Re: I, the Shadow

[Matryoshka]

edit 1 to 1,000

as said this is a companion piece to "blue skies"
for laughs the original poem was something like this:

You are the sun, I am the shadow
You were the sun in blue skies
My, how life lies.

a brain fart that hangs on a cliche.

I like your brain fart....it puts my working brain to shame.

I've been trying to polish up a new piece before sharing it, using everyone's advice beforehand. The last one I submitted before sharing, and now I have it stuck there, less than the quality I'd like.

By the way....I, the Shadow is awesome. It was before, and only continues to get better. Sorry if my critique isn't specific to what needs to be corrected. I can only tell you I was moved when I read it and for me, that's the most important - the emotion evoked while reading a piece.

 

[twelveoone]

I like your brain fart....it puts my working brain to shame.

I've been trying to polish up a new piece before sharing it, using everyone's advice beforehand. The last one I submitted before sharing, and now I have it stuck there, less than the quality I'd like.

By the way....I, the Shadow is awesome. It was before, and only continues to get better. Sorry if my critique isn't specific to what needs to be corrected. I can only tell you I was moved when I read it and for me, that's the most important - the emotion evoked while reading a piece.

Criticism isn't necessarily about what needs to be corrected, sometimes it validates, even in an off-hand way:
by Angeline (out of context)
...overall the poem feels slightly unconnected....
which is exactly what I was looking for.
this by greenmountaineer (the first sentence identifies the section...
The sonics of the poem are inspiring: internal and near rhymes, the choice of consonants. It felt like one of those "out of body" experiences, almost like sleep walking,
exactly what I had hoped for there, where I failed is in not tieing it to Poe's charter
Roderick Usher in the House of Usher
from the article:
Roderick's condition can be described according to its terminology. It includes a form of sensory overload known as hyperesthesia (hypersensitivity to light, sounds, smells, and tastes),
from the poem
But evil things, in robes of sorrow, despite my abundant lifting of key words, it wasn't enough. Why was it important? Exactly, what I was suffering from. Especially sound, I was "inside" songs. Not quite the same as hallucinations, but I could not turn it off.
Neither here nor there, this is a poem, someone who is new to writing should not read, it has too many tricks in it, it is too close to things you should not attempt.
This, however you should shoot for, follow the sounds, I'll spare you the technical terms.
tomorrow horrifies, laughs with dull knell
of leaden bell;

loomed with moonlit motes

btw, when I was suffering, food was fantastic, since it pretty much tastes like crap again, I guess I'm normal now. Slight exaggeration all the way down the line.

I glad you liked it, but for you, identify what you like, figure out why and then find out how it's done. The thing I pointed out, just about every better poet here does the same thing in a similar fashion. Generally in twos and threes. Takes time.
Thank you again.

 

[twelveoone]

7.) try thinking of every stanza start or isolated line as scene change, start thinking film techniques.

 

[butters]

7.) try thinking of every stanza start or isolated line as scene change, start thinking film techniques.

damned if i remember who it was, but someone here was doing that wide frame to tight focus and back again thing as they wrote - it showed the reader exactly what they needed to be looking at and when. the poet as director.

 

[twelveoone]

damned if i remember who it was, but someone here was doing that wide frame to tight focus and back again thing as they wrote - it showed the reader exactly what they needed to be looking at and when. the poet as director.

two words, butters:
gestalt, make his acquaintance
and
awesome, as in you are. Anyone that get's butters to comment on a poem, gets the most sympathetic, though reading of any at literotica, and I'm sure she knows gestalt as she operates from the framework of the poem and not from a set of assumptions.

Her reading, is different than the one I hold currently and even though I wrote the damn thing
I write for other possibilities, and a poem is a poem when it is reconstructed.
I just throw out the brightly coloured blocks. (over simplification)

Here's Desijo: another awesomness and missed in absence.
Mr. 1201, you certainly do mix things up. I have to say I did not expect to read a poem by you using ye olde english, let alone making it actually work. What I like about this is that a reader can search for meaning on several different levels...
I assume, she also means story line, because the line between literal and metaphor is shaky and I also play the game of hide the metaphor.

 

[butters]

two words, butters:
gestalt, make his acquaintance
and
awesome, as in you are. Anyone that get's butters to comment on a poem, gets the most sympathetic, though reading of any at literotica, and I'm sure she knows gestalt as she operates from the framework of the poem and not from a set of assumptions.

