naivete; shame; love (or the ribbon thief)

Psh. You're supposed to PM me when you post.

Firstly, I'd just title it "The Ribbon Thief". Naivete, shame, love...meh. I have this deep-rooted vendetta against listing in poetry, and throwing nouns at us from the title does nothing to tell us what the poem will be about.

there were no security cameras in those days

"In those days" is another empty phrase. It's extra clarification for something that doesn't need to be clarified-- the antiquity of the setting. We can already gather the time from other hints in the first stanza: pick-pockets, sepia, etc. One of the most difficult things to achieve in poetry is a balance between what's necessary for understanding, and an under-toned subtlety that gives the reader the credit to interpret it correctly themselves. Tough balance, I know.

just the bewhiskered storeowner's lazy eye
it took fast fingers and nonchalant pocket coats
to make a living in those sepia–toned days.

I don't like the use of the word "lazy" here; it seems to contradict the entire next two lines. If it takes fast fingers to make a living, that means there's a certain security measure the pick-pockets have to bypass; namely, the store-owner's watchfulness. But if the store-owner has a lazy eye, he wouldn't be much of a problem for pick-pockets, would he? Wouldn't be very watchful, either.

I'm a little thrown off by your use of words like "well" and "heck". It certainly gives the poem a more personal, informal feel, and to be perfectly honest I'm not sure what I think of it yet. Maybe I'll figure it out by the end of the piece.

You use the word "watched" twice in the second stanza.

and their dreams were as sweet and as brief as jelly beans.

Oh. Wow. I love this simile. Like, with a passion. And I don't normally spend time to point out things I like; normally I just focus on corrections. But, yeah. This is good stuff. Yum.

she didn't really, of course, and she didn't want it for a career,

Didn't really, what? Didn't want what for a career? You lost your subject somewhere in the previous stanza.

luscious ballpoint pens

Navita mentioned the cluttered feel of all this imagery, but I like the feel it establishes: a cluttered, wonderful shop. However, the adjective "luscious" doesn't work well to describe a ballpoint pen. It's something Galerius always points out in his reviews. When dealing with imagery, making sure you're using adjectives and combinations that can be visualized. I can't visualize a luscious pen.

I agree with Navita that "rejection slip" sounds fake, but the part about Charlotte seems out of place and random to me. Who's Charlotte? Forgive me if it's a well-known literary allusion that I'm just too uneducated to understand (;P), but it doesn't mash with any of the imagery up to this point.

Overall

All in all, I enjoyed this. I detected the color motif, the sepia/pink-red contrast, but it was a little bit too underplayed to come across as the driving theme of the piece. The main thing I'm wondering is why on earth she stole a ribbon. It's a lovely idea and as a whole I really did enjoy this poem, but it's like the center puzzle piece is missing. She thinks she has been rejected-- so she steals a ribbon? There's a connector thought missing. A motive that becomes clouded with all the lovely imagery.

Best of luck, good job, and PM for any questions (as well as when you post something else)! I genuinely enjoy your poetry, so keep writing.

~Evi

Why did she steal the ribbon?

Or rather - why might anyone do things without thought, without a care because of a 'rejection slip come the day before'? This is sort of what makes this poem so engrossing - there is always that question driving it through, and only the barest hint of the answer. The mystery is compelling, but not frustrating - the details of the poem are what make it enchanting and intimate, but at the same time you pretty much talk about everything in sight except the question I most want to know about. Clever.

there were no security cameras in those days

Oh, ha. Loved that one. What I love about no capitals is the immediacy of action, the total lack of formality. It's cute.

just the bewhiskered storeowner's meandering eye

Nothing like a clunky second line to totally ruin the effect of the wonderful first line. 'Bewhiskered storeowner's meandering' is an EYEFUL - too many long words, too close together, so that the overall meaning is lost and so that I don't feel like continuing reading. I vote 'meandering' to be removed. Bewhiskered is too cute to go. But surely there must be a neater way of saying that.

it took fast fingers and nonchalant pocket coats
to make a living in those sepia–toned days

'Nonchalant pocket coats' worked; 'fast fingers' bordered on the cliche while 'sepia toned days' was just meh. I scanned the poem for further expansion of this motif, but this one stood out like a sore thumb. Seems like overkill.

well he had watched her enter. and he knew
she had real business– more of a serious nature
heck, most kids, gray dull like sharks, watched with
wild eyes and puckered mouths at lipstick–colored candies,
and their dreams were as sweet and as brief as jelly beans.

she didn't really, of course, and she didn't want it for a career,
but in order to soothe her papercut heart she
marched with head high past those clean, crisp notebooks–
luscious ballpoint pens– and the flowery stationary
and the rose–pink erasers and school–bus yellow hexagon sticks–

There is something not smooth about this. At first I thought it was the absolute clutter of words in the poem - papercut heart, lipstick-coloured candies, sweet and brief as jellybeans, clean crips notebooks, luscious ballpoint pens, flowery stationary, rose-pink erasers, school-bus yellow hexagon sticks - YOWCH! On the one had, imagery is great for creating the scene. On the other, too much imagery and I don't even bother to read it all - it's so different that it's similar. But the weirdest thing here was: this absolute clutter of words, this placement of adjectives and nouns with no finesse at all is actually rather typical of the shop itself - cluttered, inelegant and crammed tightly with stuff. So...the poem reflects the scene.

