and if there was then it would sound awkward and counter intuitive. Another thing is that just because you lack the punctuation when finishing up a sentence doesn't mean there isn't a stop there. We naturally break things apart in that way. How you went about your line breaks seems completely arbitrary except for the fact that they are around the same length. It's almost through a strange process of making it seem unnatural. It's distracting and to me goes against the type of practice I and so many others like.
In the piece it almost seems like you religiously stayed away from any subtle use of alteration. The words fall like any random paragraph in a book because of your lack of rhythm and lack of any literary technique what-so-ever. It is not written to convey that sense of in-the-moment how it's said or in-the-moment real imagery ect. Which means you would have to fall into the spectrum of expressing emotions for it to be a susceptible poem but instead you rely directly on this abstract story. It is numb because it's talking about someones words and not a first person up close view of how the person actually feels.
Then you have this;
Which is just more distractions and wordiness. The whole poem takes one concept and explains it over and over again. You don't quite go in depth with anything at all and yet, Repetition makes no practical sense here. These words together do the same thing - tacking onto a bland concept.
Then you got a subtle gem in this pile of rubbish;
The rest is too cliche and to lacking for my taste.
I mean not all of it's bad, you have subtle moments of awesomeness and then a wall of blandness surrounding it. I'd just work on it and use your better judgement.
Lumi, you know I love your poetry. This piece was no disappointment. You managed to balance right on on that thin, hard-to-find line of writing that is matter-of-fact, but not abrasive or laid completely bare, subtle, but not too elusive or vague. Realistic writing takes skill to maintain its poetry.
I'm going to do my best to include so constructive criticism and not just gush praise. The least I can do is tell you why I appreciate the things I do.
Formatting: I've formed the habit of automatically disliking pieces which leave out capitalization and/or punctuation because 9 times out of 10 there was no real reason...or it wasn't a good enough reason. Along those same lines, random line breaks tend to be thrown around helter-skelter just because. There's no question in my mind that both of these techniques worked for this piece. They contribute to the blunt nature, leave the words bare and uncluttered and throw them all together in long flowing frustration...a bit like a rope. Normally I avoid reading any other reviews and comments, but I did glance at LadySpark's a bit, and with all due respect, I entirely disagree that it "didn't work." Maybe there are a couple points where "clunky" is the right word, but in those parts I think clunky is what it needs to be. "Clunky" is loud, it draws attention, it is frustrated, not necessarily graceful because it is trying to make a point or busy doing/saying other more important things. I think you made the right choice.
Normally I don't like cliche, over-used phrases...like "the end of her rope." I think you can get away with it in the first line. It sets everything up. The second time was too much. I understand wanting to make the parallel between mother earth and father time and the whole end-of-the-rope concept overall. I just think there is a better, subtler, more unique, more effective way to achieve that. A different way to phrase it the second time around. Another reason is because I noticed there are really three subjects, not just two, and I feel the understated entrance of the third was much more effective--and at the same time highlighted the need for change with father time. Otherwise, the thee subjects are put on unequal footing as well. Mother earth and father time enter the same way (and this also right off the bat makes father time's beef much less interesting. There was no anticipation for me. It was kind of an, "oh, him too" reaction.) but there third gets no announcement--which is good, I think, but they are currently overshadowed by that "end of his rope" phrase.
"time is a single point in a web of light yes
you can see your past and your present yes
and know your future because all that has happened
will come again famine after war after bloody genocides"
I like this stanza because it is time himself almost...discrediting his own power and revealing his secrets. The choices of events in the last line I'm undecided about. It's certainly true, they are one of those things which go around and come around. But at the same time, all of these are really grand-scheme things, as if time pays no attention to, or doesn't consider important, the "little" things, things which happen to individuals every day. I think that might add a little human feeling and connection, bring the reader in a little closer. The majority of people--not everyone, of course--don't have personal experience with famine, war, or genocide. Reading a newspaper article or watching a TV news segment doesn't have the same impact. That's just my personal thought. He sounds kind of lofty and self-important. But time has so much more impact on the individual than the whole.
I am torn about the last stanza--mostly because you get, perhaps, too specific. And I say too specific because the rest is more subtle, more broad, so the three examples to me did not specifically tie back into the earlier...complaints, if you will. I've always liked the ability to bring into poetry explicit and direct references to real-life events, places, etc. The affect is so deliberate and determined. I'm not sure if they come too close to the end, or just seem isolated because they have no anchor in any other real-life references earlier on. I don't have any straightforward advice about what to do or not do with this stanza without knowing exactly what you wanted to accomplish. I think the direct references can be very evocative, under the right circumstances. I guess that is for you to play with and figure out...or not.
If I sunk my teeth in a bit further I'm sure I would have more to say but this is what I have time for at the moment. As always, thoroughly enjoyed your work. Well done.
hey darling.
let's dance.
so i'm not sure what to think about this. there are some really brilliant moments, but there's also some not so brilliant moments. for instance, line two of the first stanza. it's too cliche for you. the image of rain in the clouds isn't new. i don't get the whole henry ford thing. at first i thought you're talking about a different henry ford, but after i googled it i realized you probably didn't so i was just left wondering exactly connection you're trying to make. you don't mention cars or anything, so it makes me think you were just saying henry ford to have a name to say. There's no connection from what I can see, and it's kind of annoying because I want to understand it, but it makes no sense.
