401

[paperleaves]

the mocha loveseat, dusted with ashes
from the foot of your Maduro cigar,
wheezes
as you flip through the classifieds.
my nimble hands
wrestle with angels,
folding gently around a mug of
hot vanilla chai.
briefly, you look out the apartment window,
following the movements
of the colored boys' legs, as they swingdance in clean tennis shoes
between jumpshots and free throws.
I can see the longing in your laugh lines, papa,
as you wobble over your cane
to the back porch, and call out,
with a wounded yelp
to what remains of God.
once, you scrounged for scraps of bread
on the hollow Ukrainian streets, you asked for water
and he gave you
the Holodomor.
so now, you cry, in an antiquated accent,
sobbing for sleep,
and the pity is, papa,
that you think He can hear you

[PrinceMyshkin]

As if the whole of this wasn't already magnificent,


once, you scrounged for scraps of bread
on the hollow Ukrainian streets, you asked for water
and he gave you
the Holodomor.
so now, you cry, in an antiquated accent,
sobbing for sleep,
and the pity is, papa,
that you think He can hear you

you conclude it with these heartbreaking lines!!! And did I ever tell you that my mother was born in Ukraine, in Yekatarinaslav, on the Ukrainian side of the River Dnieper?

[paperleaves]

No way!!!
I had no idea. Thanks for the comment, Jer :)

[Nietzsche]

I can see the longing in your laugh lines, papa,
as you wobble over your cane
to the back porch, and call out,
with a wounded yelp
to what remains of God.

I love it! Especially the quoted lines, but as a whole it is great.

[NisreenS]

I liked the details of everyday life in the poem.It is enjoyable to read.

[Hawkman]

An evocative poem, Paper, and a pleasure to read. Thanks

H

[Bar22do]

You're back, Paper! how nice. I love your poem, but was more particularly caught by:



I can see the longing in your laugh lines, papa,
as you wobble over your cane
to the back porch, and call out,
with a wounded yelp
to what remains of God.


Also, through your dad, you remind here of those horrible times of starvation in Ukraine, far from being enough researched on and that should never be left to oblivion.

Be well, Paper and thanks.

[~Sophia~]

Hi paper! Sorry to be so late to this party. I too have a Ukrainian ancestry. In fact, I was first generation born in Canada. I full well remember my grandmother and parents stories of the forced famine and the horrible things they had to do to stay alive. I'm not sure if you are referencing your dad or grandfather but if you want some authenticity in that regard - father is tato and grandfather is dido (pronounced tahto and dyido - in both cases the o is a short sound like the o in object ). Love this poem... as usual, you have such a unique voice and perspective. I always look forward to reading you!!!!!!!!! Hugs

[Virgil]

It's very good Paper. I'm not sure the ending is right. I would probably cut those last two lines. Seems like you're fishing for empathy and I think there is just the right touch without them. Those last two lines bring in an abstract idea that seems to not go with the rest of the poem.

[PrinceMyshkin]

It's very good Paper. I'm not sure the ending is right. I would probably cut those last two lines. Seems like you're fishing for empathy and I think there is just the right touch without them. Those last two lines bring in an abstract idea that seems to not go with the rest of the poem.

I can't see what you mean by the "abstract idea" in those last two lines but in any case I would like to support them in the face of your objection that they are appealing for empathy. I tend to think, as a generality and in respect to this poem, that once a poet has made a good solid case for her or the situation, she's earned herself the right to a naked expression in her own, spontaneous voice.

[Virgil]

I can't see what you mean by the "abstract idea" in those last two lines but in any case I would like to support them in the face of your objection that they are appealing for empathy. I tend to think, as a generality and in respect to this poem, that once a poet has made a good solid case for her or the situation, she's earned herself the right to a naked expression in her own, spontaneous voice.

I guess the abstract idea I was referring to is the dichotomy between the father's belief in God and the narrator's implied disbelief. It seems to bring in an abstract debate that wasn't the intent of the poem. I'm not siding one way or the other on the debate - that's for Paperleaves to decide - but the debate seems to enter there unprepared within the poem. Does that make sense? If Paper wanted that dichotomy to be the subject, or at least a strong element in the poem, she needed to work it and integrate it somehow earlier.

Also I do think she's fishing for sympathy there. A broken man appealing to God already has enough sympathy associated with it, and that's the heart and raison d'etre of the poem, and that's fine. But to double up at the end in an O'Henry type of closure with a unprepared twist reaches for bathos. She even uses the word "pity" there at the end.

