The Raid on Fort Pierce

Love the choppiness here! Works very well with the subject at hand, as does the repetition. However, the part where you repeat but not really, where he comes to life again, it seams a bit dead, pardon the pun. What makes the poem interesting up to that point is that it seems to be a dead soldier whose spirit is still on the battleground. Operating under this assumption, the resurrection call is interesting, but confusing when implemented. What is it, exactly? At first I thought it was someone playing a video game, but then I re-read your description and thought maybe they were in a play? Or does it have some religious meaning? Because this is poetry, you probably don't want to explain it in the poem if it's something obvious to a rather large group of people. But I'm very curious. The ending is probably supposed to seem strong, but the questions flatten it out instead. Because I don't really have a solid idea of what just happened, if he was really dead or not, I have no idea how to even begin to think about those questions, let alone answer them.

Actually, Jabbs has a good point there regarding the ending, too. Listen to her. She articulates it much better.

Okay. This poem was sort of abrupt.Where it just goes around everything but I do think that it helps give a sense of chaos and things, so nice. I do like the idea, it's a great one. But as they said the story and framing didn't work too well. You repeat the word dead so many times, it's almost annoying to hear it at the end. I do think I'd get a laugh r still if you threw in "I don't know, I'm still dead!"(sorry, lack of sleep). Anyways, you reuse a lot of words, like "All, I, who, know," All within close proximity with each other and it just gets tiresome, you know? If you got some other words and changed it up a bit, I doubt you'd have much if any rewriting to do. =]

Good luck, keep writing.

Silented1.

This poem definitely seemed like it was a great idea. However, the structure and content seemed forced. In poetry, especially narrative, you want to allow the reader to grasp the points and ideas that you are trying to get across. While your pain had the right idea, I felt that you repeated it too many times ("I am dead; therefore I cant do anything). You want to have the main idea, but branch it out with metaphors, and literary devices so the reader can accept it, and then put their on view on it. IN this poem, it felt as if the reader was being force fed the idea with repetition.

But I love the idea. It was neat to read, and there were some brilliant moments.

Overall it is a good poem. It doesn't give me a feeling of being there, it gives me a feeling of being inside the narrator's head. That's a great thing for a change.
*
There's only two little nit-picks. Three sentences don't end with a full stop:
I can't look. I'm already dead
I can't move. I'm already dead
I can't say. I'm no longer among the dead
I think it would help with the presentation of the poem if you did end them with a full stop.
*
The other nitpick is the two sentences that are indented:
The Rebs advance.
The resurrect call comes.
I think the poem would be easier to read if they weren't.
*
Again, good poem, and keep writing!
*
~Luciano

I loved the poem but it would have been better if it was a descriptive eassy. You description is too detail and it lost the flow of poetry

I'm here for you! I've got time to kill, so let's do this review, ja? And forgive me for anything confusing because I'm definitely no poet.

First off, I feel the repetition was forced. It happened way too often for it to sink in. It was like a punch in the gut every time I read "I'm already dead", and then one last smack down with "I'm no longer dead". Just repeating the parallel structure two or three times is fine, but when it gets to four, five, and definitely more than that, it gets tiring. Show us why they think they're dead! Surely they feel stiff, bloody, deaf... Something convinces them that they're dead.

And another peeve of mine is the ending here. The last three or four lines where it explains that their no longer dead--don't explain that. Show us, and allow it to sink in. You want the reader to leave, thinking about the poem. Don't just give the question and tell us the answer. Let us figure out the message for ourself!

Otherwise, I think this is a very well-inspired poem and I hope you polish it! It definitely has potential.

Keep writing!

Jabber, the One and Only!

Sare --

I can't remember the last time I reviewed you! Good to see you writing again. I have two major complaints with this poem.

[one]

Narrative. Let it be narrative poetry, but don't strain the narrative, dear. A lot of times, you will see poetry writ in third person, because third person is an easier voice to leave an impression in. If you stick to first person you end up sounding - if not whiny - then self centered.

I don't mean this in a bad way. The world's revolving around this first person character when it should be the character living in the world, if that makes sense. Basically, what I'm saying is, get rid of the "I" narrative. It sounds a little awkward, dear.


[two]

I really, really, don't like the raising of questions in poetry. Let the poem tell, but don't let it ask of us! Just by writing it you're asking a lot of us to read and interpret it. You can do without the questions.

The narrative and questions really override the message that this poem is setting forth. Without them, you'd have more room for elaboration, for setting effect, for more -- maximize your words, Sarah, and use them to tell us a story without telling it to us like such.

Good luck! Any questions, PM.



June