The 'there' in stanza two bothers me because it feels out of place. I feel like you could delete it and the stanza would be cleaner and clearer.
I know you're not using punctuation, but because you're not, the first line of this makes no sense. Either line break it or add an 'and' or something. I would move the 'let them' down to the next line. Once I again, I see what you're trying to do, but it's not working. line one is so wordy. I would actually delete 'let them' all together. Eh, using the word unpleasantries doesn't work for me. It feels like you added it just to make it seem a little more elegant, but it didn't work. It just feels clunky and completely at odds with the simplicity of 'ants and bees'.
Once again, you have this completely random word. It doesn't work for me again. There's no reason for it, I don't feel as if you need it at all or it adds to the poem at all.
This is the brilliant line I was talking about in the beginning. This is where the poem really starts for me, because up until this point I've been sort of confused about what you were trying to say. Here, it starts making sense and it feels real and like it's actually in front of me.
Eh, up until now you've been working with things that weren't people. You were talking about the land, about divorce papers-- basically inanimate objects. Pulling the AIDS thing is totally out of left field and leaves me going '...why'. It cheapens your poem because up until now it was really surreal but now it's about gay people? It makes no sense at all, to be quite honest. The last two lines are a good finish, but once again, I don't understand why. Was it a competition after all about who was the most brave? I didn't get that at all until now, if that's the case.
Oh, and by the way, once you get to the stanza about divorce papers, I got a little confused on what pov we were coming from. In the beginning, we had very distinct 'father is talking' 'mother is talking' and it gets kind of muddled because they're both talking but you're not sure which is which.
Overall, I want to like this a lot more than I actually do. It's brilliant, just like the rest of your poetry but it's missing one key element that I just can't put my finger on. Maybe you're just trying to use too many literary devices at once. Continuing lines like you are, no punctuation, no caps-- it all gets muddled and confusing because in my humble opinion, you need punctuation when you're going to continue lines like that. If you don't, it gets confusing and I'm not sure which way is up and which way is down. I like the concept you have of mother earth and father time getting divorced, but it doesn't feel as poignant as it could. You're half trying to tell me something but I'm not sure what and I'm just overall confused, and then out of left field you talk about killing yourself, and then about AIDS and I'm so confused on what the actual point is.
But of course, at the end of the day, I adore it. <3
Love
sizzle
I'll try to knock this out in one go and be quick about it because I hate long posts.
The underlying/recurring theme of this entire mess is being at the end of one's rope. You explore how Mother Earth told the maker of the car to destroy her atmosphere, you see how Father Time deconstructed his life's work in a philosophical one-liner, and you see a disembodied third person muse divorce papers and the finality of all things because in the very end, it comes down to one deciding moment, whether you're signing a line on a paper or firing a gun in one of two directions (at yourself/away from self). The entire piece is an exploration of that one deciding moment. The final stanza with AIDS, Jesus, and everything thrown in is a historical recount of people being at the end of their ropes and why. It's all there, it just takes a couple of reads to get there if you don't hang on to the first line - which I understand because you didn't like the first line. So it goes.
The extraction of caps and punctuation is to give sole power of flow to the positioning of the words a la slam poetry. I know it's not as easy to follow as some pieces, but I ultimately like my choices in structure and formatting.
Thanks, love. <3
Now I kind of understand where you're coming from, but I'm still not sure I agree with it being the best way to showcase it. You've got so much going on and I feel like your actual meaning gets lots in 'its about this and this and this and this and this', you know?
<3
Okay so I got a really strong slam poem vibe from this. I am also going to reveal my bias so you know: uncapitalised poems drive me bonkers, but that's just me. There are a thousand better writers than me who would argue that. And heck, the best writers of the beat generation never used capitals. So, no big deal on that front. What I will say is that I think this poem would be drastically improved by punctuation. Punctuation, to me, is like the secret code that tells the reader how to read the words in their head, and I find that poems without it tend to be muddled.
It personally took me a long time to consistently use punctuation in my poetry, but I think its just another layer of art! Punctuation can be beautiful! But yea, I think a lot of the imagery you have is really cool, but I think it may need some revising.
Hello! This is herby, here for a review.
.
I'll start with the title. I think it fits the poem absolutely perfect.
Next, I really like the beginning of this poem. The idea that mother earth told the creator of cars that she knew it was inevitable, that she knew she would, so she wanted to die powerfully. I think you portrayed this idea really well. I really can't even describe how creatively wonderful this idea is.
As I continued with the poem you kind of lost me. I think I understand how mother earth and father time were married (another great idea, by the way), but I don't understand where the divorce comes in, or how that leads to your confusion. You might want to explain it a little better. Or, if you don't think that is the best way to convey your message, please just explain it to me. I would love to understand this better
I also think that you should include more capitals. I can see your point of how capitals make the situation seem more cut and dry, but I think that is a very good way the explain. Because the death of the world is pretty cut and dry. There really is no way around it.
I really do just like this whole poem. The original idea is pretty great, And I think if you change it it could be even better.
Thanks for the read,
herby