Even so, it would do well to run smoothly all the same.

Have a play around with sentence structure. I guess you could still keep it cluttered, but aim for focussing on just a few things instead of everything. Put yourself in the girl's shoes. She's heartbroken - would she have noticed all this? Also - the 'she had real business - more of a serious nature' sounds off. It sounds like the narrator is trying to be intelligent, but he's not - and here it appears like you're ruining his credibility, making me doubt his observations. This is not the best thing to do here, since in this poem, I'd want to focus on the girl, not her observer's eye. Also: 'heck, most kids, gray dull like sharks' annoyed me (again, the focus has switched from the girl to the internal voice of the narrator) and 'but in order to' was a bit old-fashioned as well; although this is written about something that happened in an earlier time, it's written, clearly, in the present (since how would we know about security cameras otherwise?) and so the odd phrasing sounds more like a syllabic filler than anything else.

From a bit more of an overall point of view so far, why is the imagery of the items in the shop so happy? 'jellybeans, clean, crisp notebooks, luscious ballpoint pens.....' ---> these are all happy things. What was the intention here - instead of creating the contrast between her misery and the happiness of the items in the shop (and in doing so, it's kind of like saying that when she steals the ribbon, she runs away with a bit of the happiness), it doesn't really reflect her mood well at all; it neither adds to it, prepares us as the readers for it, or makes it even a little bit believable when you reveal it.

when the rejection slip had come the day before
she couldn't fathom it, really
only instead to remember and caress the
flavor wafting out of her freshly inked words on the page–
a boy and a girl, a rose garden; a prick from a thorn; death. and every day Charlotte walked to his grave in a blushing silk

'Rejection slip' here sounds quite fake, simply because you have not prepared us well for her misery. The 'boy and a girl, a rose garden...' line sounded on the verge of cliche, but not quite. I loved the 'Charlotte walked to his grave in a blushing silk' part even if I did not see any significance of that to the current action.

meanwhile he scratched his 5 o'clock shadow, engrossed in the Sports Section

While I liked this line as well, I didn't think the narration was helped here. Let me explain: the first stanza begins with a more omni- look at the scene, the second (with the 'heck...' opinion) causes us to focus on the man as the narrator rather than the girl as the MC; the third focusses back on her since it outlines her thoughts - things the shopkeeper couldn't possibly have known; the fourth is a half-half of each; and this above quoted line slips back into omniprescient narration, as if we're looking at him not looking at the girl.

This seems an accidental mishap on your part to me as opposed to an intentional and deliberate switch of perspective. I'd say to have a good think about keeping one version of narration throughout - it looks clunky as it is right now.

flurry of movement floundered through the doors, to which
an old dog barked at its fleeing guilty shadow

Alliteration was nice, as was the fleeing guilty shadow, but what was the significance of separating out the two lines? It's sort of interesting that it makes that instant in time - with her legs in mid-run, ribbon in hand, eyes bright, dow barking, shadow disappearing - it makes that instant freeze in my mind, so that instead of seeing her continuously running, I snap the whole action in one go.

But then again, it also breaks the flow of the run (and the poem).

when she got home
all the brilliant strands–bleeding scarlet–
had unraveled limp in her pocket.
mother in the kitchen, humming
"dearie–that envelope you got? misaddressed–
did you cut yourself?"

daisy dazed, and all her petals shaken to stern earth beneath

My God, that was an embarrassing ending - misaddressed and all. It'd almost seem like a cop out, but then again, things like that happen all the time; people make mistakes and then do something they probably shouldn't on the basis of misinformation. The 'sepia' part which I didn't like before, sort of came out through the last line with the flower imagery, but it wasn't tightly woven enough throughout to be of any significance (the rosebush bit I didn't count since it was a clear cliche). Individually, there were a lot of lines I enjoyed, but in terms of the overall effect, the story of the girl didn't seem fluid enough - it lacked a motif that might have tied it all together more tightly. You could fiddle around with making the flower-imagery the motif - or you might choose something else entirely to incorporate in here.

Anyway, a wonderfully imaginative poem. Thank you for the read.