Holding Lightning

[Riesa]

...........................

[Virgil]

It's a little different for you Reisa, the longer lines. I like the line lengths. I like the poem a lot except for the last stanza. First I don't understand the last stanza but even so I don't see any phrasings that capture me. "Crookedly" is a poor adverb, no? And "Chaste as half O eyebrows acknowledge cast shadows" seems forced (eyebrows acknowledge shadows?). And the first part of the last line seems awkward: "hooded quotations beat against cinderless suns" (hooded qutations?).

But I like everything else. "Sighed he upon shoreless days" is a fabulous opening phrase! And then the flower imagery ("might decorate the sea" -love it!!) is very pretty. I love this entire little stanza:

She under Venus thrown, captured trees moonglown, scratching sky,
Voices slipped lapsed thunder. Stars winked one to the other at night's lazing. Very nice touch. And the next stanza is very nice too, childish bent head, with the children dancing around, and then "She bent too." is perfect. A simple line that is totally earned by what was above.

I don't know if you even need that last stanza. Perhaps you might want to end it with "She bent too." Or you might to cut the last satnza except for the closing exclamation. Like this:

Sighed he upon shoreless days, shooting rays off latte cream,
heaved heavy flowers as Gauguin maidens orange and green
might decorate the sea, skin floating dull golden in grass skirts
lest forgotten, weaved scent in scarlet blooms.

She under Venus thrown, captured trees moonglown, scratching sky,
Voices slipped lapsed thunder. Stars winked one to the other at night's lazing.

His bent head childish, holding lightning (secrets)
hand-written poems on yellow grass postcards.
Waves tore as seafroth eyes grew elephantine glimmer
behind eyelids sun transparent, children danced silent through a sailboat's wake.

She bent too.

“O Me, O Life.”

[Riesa]

Virg. :) Thank you for taking time to read and comment. I'll keep the last stanza, I like it, it has enough meaning to me to stay. I do realize it's hard to get though, so I may change it minutely some day. Thanks for continually showing up to comment...see ya. :wave: :D

[Pendragon]

A poet with a backbone, Reisa! Like I've told others, only change a poem if you think it needs the change. That said, unfortunately, I do agree with Virgil. Maybe it's just a guy thing, but it's only a minute change. The poem is excellent! http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l108/AbsalomKane/Smilies/ThumbsUp.gif

[Riesa]

okay...perhaps I'll change it a little, thanks, Pen.

[Virgil]

Better, Reisa.

[Il Penseroso]

In a poem with such wonderful imagery it's the short lines that really stand out to me on this one. With Virgil I'm fond of the "She bent too." These only have this effect when built up by great longer lines, and show wonderful technique by the writer.

That said I'm really not sure what to make of the poem's meaning. Is it about finding a child's poem? That last stanza still kinda loses me, I'm not sure what to make of it.

[jon1jt]

NOTE:
in the midst of writing my review for this poem its author decided to (haphazardly) edit the last stanza. i'll go ahead anyway and post my thoughts on the original as the one at present pales in comparison. um...sorry. :)

i don't dare to find a unifying theme or plot. what i see in this poem are moments of experience, congeries in search of something ---told in a sensual lyricism, a pulsing romantic heart of moon-filled colors spilling line into line.

The imagery reminds me of the work of the Romantic poets and makes me sigh to think of the state of contemporary poetry with its emphasis on “less said the better.“ bull####, and the poem agrees with me. :p

There is a playing with images of light and darkness, the light that shines from within this piece out from some unknown center.


Sighed he upon shoreless days, shooting rays off latte cream,
heaved heavy flowers as Gauguin maidens orange and green
might decorate the sea…

Voices slipped lapsed thunder

“behind eyelids a transparent sun”

I don’t think the piece crescendos with the line, “she bent too,” in spite of all the raging beauty this short line releases it is tempting to want it to end right there. But the release of the lyrical energy (lightning) comes in the last stanza for me:



Crookedly did accept under thatched-roof geckos click
The far-flung hum of salmon’s seaweed song: ‘where fresh waters run.’.
Chaste as half O eyebrows acknowledge cast shadows,
hooded quotations beat against cinderless suns; “O Me, O Life.”


