Young Writers Society

Greetings again! Looks like I am using your poetry as a whetstone to resharpen my reviewing skills tonight.

So, usually I follow my Vocabulary, Grammar/Structure, Interpretation format in my reviews. However, given that there aren't really Vocabulary "errors", it shall be slightly different this time.

my eyes flooding-
flooding

Though there is nothing wrong with how it is written at the moment, the repeat use of "flooding" directly after one another does seem somewhat redundant and, well, repetitive. By changing the first "flooding" into an indicative verb, aka just "flood", it gives the second "flooding" more purpose.

my eyes flood-
flooding me with empty rage

It doesn't change the interpretation of the poem, but now it makes the line 4, the one starting with flooding, seem like an elaboration on the line before it, rather than just "flooding" repeating itself.

my limbs shaking...

As the "flooding" above, the "shaking" will feel much more potent/stronger if you simply have it as "shake". I'd also suggest switching out the somewhat generic verb "shake" for a more visual/audio/sensory verb like "rattle", "creak", "strain", et cetera. It's optional, but will certainly enhance your imagery.

That actually to me a point now (I'm too lazy to retcon what I've already written). While your vocabulary is decent and quite varied when it comes to your nouns, I would suggest using more diverse verbs. They'll stop repetitions from occurring (like "flooding flooding", "rage rage", etc), and will make your work feel more alive. Also, though this is a personal preference and not really a rule, I'd recommend a few more sensory adjectives thrown into the mix. The more senses you make a reader use to interpret your work, the more they'll think about the interpretation.

Anyway, mini-rant over, we're on to Grammar/Structure. The first half of the poem doesn't really have any issues here for me, so on to lines 7-8.

you are forest canopy I am a mushroom

Two things here. This is the first time your audience is made aware of the "narrative target", aka the "you" the Narrator is talking to (since it's not the audience, but clearly someone else) I'd highly suggest making this first mention of them (also coincidentally the start of a line) a capital letter, to indicate to your audience "hey, I'm actually talking to/about someone specific here".
The other thing is to add some form of punctuation between the first half (you -> forest canopy) and the second half (I -> mushroom). Any form of punctuation here will clearly show your audience that there is a difference between the narrator and the "you". That this is definitely not an equal relationship, and that the two people are separated/different.

... the back of mushroom whales
- I knew

I'd suggest adding a question mark after "mushroom whales". It makes your audience actually ponder the question (even if self-reflective/rhetorical), only to then be faced with the answer that the Narrator, the one being burned and wilting, knew, yet still tries to water the "you".

Interpretation! This one was... interesting for us to interpret. We felt betrayal, and pain, but something about the flow, or in parts lack thereof, didn't make any interpretation quite stick for us. That does not mean there is no interpretation(s) to be found, just that we struggled to do so for some reason.

In conclusion, this poem has got places that can be improved to further strengthen your flow and paint your meanings to your audience. Though we ourself could not find a definite interpretation, we do see that others might and will, and thus accept that this is a decently written poem. Arrivederci, and until the next review, Auf Wiedersehn.