As to spontaneous voice, I'm not objecting to that. She does have a wonderful spontaneous voice. I think where her poems (I'm speaking to you too Paper on this) is that the spontaneity needs to be managed afterward. Go with the spontaneity, build a draft, but then you have to look it over with a critical eye and edit.

[PrinceMyshkin]

I guess the abstract idea I was referring to is the dichotomy between the father's belief in God and the narrator's implied disbelief. It seems to bring in an abstract debate that wasn't the intent of the poem. I'm not siding one way or the other on the debate - that's for Paperleaves to decide - but the debate seems to enter there unprepared within the poem. Does that make sense? If Paper wanted that dichotomy to be the subject, or at least a strong element in the poem, she needed to work it and integrate it somehow earlier



Nor is she, I think, asking us to judge between the father's continuing belief and her skepticism, which I think she did foreshadow earlier with:



you asked for water
and he gave you
the Holodomor.

In a similar vein, at the end, she is any child inveighing against God in the face of her imminent loss of her father.



Also I do think she's fishing for sympathy there. A broken man appealing to God already has enough sympathy associated with it, and that's the heart and raison d'etre of the poem, and that's fine. But to double up at the end in an O'Henry type of closure with a unprepared twist reaches for bathos. She even uses the word "pity" there at the end.

As to spontaneous voice, I'm not objecting to that. She does have a wonderful spontaneous voice. I think where her poems (I'm speaking to you too Paper on this) is that the spontaneity needs to be managed afterward. Go with the spontaneity, build a draft, but then you have to look it over with a critical eye and edit.

It was not, to me, an O.Henryish twist at the end, because we feel the father, enfeebled, dying throughout the poem.

[Virgil]

Nor is she, I think, asking us to judge between the father's continuing belief and her skepticism, which I think she did foreshadow earlier with:



you asked for water
and he gave you
the Holodomor.


Oh, is the "he" referring to God? I missed that. Ok, perhaps not as off as I first read it.

[qimissung]

I have to agree with the tone, and voice of paper's poem, Virgil. I think the narrator sees this naked pain, lives with it, and is shouting her own imprecations to the world to stop, to leave him alone, haven't you (You?) done enough? But the reasoned voice of reality won't quite let her believe. She is left,, then, with his pain, and her own.

I simply do not see a plea for sympathy. I can certainly understand the difficulty when writing about painful material. One cannot underestimate that it does leave an effect on the writer, too. It does. But I think she handled this material quite deftly.

[neilgee]

I think Hawkman was right to call this "evocative". It definitely qualifies for what I think of as a mood poem, one of those that can change the reader's mood with its emotional pull, whether you understand the background or not.

[paperleaves]

WOW--I am so excited to receive so many comments on this poem. Thank you to all! First off, Sophia, thank you for your comment regarding the proper regard of father and grandfather..I may change 'papa' to 'tato' because it has a wonderful sound to it and adds to the richness of the poem (although originally, I was referring to a grandfather, for a more long-bearded, whitefaced image) and since I lack any Ukrainian descent, it broadens my perspective immensely.

Just a disclaimer, this was not written from an insider perspective...I have no family members who were alive in Ukraine during the Holodomor, nor have I heard any stories that inspired this, it was just a pure speculation as to the crippling events that occurred and the effects on faith afterward.

Virgil, thanks for your comments as well--after reading your dialogue with PM, I noticed that I did not capitalize "he" in the stanza regarding the Holodomor. That probably would have made things easier to understand, as the poem gets rather confusing with the interlocking of stories. I personally didn't think there was a plea for sympathy, but I may be biased. Since I have no emotional attachment to what happens in this poem, maybe I wasn't as masterful as I could have been in describing how awful it must feel to see how blind faith can sometimes destroy someone/ impact their well-being and not be able to do anything about it.

Thanks for your comments, it really helps me see what I could do to improve in my coming pieces and I can't wait to hear more!

love
paper

[blank|verse]

On the whole, this is another great poem, paperleaves.