The hum is “far flung,” and strangely enough, the speaker “crookedly did accept" notes, perhaps, her disorientation (a disorientation alluded to earlier in the poem with the mention of “Venus Thrown.“) I couldn't help but think of the philosopher Heidegger who uses the term to merging of life and the world: “we are thrown into the world.“ thrown from that center of oceanic innocence into light/darkness.

I sense a nervous energy or anticipation for the “where” of fresh waters running. this final stanza, in my mind, is the highest expression of hope in the poem. the rest is all just a nice idea of it.

Are the “eyebrows” noting the speaker’s expression of eyes once shut now opened, acknowledging the “shadows“ and “cinder less suns“ approaching?

in the last stanza we return to the theme of light and darkness:


Chaste as half O eyebrows acknowledge cast shadows,
hooded quotations beat against cinderless suns; “O Me, O Life.”


Ah, i know Whitman when I see him. “O Me, O Life.”



“answer.
you are here.
That life exists and identity.
That the powerful play goes on
And you may contribute a verse.”


i respectfully disagree with ms. riesa and those dissenting …ahem…male poets as well who see the original last stanza to be at odds with the beatitude of what came before, and after. :p

[Virgil]

:lol: :lol: Touche` Jon. You did make the last stanza (the original one) more understandable. And perhaps there is a need for it. OK, but I still think some of those phrasings are hard on the ear: "Crookedly," "Chaste as half O eyebrows acknowledge cast shadows," "hooded quotations."

[Il Penseroso]

Yeah, now that I can see the original final stanza again I have to admit that I like that more. Much more.

[ktd222]

Holding Lightning
________________________________________
Sighed he upon shoreless days, shooting rays off latte cream,
heaved heavy flowers as Gauguin maidens orange and green
might decorate the sea, skin floating dull golden in grass skirts
lest forgotten, weaved scent in scarlet blooms.

She under Venus thrown, captured trees moonglown, scratching sky,
Voices slipped lapsed thunder. Stars winked one to the other at night's lazing.

His bent head childish, holding lightning (secrets)
hand-written poems on yellow grass postcards.
Waves tore as seafroth eyes grew elephantine glimmer
behind eyelids sun transparent, children danced silent through a sailboat's wake.

She bent too.

Ear to seashell heard
the far-flung hum of a salmon’s seaweed song: ‘where fresh waters run’
whispered through the shadows cast by a sorrowful quotations pulse;
“O Me, O Life.”

I’m responding to this draft. He obviously has trouble getting over her. I guess what reminds him of her are these “shoreless days” where he only sees the sea. I like that you use sea because it contrast well with the fresh water in your last stanza. The only kind of general connection I, myself, can make with the sea is that it contains salt, and salt poured on a wound is excruciating. I imagine that’s the kind of pain he is feeling when thinking about her. I’m also guessing the postcards and poems he is holding which reminds him of her is in one sense like literally holding lightning, in that it brings about all the sweet memories they shared but no longer are sharing? So is he dressing the sea to remind him of her, or their experiences together? Your poem ends nicely, because it hints at a fresh start, fresh water, no salt, and a movement inward toward the individual. You do not introduce the quote, say with a colon, so I’m guessing this is separate from the thought expressed in the line just above the quote? Which means thinking about him, and less about them, is life?
I’m at a lost when it comes to the second stanza. I have no idea what you’re trying to accomplish there. You don’t need “secrets” in the third stanza because it’s a given that the experience these two shared are specific to them. Overall your poem is nice. I’m out of things to say at the moment. I’m trying to accentuate more of the positives in people’s work these days. I would also suggest finding ways to highlight the “he” more, towards poem’s end. You know, just like the way you started off the poem. I can’t read the first few words out loud without annunciating the “he”.

