To the Vultures

[robertenem]

To the vultures:

Sweeping past and through and among the decay
and by the by, feasting upon the warped flesh
darker-shaded spectrum hues and virtue
their very own virtue of survival

Burrowing; finding their way as parasitic inhabitants
conforming to acknowledge and embrace death
picking away at the outer membrane of our very existence
never wasting, never reproached; keeping us in check

Stranded in desolation hills and deserts; deserted
music of dust blowing, passing by as chaos; random
happens left to chance chiming in for what is to come
guided by nightmares and dreams our own reality strikes a final chord

Originally posted here (http://robertenem.wordpress.com/2011/01/04/to-the-vultures/)

[hillwalker]

The first two verses made most sense - although two 'virtue's appearing so close together is not ideal, and some of the expressions are a little awkward.

But in the third verse there are far too many mismatched metaphors for one to comprehend what you are trying to say

- deserts deserted (!); music of dust; chaos; random happens (what?); nightmares and dreams; final chord -

it's as if you've thrown all these unformed and unrelated images/ideas into the final mix hoping the reader will be able to reach some conclusion that the writer was unable to.

Personally the poem is marginally better without that final verse but even then it would benefit from some tidying up.

H

[robertenem]

The first two verses made most sense - although two 'virtue's appearing so close together is not ideal, and some of the expressions are a little awkward.

But in the third verse there are far too many mismatched metaphors for one to comprehend what you are trying to say

- deserts deserted (!); music of dust; chaos; random happens (what?); nightmares and dreams; final chord -

it's as if you've thrown all these unformed and unrelated images/ideas into the final mix hoping the reader will be able to reach some conclusion that the writer was unable to.

Personally the poem is marginally better without that final verse but even then it would benefit from some tidying up.

H

The last line of the first verse elaborates on the initial use of the word virtue in the second to last line. As for your criticism of the final verse, I disagree. All in all, the poem is intentionally the way it is. I can write neatly composed poetry lacking awkwardness and clunky-ness, but who is to say those elements should be excluded from poetry?

[hillwalker]

the poem is intentionally the way it is. I can write neatly composed poetry lacking awkwardness and clunky-ness, but who is to say those elements should be excluded from poetry?

You are right of course. I just find deliberately badly written poetry difficult to appreciate, but that's my problem not yours.

H

[robertenem]

You are right of course. I just find deliberately badly written poetry difficult to appreciate, but that's my problem not yours.

H

C'mon now, there is no need to be facetious. It seems that, when I read this poem aloud, it really does not come off as having the problems you suggest it does in regards to it being poorly written with odd strings of metaphors appearing one after another. I've begun to wonder if my problem in conveying this actually has something to do with my line breaks.

EDIT: I will concede that the final verse does not flow so beautifully as the others, but it acts more as a piece of poetic prose.

[blank|verse]

Hi robert - I have to say that I'm with hillwalker on this one. I think his response is an honest one and contains an accurate appraisal of the weaker moments in the poem.

I too, found the poem to be awkward to read. But as you say, there's no reason you can't have awkward phrasing in poems... as long as it's included for a reason. And this is the bit I'm struggling with - I just don't think it enhances the poem. For example, punctuation - you use semi-colons, but not full stops. So how does one read the stanza breaks, such as: 'survival || Burrowing'? If it's not meant as one continuous sentence, why not simply include a full stop?

On the plus side, there are some imaginative literal and figurative images in the poem, which perhaps deserve to be presented to the reader without the distractions of non-standard punctuation or syntax.

[hillwalker]

Ok - tongue removed from cheek.

But you're the one who used the words 'awkwardness' and 'clunky-ness' and said they were intentional. All I was trying to say is - why deliberately booby-trap your own poetry?

Anyway - I would hate to dissuade you from experimenting. And the fact that you concede to some of my points is very honourable of you.

I'm guessing from reading your other poetry and prose on here that you have a mission to create a brave new world of writing where anarchy and anti-form are preferable to elegance and cohesion. A bit like the punk music revolution against the pomp and virtuosity of 70's music - replacing 'safe' music with rebellion and passion and fire.
The problem is - I don't see much passion in your work. And in trying to destroy what you perceive as the status quo you have nothing much to put in its place.

I'm all for extending the boundaries - but it can go horribly wrong when you are merely kicking against the traces rather than forging ahead.

Best wishes

h

[robertenem]

I too, found the poem to be awkward to read. But as you say, there's no reason you can't have awkward phrasing in poems... as long as it's included for a reason. And this is the bit I'm struggling with - I just don't think it enhances the poem. For example, punctuation - you use semi-colons, but not full stops. So how does one read the stanza breaks, such as: 'survival || Burrowing'? If it's not meant as one continuous sentence, why not simply include a full stop?

I think I agree with you concerning the issue of non-standardized punctuation. I'm going to have to think about this one, maybe I'll edit in a re-post of the poem with cleaned up punctuation and possibly a few other changes. To be honest, I'm having a lot of conflicting feelings from posting my writing on these forums. There is a part of me that can understand where almost every criticism that has been made towards my work has come from, but there is another part of me that feels sickened that I might be striving towards optimizing my work to be easily read and accepted. Not to abuse a cliche, but the idea of making the writing smoother and allowing it to flow better so that it can be more easily consumed and enjoyed by the masses seems to be both logical and counter-intuitive at the same time. There is a big part of me that resists this notion and the many ways in which it is applied in society. Do a good job and nobody asks questions, but when the people stop asking questions we're left with one big circlejerk of misfortune, leading to an awful lot of confirmation bias. My goal is not to be a master orator, so why should it be too easy for the reader to swallow what I've got to say? These are just some of my thoughts, as of now. As I said: I'm deeply conflicted.

Edit: Here's another attempt at this poem, just with syntax cleaned up a little bit.

To the vultures:

Sweeping past and through and among the decay
and by the by, feasting upon the warped flesh
darker-shaded spectrum hues and virtue
their very own virtue of survival.

Burrowing; finding their way as parasitic inhabitants
conforming to acknowledge and embrace death
picking away at the outer membrane of our very existence
never wasting, never reproached; keeping us in check.

Stranded in desolation hills and deserts; deserted
music of dust blowing, passing by as chaos; random
happens left to chance chiming in for what is to come
guided by nightmares and dreams, our own reality strikes a final chord.

For now I'm just going to make this new version theoretical until I feel convinced that the changes are for the better, so I'll continue taking suggestions. I'm fairly certain I will at least be making these changes, though.