Hi, I decided to post this on TL instead of my wordpress due to the recent surge in literary posts here (riding on the wave xD). Here it is:
Let's Be Friends
Lies Blatant One never intended The other could hardly misconstrue In a dance to the death over hell-bent flame A pair of lone wings ignite over futile hopes of life
Lines Protracted Across the hills Upon inciting, already a stalemate In an engagement to the end over hate-scorched earth A convergence of attrition falls into dire straits of ignominy
While no man's land had no edges and no deception about it Yet man and woman imposed arrogance, unadulterated Immaturity led to childish naivete Reliquish no more Unrequited Passion
//
Thanks for reading! Appreciate any comments
Edit: Could the kind sir who rated this 1 star please leave some criticism for improvement?
Just seems like a lot of sentences that don't fit together well at all.
Maybe it's because I am not a native english speaker? I dunno ... I just don't get why some of these sentences would naturally belong after each other.
Example: - Let's be friends I am therefore assuming this poem is either about a breakup, or about reaching out and trying to find a friend)
- Lies. Blatant. One never intended. I am now assuming it's about a breakup due to the constant lies from one of the people involved. And that one lie in particular, was never intended. Based off most things I read, I would here assuming that the person wanting to be friends is the other person, and that this is a personal poem where the narrator discovers that while he (she) was constantly lying, and never caring, now that it's discovered and over, the lie that wasn't intended was that he (she) never cared (which in fact he (she) did).
- The other could hardly misconstrue. Now I am lost. What does this mean?
- In a dance to the death over hell-bent flame. Ok so now someone is fighting? What happened? Where? Why?
- A pair of lone wings ignite over futile hopes of life Well, this would fit with my original thought that this was a breakup, and hope dying, but uhm, with the last two sentences I am just confused.
- Lines ... etc etc etc. I don't get pretty much anything about this at all. Ignominy - was there a public scene? What?
- While no man's land ... Now I am even more confused. No mans land is an area that doesn't belong to anyone, and most often, it's contested. No deception? What does this have to do with anything?
- Yet man and woman imposed arrogance ... immaturity led to ... Okay, are we now in the bible? Some creation story? What does this have to do with anything? Let's be friends? Uhm ... I am so confused now.
- Relinquish no more. Unrequited. Passion. Okay, was it a breakup after all?
In the end ... I am just confused, I don't get this poem at all.
Might want to avoid cliches like "dire straits" and "no man's land". Some phrases are too obtuse and overwrought to evoke anything... like "convergence of attrition" and "imposed arrogance, unadultered". They are fancy sounding but almost meaningless. They don't bring a picture to my mind at all, nor are they even beautiful sounding. The emotion does come through powerfully though, good job on that.
You have this theme of the disconnect throughout the poem, and these first two lines are exemplary of the whole because they stand separate from each other when in fact one modifies the other. As far as prosody is concerned the two independent-but-not-really trochees are a fine touch, but on a more practical level they do not function as well. The first problem is the bold declaration of 'lies', followed by its modifier, 'blatant'. This is a grand thematic gesture which must be expanded through what follows. Unfortunately, the lies are left hanging in the air, not so much supported by as much as supporting your third line, 'One never intended'. This is a problem in poetry in general. It is an art in which you must condense meaning, but that does not mean you are allowed to hint at meaning, which is what you are doing now. It is not always easy to determine whether what you are writing is a difficult poem which requires the reader to use his or her intelligence, or one which is purposely or accidentally obtuse. I want to get back to your use of 'lies'. I feel this, by itself, is poorly chosen. The reason is the abstract nature of a lie. A lie is a false statement issued as truth in order to deceive. Notice how even its definition is laden with abstractions. This is a dangerous practice. Poems are great for feelings and images but not for ideas, and even Shakespeare's best work relayed only simple messages which were transformed through his language. This is what you have to do with lies, you must give them a face, or at least a mirror. Continuing, blatant is not a great modifier. Why? What does it mean? Obvious and said in spite of its obviousness. It recalls the nerve one must have to lie blatantly and doing so it also invokes anger, but you don't use any of it. This isn't the main problem, however. The main issue with 'blatant' is that it fails to support 'lies' properly. The first line has already been cast into the aether where it must dissolve, and this second one does little to prevent that or its own dissolution. Now we have a strong, dare I say rigid, opening, which seems to crumble as soon as it manifests, and only because there are no images to connect to. This nakedness of the lines repeats itself in subsequent stanzas with pretty much the same effect. Try reformulating your opening by looking it as 'blatant lies'. Keep in mind that at the point where the lie is discovered, the betrayal has already occurred, which means you are starting the piece with the punchline. Now, observe that this is not bad per se. It is bad because we do not know what has happened, and so the lie means little to us. It just vanishes.