[blp]

I liked the original last stanza too. I think I like this most of all the poems I've seen of yours, r. Speaking as an occasional proponent of 'less said the better bull****'. ;)

[symphony]

I always keep saying I'm no expert in judging poems, and now I'm repeating it :D . I'm just a common reader who likes a poem only if she likes it! :lol:
Fresh imagery always makes a poem jubilant and thus enjoyable, and I love such poems. This poem made me visualize, and it has a distinctive air about it.

Sighed he upon shoreless days
A wonderful wonderful wonderful way to start! :D + I loved this part-

She under Venus thrown, captured trees moonglown, scratching sky,
Voices slipped lapsed thunder. Stars winked one to the other at night's lazing.
and not to mention the "She bent too" and the ending exclamation, which somehow reminded me of Shelley's "A Lament"- "O World! O Life! O Time!"

But wait, what am i doing?! Ur a great poetess and u definitely dont need me to tell u that!! :lol:

[jon1jt]

:lol: :lol: Touche` Jon. You did make the last stanza (the original one) more understandable. And perhaps there is a need for it. OK, but I still think some of those phrasings are hard on the ear: "Crookedly," "Chaste as half O eyebrows acknowledge cast shadows," "hooded quotations."


i'm glad to see you're coming around, but you're still hating "crookedly" and the third stanza! c'mon Virge, it's not about the ear, it's about the soul! :lol:

blp: :thumbs_up

ms. r: "Sighed he upon shoreless days," "She bent too." Symphony is right, the poem sings of Shelley, Keats too. :thumbs_up

[Riesa]

I wanted to say thanks to Virgil, Pen, IP, jon, Blp, ktd and symphony, all who took the time to read and discuss, ponder even these few words of mine. It's so hard to throw these poems out there for me, I don't know how you other poets do so with such fervor and continuity, y'all know I admire your work. Symphony you are new to me, but so enthusiastic and obviously smitten with poetry, and understands where I am coming from very well..


always keep saying I'm no expert in judging poems, and now I'm repeating it . I'm just a common reader who likes a poem only if she likes it!
Fresh imagery always makes a poem jubilant and thus enjoyable, and I love such poems

that's exactly how I look at poems too..:thumbs_up thanks for your time and comments and hey..."I'm a great poetess and I don't need you to tell me that?" :lol: You'd be surprised. ;) that is something I need to hear many more times before I even come close to believing that. so thanks so much.

jon..what can I say? defender o mine...iron giver, spine builder. you in your velvet space helmet, me in my rainbow hat. :p thanks for your time and what you see through those poetic eyes, heart and soul. :)

blp..:lol: not quotidian enough for ya? next time I'll write one about garbage day and making the bed. thanks.

IP ~ It's not about understanding, it's about fun with words. right? thanks. :) but the meaning really is quite simple and age old: guy, girl. the moon, the ocean.

ktd...you shouldn't stop criticizing, I mean it's nice to focus on the good stuff, but you have a sharp eye for what's superfluous. however, in this case...secrets stays, I hear it, without it would change the poem in a way I wouldn't like as much. I'm trying to get some of that backbone Pen's talking about, no offense. :eek:

as for that last stanza, Virgil, Pen...hmm. I may still go back and make some small changes one of these days. I do hear your observations. :nod: thanks again all.

question of the week....meaning: ? why do poems have to have clear meaning, and is it an expectation in women's poems more than in men's?

