Published September 24, 2010
Four scored, and seven years ago,
at a 'Battle of the Bulge'
where your ma defended her
capital of V.
First strike - an incursion
Groping through for terrain data
hunkered down at Gros Cul.
Second ascent - incapacitating
Defenses meant to reject,
Weaving in slimy, forcing them
to accept the Union efforts.
Descending further - a slog
Through the soft valley between
East and West Seins.
Rising steadily - snaking
helix-like toward the climactic zone,
where would thrust the two-pricked attack
and separate Church and State.
The capital overrun - the ruffians
have won and whisper softly,
"Mrs. Booth, how like you this?"
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.
141,251 Literary Works • 674,330 Reviews
Umm... Wow?
This is... I'm not sure what to make of it XD It sounds very logical and contemplatively written. There are some parts I don't understand, but... I guess I like it.
It seems different to a lot of other poems, I think because it seems to lack all emotion. I don't like that, I prefer things that are overflowing with emotion, but this definately stands out because it doesn't convey anything like that, but it doesn't try to.
Congratulations, you have brought about an unfamiliar genre: historical poetry. I think, because it is different, this is good, but I wouldn't encourage you to continue writing like this. Poetry is an art, it needs emotion. If you can keep this kind of sophistication and add in that emotion, I think there is something brilliant in you as a writer.
This was good to read. Keep it up
"Eloquence" threw me off for a couple stanzas, but I think I got the gist of it– your alternative ending to the Civil War. There are some thoroughly off–kilter moments, and by this I mean in terms of your syntax/grammar. I can't tell how much of it you meant on purpose, so feel free to correct me if I misread something.
1) "scored"– did you misspell, or is it in reference to some kind of number of battles won, or perhaps to scratch or cut something?
2) I am a bit fuzzy on Civil War History currently, so I don't know what everything refers to, but "slimy" is pretty strange. Were the soldiers in formation traveling in swamps or very muddy areas? Just curious.
3) Haven't a clue what "seins" is– and the French translation (centers) isn't logical in the context.
4) The only reason I like "helix" is because I don't see it very often. But a helix is something akin to a spiral, and even the serpentine verb before it didn't shed any light on its usage.
5) "where would thrust the two–pricked attack"– I'm not sure about that "would". If you stuck an "it" before "would" it will give your readers something to stand on. Also, in the last stanza, "How like you this" makes NO SENSE grammatically.
So... in short, I am feeling pretty murky about this. It has potential, but what appears to be sarcasm and/or wit is lost in the various opaque metaphors you have running around. I must say that the final line is of particular interest to me, since it reminds me of "Mrs. Robinson" by Simon and Garfunkel.
"Eloquence" needs rehabilitation. I think some clarity, and not in an author's note but in the actual piece, will help tremendously. I suggest starting with the grammar.
Best of wishes and good luck,
–antimelrose
Watch your spelling.
I disliked the use of "data" and "helix-like". They struck me as a bit out-of-place. Also, I believe "two-pricked" should be "two-pronged".
Overall, this poem felt fragmented. The sentence fragments that made up each stanza and the placement of the linebreaks gave a really strong feeling of disjointedness, and so the poem did not flow at all.
Since most of the disjointedness came from the fragments of ideas, I suggest you go back through and rework the stanzas so that there aren't so many fragments. I think, if the ideas were more cohesive, the flow would improve enough that maybe fiddling with the linebreaks wouldn't be as necessary.
Otherwise, I did like all the historical references to the Civil War. They fit and built up to the last stanza.
So, this is your take on why Booth killed Lincoln? Sorry, I'm Canadian, so, i don't really get it.
It made me smile though. it was super happy, which is great, because the majority of pieces i've reviewed today were sad!
YOur flow was good, and so was your description!
Keep writing,
~WickedWonder