For what it's worth, I do think Virgil has a point in saying the ending of the poem could be subtler; I think it strays too much into 'telling' rather than 'showing', to invoke Henry James's famous dictum. Perhaps something simpler like:

so now, you cry, in an antiquated accent,
sobbing for sleep, thinking He can hear you
I'm not keen on the line breaks, they seem a bit arbitrary (particularly 'wheezes' as a line by itself) and work against the flow of the measured, thoughtful tone of the subject. Maybe you should consider working in syllabics, where you just stick to a set number of syllables per line (as a basic rule of thumb); at least that gives the poem an element of control. In fact the first two lines:

the mocha loveseat, dusted with ashes
from the foot of your Maduro cigar,
both have 10 syllables, so would be an ideal form for the rest of the poem. I'm also unsure about 'loveseat' in the first line, I think it sets the wrong tone for what's to come.

But still, there are some wonderful images; the characterisation is spot-on and tenderly evoked; and the contrast between the comfort of now and the horrors of the past is strongly expressed.

[Virgil]

Virgil, thanks for your comments as well--after reading your dialogue with PM, I noticed that I did not capitalize "he" in the stanza regarding the Holodomor. That probably would have made things easier to understand, as the poem gets rather confusing with the interlocking of stories. I personally didn't think there was a plea for sympathy, but I may be biased. Since I have no emotional attachment to what happens in this poem, maybe I wasn't as masterful as I could have been in describing how awful it must feel to see how blind faith can sometimes destroy someone/ impact their well-being and not be able to do anything about it.

Thanks for your comments, it really helps me see what I could do to improve in my coming pieces and I can't wait to hear more!

love
paper
Yes, i do think capitalizing the "he" would not have thrown me. Ok, it's prepared, I'll agree, though I think Blankverse's comment is accurate.


On the whole, this is another great poem, paperleaves.

For what it's worth, I do think Virgil has a point in saying the ending of the poem could be subtler; I think it strays too much into 'telling' rather than 'showing', to invoke Henry James's famous dictum.

Yes I agree, good point. There is just something about that ending that doesn't satisfy. Perhaps it's just such a coloquial common phrase that kind of feels cheap. But I agree, the rest of the poem is very good. I still think she could leave out those two lines and end it there, and it would be fine, if not even perfect. I'm not quite sure why she needs to add that point at the end.

[paperleaves]

If I didn't add the last two lines, even if I revised them, how would you see the child's criticism of their grandfather's blind obedience to his religion?

It may not seem like it, but the main character in the poem is the child, who would be nearly eliminated if I didn't add his ring of disapproval at the end.
I'm just not sure I understand how the last two lines are the ones that plea for attention, rather than the lines about the vanilla chai or hands wrestling with angels.
Sorry I keep nagging, but I honestly never learned anything about what you're talking about in my poetry classes and I am curious to learn!

love
paper

[PrinceMyshkin]

If I didn't add the last two lines, even if I revised them, how would you see the child's criticism of their grandfather's blind obedience to his religion?

It may not seem like it, but the main character in the poem is the child, who would be nearly eliminated if I didn't add his ring of disapproval at the end.
I'm just not sure I understand how the last two lines are the ones that plea for attention, rather than the lines about the vanilla chai or hands wrestling with angels.
Sorry I keep nagging, but I honestly never learned anything about what you're talking about in my poetry classes and I am curious to learn!

love
paper

In the face of two such careful, scrupulous readers as B|V and Virgil, I hesitate to reiterate that the last two lines are not only NOT an overt plea for sympathy, but they are essential to the poem inasmuch as hitherto the speaker has constrained herself to speak objectively about her grandfather and his lamentable condition but finally, she cannot leave this interior dialogue with him without appealing to him directly or as directly as she can do. Despite her avowed disbelief in God, one might even read those last two lines, to mean that she hopes - if there is a God - that He is overhearing her denunciation of Him and might be swayed to honour her grandfather's loyalty to Him..

[Virgil]

If I didn't add the last two lines, even if I revised them, how would you see the child's criticism of their grandfather's blind obedience to his religion?

It may not seem like it, but the main character in the poem is the child, who would be nearly eliminated if I didn't add his ring of disapproval at the end.
I'm just not sure I understand how the last two lines are the ones that plea for attention, rather than the lines about the vanilla chai or hands wrestling with angels.
Sorry I keep nagging, but I honestly never learned anything about what you're talking about in my poetry classes and I am curious to learn!

love
paper

I think it's suggested like this:

I can see the longing in your laugh lines, papa,
as you wobble over your cane
to the back porch, and call out,
with a wounded yelp
to what remains of God.
once, you scrounged for scraps of bread
on the hollow Ukrainian streets, you asked for water
and he gave you
the Holodomor.
so now, you cry, in an antiquated accent,
sobbing for sleep,
He asked for water and God gave him the Holodomor; he continues to call out for God and gets nothing. You can't spell everything out for the reader. Best poems are those that suggest it. If a particular reader doesn't get it, well, that's unfortunate. But I think the power of your thought is greater with the suggested subtext.