Her reading, is different than the one I hold currently and even though I wrote the damn thing
I write for other possibilities, and a poem is a poem when it is reconstructed.
I just throw out the brightly coloured blocks. (over simplification)

Here's Desijo: another awesomness and missed in absence.
Mr. 1201, you certainly do mix things up. I have to say I did not expect to read a poem by you using ye olde english, let alone making it actually work. What I like about this is that a reader can search for meaning on several different levels...
I assume, she also means story line, because the line between literal and metaphor is shaky and I also play the game of hide the metaphor.

who's gestalt - does he have an alt?




it's true i like to look at a piece as a whole before deconstructing it to its individual parts... (even if my mind might be absorbing and noticing those same parts at the same time as the original read-through - i just don't give them priority at that time) and that the whole is often different to the sum of those parts.

As to the rest, 12, whilst i appreciate the sentiments I would say there are others here - tso, tods, yourself, gm to name a few - who've given their time and thoughts to thorough read-throughs/comments. Being a good reader is something i've had put to me often, i won't lie. But i'm not so sure that it's because i see more than others - i think it's more to do with the fact i tell authors that i HAVE seen what they did here, here and here. Lots of people might see but if they never say, the author never knows. And, also, perhaps my coming from things in a less-than-academic fashion (since i never went on to uni as intended) means i am less 'fixed' in how i view a piece: i look at it from different angles to those i might employ had i studied the text myth and history of poetry. Perhaps my lack of knowledge frees me a little, not automatically fitting things into boxes of framework. dunno. I say what i see, feel and think and miss lots in the process.

 

[twelveoone]

who's gestalt - does he have an alt?

yes, but you have to had guessed it. oh, never mind.

it's true i like to look at a piece as a whole before deconstructing it to its individual parts... (even if my mind might be absorbing and noticing those same parts at the same time as the original read-through - i just don't give them priority at that time) and that the whole is often different to the sum of those parts.

As to the rest, 12, whilst i appreciate the sentiments I would say there are others here - tso, tods, yourself, gm to name a few - who've given their time and thoughts to thorough read-throughs/comments. Being a good reader is something i've had put to me often, i won't lie. But i'm not so sure that it's because i see more than others - i think it's more to do with the fact i tell authors that i HAVE seen what they did here, here and here. Lots of people might see but if they never say, the author never knows. And, also, perhaps my coming from things in a less-than-academic fashion (since i never went on to uni as intended) means i am less 'fixed' in how i view a piece: i look at it from different angles to those i might employ had i studied the text myth and history of poetry. Perhaps my lack of knowledge frees me a little, not automatically fitting things into boxes of framework. dunno. I say what i see, feel and think and miss lots in the process.

One, I stand by what I said, and the people you mention have done a bang up job and others. Now let's take me as a comparison, I try not to operate from a fixed point, but that is no guarantee that it will be sympathetic.
Two, half of learning is unlearning, especially when new information is coming in.
Three, missing lots, if you are not missing lots you are not dealing with poetry, so you apologise for being honest?

 

[greenmountaineer]

who's gestalt - does he have an alt?




it's true i like to look at a piece as a whole before deconstructing it to its individual parts... (even if my mind might be absorbing and noticing those same parts at the same time as the original read-through - i just don't give them priority at that time) and that the whole is often different to the sum of those parts.

As to the rest, 12, whilst i appreciate the sentiments I would say there are others here - tso, tods, yourself, gm to name a few - who've given their time and thoughts to thorough read-throughs/comments. Being a good reader is something i've had put to me often, i won't lie. But i'm not so sure that it's because i see more than others - i think it's more to do with the fact i tell authors that i HAVE seen what they did here, here and here. Lots of people might see but if they never say, the author never knows. And, also, perhaps my coming from things in a less-than-academic fashion (since i never went on to uni as intended) means i am less 'fixed' in how i view a piece: i look at it from different angles to those i might employ had i studied the text myth and history of poetry. Perhaps my lack of knowledge frees me a little, not automatically fitting things into boxes of framework. dunno. I say what i see, feel and think and miss lots in the process.

It took me a while to wrap my head around 1201's persistence about how important it was to read as well as write. Fortunately, there are some poets in New Poems where it's worth the time. I prefer detailed comments to "attaboys/attagirls," indicating what I think, even if I'm wrong in my analysis. I find that when there are many comments (as in the case of your recent "H" poem) there are added "ahas" whereby you appreciate more than poem itself.

 

[twelveoone]

It took me a while to wrap my head around 1201's persistence about how important it was to read as well as write. Fortunately, there are some poets in New Poems where it's worth the time. I prefer detailed comments to "attaboys/attagirls," indicating what I think, even if I'm wrong in my analysis. I find that when there are many comments (as in the case of your recent "H" poem) there are added "ahas" whereby you appreciate more than poem itself.

if you ain't wrong (from time to time)
you don't belong
10 years ago, I said this place was special because the poetry was better than elsewhere, and I liked the comments (YDD), now the comments are better.

But if you're referring to my recent H poem, the H was already there, it hadn't been removed by the anon. brothers. Yet.