About the overall structure of the poem. Your three stanzas unmistakably share the same architecture, though I wonder to what purpose. It goes without saying that the, aherm, narrative complicates itself as the lines lengthen, but that is an arbitrary limitation. Defining a poem's shape is the least of a line break's functions. When Dante and Petrarch were writing there was no such thing as a line break, and their poems were written in prose form. The reason I'm saying this is that you ought not to place this kind of limitation on yourself. I have read so many first efforts where people were forcing rhyme in their poems, thereby hurting themselves. I myself have written poems in which I decided for no reason in particular to set a specific line length, eschewing the wonderful effects which could have otherwise been achieved. The trick is to just write, and worry about that stuff later.
That's all I have for now, OP. Let me know if you want me to continue. I promise to be less preachy.
Also, in case you were wondering, no, I am not the guy who rated your blog 1 star.
@procyonlotor & Mothra - Thanks! I'll get to work editing it. I found the criticism very useful (and no I'm not wondering if you gave me 1 star =) )
@Aebriol & Alejandrisha - I was rather sleep deprived and was listening to Tchaikovsky's 6th symphony while writing this so I'll just post a breakdown of meaning and perhaps it'll clarify my editions:
Lies Blatant One never intended The other could hardly misconstrue
- This is supposed to mean how flirting can initially resemble being friendly and vice versa, but for those with the intention of getting a s/o or spouse or sex it is supposed to be fairly obvious but yet discreet at the same time according to social norms.
In a dance to the death over hell-bent flame A pair of lone wings ignite over futile hopes of life
- Referencing the imagery of moths to a flame and the angel fallen from grace
Lines Protracted Across the hills Upon inciting, already a stalemate
- Love is a battlefield, and those that get friendzoned enter immediately into said stalemate.
In an engagement to the end over hate-scorched earth A convergence of attrition falls into dire straits of ignominy
- Attempts to further the relationship (some call it "jumping the ladders" in ladder theory) are met harshly. Repeated attempts with different goals are carried out by both parties, but to no pleasant or resolving effect.
While no man's land had no edges and no deception about it Yet man and woman imposed arrogance, unadulterated Immaturity led to childish naivete Reliquish no more Unrequited Passion
- No man's land refers to that between people who are not yet acquainted. People approach each other with their own selfish intent, and become once again foolish.
The overall structure came into being after the 1st two stanzas. I was deciding whether to fill up a 3rd stanza for visual symmetry but felt that making the ending abrupt would be more apt for such a subject. Although now that I re-read it it may be more balanced to narrate breakups gone bad as a 3rd stanza for some balance and make the subject matter more relatable and relevant.
On February 04 2012 05:55 Roe wrote: here's a poem i call new york times.
New york times??? new york tiiiiiimes??? you think youre better than us? us???? us!!!!! U.S.!!!! USA?? NO WAY!!!! The End.
This sounds like something straight out of Poetry magazine, no joke.
In general, I would say this is a better poem than the OP.
It clearly communicates it's message. It's understandable. The theme is supported from beginning to end. Every line communicates a clear feeling to me.
1) Shock. 2) Anger. 3) Outrage. 4) Clearly identifying the narrator as part of those being attacked and shock / outrage. 5) Clearly identifying the united states as the 'us' and the narrators shock / outrage. 6) Shock. Really? You are attacking the united states of America? Further identifying the author as nationalistic. 7) Clear dismissal based off gut reaction, not logical thought, that someone who dares attack the US must be wrong - no matter what.
I don't like the 'the end' as part of the poem though
Now I am not saying it's a good poem. But it doesn't pretend to be either.
On February 04 2012 18:48 JFKWT wrote: Lies Blatant One never intended The other could hardly misconstrue
- This is supposed to mean how flirting can initially resemble being friendly and vice versa, but for those with the intention of getting a s/o or spouse or sex it is supposed to be fairly obvious but yet discreet at the same time according to social norms.
In a dance to the death over hell-bent flame A pair of lone wings ignite over futile hopes of life
- Referencing the imagery of moths to a flame and the angel fallen from grace
Okay but ...
Where do you indicate that this poem is about the start, and not the end of a relationship between two people?
"Lies". "Blatant".
I don't think you understand what a "blatant lie" is. It's an obvious lie that shows the person making it having no care whatsoever for the recipients feeling. A disregard for whether or not that person notice. You never use "blatant" if it's not offensive in some way. It's not a positive word.
That doesn't sound like flirting to me in any way ... ?
When you begin like that, I feel tha tthis is a clear indication of someone not giving a shit about what the other person feels or thinks. The opposite of flirting, or beginning a friendship. It would seem more like an abusive relationship, if anything.
... you are referencing the imagery of moths to a flame and angel fallen from grace ... why?
Thematically, what does this have to do with anything?
Hi, I wrote another draft that plays on the same theme and tried to focus on the theme itself this time.
You thought that this might friendship You knew that it was not so From the get go No intention of being just friends But you lie to yourself and to another Who knows just as well and as clearly But choose to be dumb and deaf One and the other To one another and to each self Neither will let go But none can to see this through Two paths winding around the necks of both Of the fatal truth Neither dares to speak You intuit before you even realise Neither will be happy.
Should I pick one to work on (editions) instead of editing both? Thanks in advance yet again
EPT