[Virgil]

question of the week....meaning: ? why do poems have to have clear meaning
I think this is a corollary to the Classicism versus Romanticism debate. Classicism strives for clarity while Romanticism strives for imaginative effect. However, if you look at great poems of Romantic sensibility you will find meaning there too. So let me make another qualifyer to your question: poems with no meaning are not art; a computer can randomly pick words and lay them out on a page. Any art with no meaning has no reason to be. Poems with less than clear meaning are a different story but they do raise problems. A lot depends on why they are less than clear: if a poet is less than clear becasue of obscurity, or personal allusions and associations, that's one issue. T.S. Eliot falls into this catagory many times, and once you are able to understand his obscurities you get the feeling he's actually a classicist. If a poet is less than clear because he is striving for a suggestion through images and sounds and style, that puts him in another camp. Examples of such are Whitman (as Jon loves to point out) and D.H. Lawrence (a devotee of Whitman and someone who's writing I really admire as people know). Neither of these two camps are wrong. I enjoy them both and while I'm certainly no poet, i have tried to do elements of both. Maybe i've rambled on here, but let me say that I don't find fault with less than clear meaning. I've always said in many of my comments on people's poems on lit net that I may not understand a passage but as long as the author understands what he/she intends than that's usually enough. My problem with your last stanza was not the clarity but the awkward language. Now if you have a reason for that awkwardness that adds to your poem, then by all means keep it. Otherwise it strikes me as off key.



and is it an expectation in women's poems more than in men's?
To be more clear or less clear? Your not being clear there? :p :lol: Whichever, i don't think there is a gender expectation to clarity. At least not in my mind or in anything I've read. But I don't read the latest moron critics.

[Riesa]

Now if you have a reason for that awkwardness that adds to your poem, then by all means keep it.

Hiya virg! thanks for the thoughtful response. umm, keep in mind the stanza starts with the word 'crookedly'. by definition is awkward and off key. maybe?...I don't know :)




To be more clear or less clear? Your not being clear there?

to be more clear...to write hallmark card poetry. direct straightforward laments, etc...do you think a poem by a woman that might on first glance seem confusing and hard to understand might not just be considered 'bad' while on the other hand an abstract poem by a man might be considered...umm..godly, experimentation, *cough* ART. just questioning. :p Or is it just the full moon causing me to be hysterical and paranoid? :lol:

[Virgil]

Hiya virg! thanks for the thoughtful response. umm, keep in mind the stanza starts with the word 'crookedly'. by definition is awkward and off key. maybe?...I don't know :)

Hmm, I didn't think of that. No matter how many times I read it, I just can't get myself to like it. But perhaps it's me.


to be more clear...to write hallmark card poetry. direct straightforward laments, etc...do you think a poem by a woman that might on first glance seem confusing and hard to understand might not just be considered 'bad' while on the other hand an abstract poem by a man might be considered...umm..godly, experimentation, *cough* ART. just questioning. :p Or is it just the full moon causing me to be hysterical and paranoid? :lol:
I don't know. Those kind of thoughts don't dawn on me. Sylvia Plath is fairly experetmental and I've never heard her get criticized for it. No, I think you're just being paranoid. :p

[Riesa]

hey virg...it's okay. it's too personal, I wouldn't expect you to like it, don't force yourself! or maybe you are just being stubborn.. :lol: what was it Rachel used to say about ya? obstinate? :lol: only kidding. Like I said in an earlier post...I do hear your criticism, and I will think about it, maybe make some minor changes, mold it into something even YOU will like. or not.

thanks V. (and Sylvia Plath got criticized for writing about things considered too female to be taken as serious poetry...i.e. Pregnancy...) so. :p

[ennison]

Get a hold of 'The Poet's Tongue' jointly edited by W H Auden. You'll read there the variety of types of 'poetry' that that competent poet and commentator considered worthwhile.
I don't think that Emily D or the more modern female poets of note are 'simple' or simply female but are full of abstract ideas that they try to put in concrete terms

[jon1jt]

question of the week....meaning: ? why do poems have to have clear meaning, and is it an expectation in women's poems more than in men's?


