You, the Arsonist
The writing exercise in front of the class
concerns a pile of leaves
depressed and repressed
stricken from nature and laid to rest
under a great fluorescent ceiling
this is a mausoleum –
no – museum
to the endless application of imagination.
Our pens set off fireworks
until the pile of leaves has caught on fire.
and the fire department has to be called
because the smoke’s alarming people in the hallway
and then, of course,
the police get involved
because they don’t like the firemen
stealing all their thunder
so they haul you,
the arsonist,
to court, and then into the slammer,
where all that grows
is wet moss
that starts fire about as well
as Jack London,
indeed he would be the first to tell you
this is dangerous stuff.
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.
140,571 Literary Works • 673,516 Reviews
in a header: thought, "this was perfect"
never said that before
-M
never left this sad of a reply
hope it means as much to you
as for me
I'll never say it again
It simply communicated perfectly my own heart behind the soul of writing.
Really good poem. The only thing I would really consider changing would be the reference to Jack London, as the audience (like myself) may not know who he is and what validity he has to this poem.
Hi smorgishborg,
Not sure why you have such a change of tone within the "sticken...rest" line itself. The "stricken from nature" is obviously not a pleasant thought because of the word usage and the mood it entails, while the "laid to rest" has a sort of tranquil about it - a funeral, an honor to the removed. Both these conflict with each other; it might have worked had you incorporated this perpendicular structure in the previous lines or somewhere, at least. As it stands, you don't, and that conceals a great potential that could be had with this line.
I don't like this self-reflective "no". Don't overdo it when trying to make an inverse of the thought process so the reader can read the ponderings.
Sappy and painfully obvious, but it'll fly. It's not bad enough to warrant a deletion.
Check your tenses. "Has caught" vs "smoke [is] alarming people" , etc.
I'm pretty sure that this is a reference to "To Build a Fire" - Jack London, moss, not being able to build a fire in the first place, etc. But there's no dignity in scrounging such a large part of your piece from another piece. It's good that you incorporated some of the ideas from the other story, but do you have to make it so obvious and let it eat away at half of your poem? A reference should only be a reference, nothing more.
In general, this was decent. The simplistic language is a double-edged sword; it either can provide a sense of passionate innocence (on the arsonist's part) or a detached mood. It doesn't work to have it go both ways (well, it does, but in this case that would not fit well with what the poem is trying to convey) and so the reader is forced to stop at the fork in the road and choose a path, risking going down a completely different interpretation. Keep that in mind.
Hope that helped,
Galerius