Edit: Plus I think the adjective "antiquated" is perfect to add to your subtext.

[hack]

I suppose we would each rewrite it to suit our individual tastes. If I were to criticize or edit it I would pare it down some, but that may or may not be an improvement. I think that this is true to Papers voice, as I read it anyway. It works with or without the last two lines. It is good Paper. Thank You. Keep writing...peace...

[blank|verse]

Although people are clearly divided on this issue, in addition to what Virgil said, it might be worth your while looking up the term 'objective correlative', used by TS Eliot in an essay about Hamlet. Basically, he was saying a writer should describe a situation which evokes the feelings you want the reader to experience without saying directly: "You the reader should now be feeling sorry for this person – look at all the bad things that have happened to them" or whatever, a form of authorial intervention sometimes called 'buttonholing', as if you're grabbing the reader by the lapels and shouting in his/her face. It is therefore a technique best used with caution. (And I'm not saying you go quite that far in your poem.)

To take the 'vanilla chai' example – here, you're simply describing the action. You don’t add "and you the reader should like vanilla chai as well". That, rather crudely expressed, is the difference, which is the same for moral issues as well as one's of taste.


If I didn't add the last two lines, even if I revised them, how would you see the child's criticism of their grandfather's blind obedience to his religion?

As it stands, you evoke enough sympathy for the old man, 'wobbling' across the porch with his cane, still haunted by his horrific memories. Any reader that doesn't sympathise with this will be in a cynical minority.

If the old man is simply described as thinking God can hear him, it prompts the reader to consider his inner turmoil of how, if everything has a divine purpose, God could let such horrors he has experienced happen. Any right-thinking person today will naturally consider the implicit criticism of why he continues to believe in God in such circumstances but also understand, and hopefully respect, that this is what the old man believes and the differences between the generations. 'Showing' or presenting these tensions for the reader is far more poetically and dramatically powerful than coming down on the argument one way or another. This way you leave the reader to draw the conclusion and naturally pity the old man without being told to.

Now, because the child narrator is himself giving his opinion about this poor old chap (and hence 'telling' the reader what to think) the reader could rebel and turn against the child: "Leave the old fellow alone!" he might think, "he's been through enough without you forcing your modern, godless opinions down his throat!"

Writing things like this is always a bit of a balancing act, but the fact you've chosen the subject you have, and have successfully evoked sympathy for the old man and his belief, forces the reader to consider his predicament; and, if the poem is well written (which I believe this otherwise is) then you will have led the reader to the conclusion you want them to reach naturally, without having to announce the 'moral of the story' at the end.

[paperleaves]

Thank you for your replies, PM, Virgil, hack, and blankverse. I am going to do a little bit of reading and educate myself on this "objective correlative" term.

ALSO, thank you Virgil for posting my poem without the ending lines so that it was clearer to me of what you were suggesting it look like. I see where you and blankverse are coming from now that I have read your explanations. I obviously have not mastered this kind of poem, but for some reason, felt it more important to exaggerate the child's marked disdain toward his grandfather's blind obedience to his God. Perhaps if I beefed up the poem in other ways (although I think through the line about the "wrestling hands" may have shown the child's emotions concisely), I could have exaggerated that emotion in a different way and cut out the last lines. I will have to keep that in mind.

For now, this will remain as it is in my memory, a perfect example of a poem I've wanted to write for a looooong time, one that receives both constructive criticism AND praise, so that I may grow with my voice as a poet and tame the wild constructs of which she prides herself. ^_^

Seriously, can't stress enough, thank you for all your feedback. I feel like this is the response I've been needing on LitNet and it pleases me to see how many people are helping me here.
Love you all!


in kindness,
paper

[Virgil]

Although people are clearly divided on this issue, in addition to what Virgil said, it might be worth your while looking up the term 'objective correlative', used by TS Eliot in an essay about Hamlet. Basically, he was saying a writer should describe a situation which evokes the feelings you want the reader to experience without saying directly: "You the reader should now be feeling sorry for this person – look at all the bad things that have happened to them" or whatever, a form of authorial intervention sometimes called 'buttonholing', as if you're grabbing the reader by the lapels and shouting in his/her face. It is therefore a technique best used with caution. (And I'm not saying you go quite that far in your poem.)