to be more clear...to trite hallmark card poetry. direct straightforward laments, etc...do you think a poem by a woman that might on first glance seem confusing and hard to understand might not just be considered 'bad' while on the other hand an abstract poem by a man might be considered...umm..godly, experimentation, *cough* ART. just questioning. :p Or is it just the full moon causing me to be hysterical and paranoid? :lol:

the slightest suggestion that female poetry is viewed with a different standard by male readers is going to raise all of the programmed replies used to obfuscate any discussion on the subject in the same way it's been used to thwart charges of discrimination ranging from unlawful hiring to affirmative action. it's still a white male-dominated world and our cultural norms and values reflect that, so let's not kid ourselves.

historically the examples of female writers whose work was kept from reaching its full potential by the dogmas of a snobby male literary establishment is undeniable. an example is one of my favorite writers, May Sarton, who died in 1995 and left behind an body of work that stretched over half a century. The New York Times wrote a scathing review of one of her early books of poetry and they never reviewed her work again. Reviews matter, and it had the undesired effect of receiving no critical consideration in literary journals. in the backdrop of the Times review was the fact that she was one of the first outspoken lesbians, even though her books are practically silent on the topic. She lost two college teaching positions later as well. even today she is regarded as a writer for women--because her books explore subjects like solitude and "feelings"? Sarton is one example, there are others.

Riesa, there is no way to measure whether the work of female writers receives a candid evaluation from men--or women for that matter. unfair critiques go on at different levels in the forum as well, such as members who forge friendships and routinely write glowing reviews for poems they privately believe are less, or petty rivalries or jealousy that stands in the way. i've been banned from more than one forum for my...ahem...humble opinions :p, which bore a meddlesome inner editor for me. :p i'm a good boy now. 2 + 2 = 5. :)

the most we can do is follow our own voices and write the best we can and hope that those evaluating can bracket their prejudices and produce critiques with the same wealth of integrity that the poet uses when writing her poems. :)

you're not paranoid, just aware. ;)

p.s. speaking of my humble opinion, i really think Virge calls them like he sees them. and he doesn't always like my poems either, which bothers me because we're men and need to look out for each other. :lol:

[Virgil]

hey virg...it's okay. it's too personal, I wouldn't expect you to like it, don't force yourself!
Whadda you mean you wouldn't expect me to like it? I don't understand it. :lol: And it's truely the language I'm reacting to.


or maybe you are just being stubborn.. :lol: what was it Rachel used to say about ya? obstinate? :lol: only kidding.
:lol: I'm open to persuasion.


the slightest suggestion that female poetry is viewed with a different standard by male readers is going to raise all of the programmed replies used to obfuscate any discussion on the subject in the same way it's been used to thwart charges of discrimination ranging from unlawful hiring to affirmative action. it's still a white male-dominated world and our cultural norms and values reflect that, so let's not kid ourselves.
I can't answer for what goes on behind the scenes in literary magazines and publishing houses, but English departments across the country (and probably the world) are predominantly female. I bet most people in the publishing world are female anyway, and the couple of men I've personally known that worked for magazines (though not literary) are of the ultra liberal sort. Every writer gets critiszed for something or other. To say today it's because of sexism is frankly looking for excuses.


p.s. speaking of my humble opinion, i really think Virge calls them like he sees them. and he doesn't always like my poems either, which bothers me because we're men and need to look out for each other. :lol:

:lol: I guess I'll have to make an extra effort now to be particularly critical of your poems Jon. No, what would be the point of not calling it as I see it? I usually don't comment on stuff that is so bad that I can't find anything positive to say. But I'll point out what seems to me to be the good and the bad.

[Riesa]

originally posted by Virgil To say today it's because of sexism is frankly looking for excuses.



originally posted by jon1jt the slightest suggestion that female poetry is viewed with a different standard by male readers is going to raise all of the programmed replies used to obfuscate any discussion on the subject


exactly. you twos. :p ;)


originally posted by Virgil But I'll point out what seems to me to be the good and the bad.and that's what ya should do..I still hear you virgil..sometimes a spade is a spade.



originally posted by ennison 'The Poet's Tongue' jointly edited by W H Auden.

thanks ennison..I will look into that. :)