Yes! Objective Correlative. My mind was striving for the term and it wouldn't come. Here's a whole page of links on it: http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=yfp-t-701-s&toggle=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF8&rd=r2&p=objective%20correlative.

[PrinceMyshkin]

I'm going to retract the argument I've been making contra B|V and Virgil (& which I just reiterated to paperleaves in a PM). If there were more instances like these:



once, you scrounged for scraps of bread
on the hollow Ukrainian streets, you asked for water
and he gave you
the Holodomor.

then one might read the poem as the child of a Ukrainian family mourning this aspect of Ukraine's 20th c. history (& how they had been misled by the Ukrainian Orthodox Church), then the last two lines would be entirely appropriate; but since her "Papa's" Ukrainian identity is but one of the facts of his existence, the narrator's skepticism re his beliefs is, I now believe, irrelevant to the poem, and an intrusion of the narrator into the poem, an unjustifiable theological debate.

[Virgil]

That is the core of the poem, and it's magnificently done. :)

[Babyguile]

I don't think Virgil has any sensible stance from which to criticise a voice such as paperleaves when he/she is not the author of his/her poem. I appreciate you're trying to make a point, Virgil, but you should have given up the cause a long time ago.

I agree with Princemyshkin about the right for the poet to stamp a little harder with their own voice toward the end. I think the whole poem works perfectly and I cannot criticise it and I would never try. Gosh no...

[Virgil]

I don't think Virgil has any sensible stance from which to criticise a voice such as paperleaves when he/she is not the author of his/her poem. I appreciate you're trying to make a point, Virgil, but you should have given up the cause a long time ago.

Huh? First of all I complimented her voice. Read each of my posts here, especially Post #11 of the thread. Second, she's asking for critical advice. I offered it. She can can do what she likes with it, including flushinig it down the toilet.

[Babyguile]

Second, she's asking for critical advice.

Where?

S/he simply posted the poem in order to share it, am I right?

[PrinceMyshkin]

Where?

S/he simply posted the poem in order to share it, am I right?

True, she didn't explicitly ask for critical comment/advice but I think it's the norm here that when we post something, we open ourselves to comment, positive or negative. Above all, may I point out that the comments both by Virgil and others were respectful; indeed, to me they were an example of the Forum at its best.

[Virgil]

True, she didn't explicitly ask for critical comment/advice but I think it's the norm here that when we post something, we open ourselves to comment, positive or negative. Above all, may I point out that the comments both by Virgil and others were respectful; indeed, to me they were an example of the Forum at its best.

Thank you Prince. Also Paperleave's comment on top of page two is noteworthy.

[Buh4Bee]

Hey Paper, I read through the first page of the strand. I do enjoy these deeply discussed poems. I can see Virgil's point when he was expressing the dichotomy between the narrator's point of view and the grandfather's about religion. But I don't think the logic really applies to your poem or possibly your style of writing. However, this has probably been discussed enough already, so forgive me if I reopen a closed debate.

I can see the deep love you feel for your grandfather and the recognition in his humanity through your expression of his physical frailty and feeble belief system (from the narrator's point of view).

What is 401?

[paperleaves]

Thank you, jersea! I don't normally title my poems when I save them in a notepad file so I just save them in numerical order. This is the 401st untitled poem on my hard drive! ^_^

Also, thanks for the praise, Hawkman, but also in order to not start any debates, I always appreciate constructive criticism.
in kindness
love
paper

[amuse]

really sorry i haven't been around to read. i clicked on this because of the title; the first line was shown as i was rerouted (which piqued my curiosity), and then...then i was very, very happy because this is a wonderful poem.

[munkinhead]

remember? this is the thread that first inspired me here

[Jack of Hearts]

The poem is, of course, exceptional. And paperleaves (more like paperleft) made her(?) dent here.






J

[Babyguile]

She was and still is my favourite poet on Litnet.

[Jerrybaldy]

Can see why

[Hawkman]

I wish she was still around...

[Jerrybaldy]

It shows how this place use to be and no longer is.

[tonywalt]

Love this

[angliholic]

Great ink indeed and I read it many times and never felt bored.

[Jerrybaldy]

My comment from 2017 is even more apt now. Somehow I'm still here. I hope Paper Leaves has gone on to better things

[tailor STATELY]

I miss paperleaves too... and too many others to list :(

Thanks for refreshing 401 for our view.

Ta ! (short for tarradiddle),
tailor STATELY