Fledgling Poet Needs Advice

[rockon1]

Could you please give me some feedback on my poem?

"Omphalos"

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself very well.
Because how couldn’t he,
When he’s trapped behind his lips
Sealed with inferiority?

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself too well.
Because the rest of the privileged world exists
Elsewhere.
They make many sounds with their voice.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself very much.
Because his reticence
Has enclosed him alone in a dome
In which love can be shared with no one.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself too much.
Because he likes to think
That he’s destined for stars and cellophane
That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to giggling during conversations.
Because when five people sit around him at a table
And start their ping-pong extravaganzas of sound,
He remembers that he can only love himself in solitude.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to an is.
Because behind the caged doors of aloofness
And dullness
And complacency
And yeses,
Lies a virgin,
Unfettered.

 

[The Mystery Valiant]

It's got potential.

I like the thought and the plot behind it, intropection is very complicated. But you have to get your readers more involved. You have a nice discussion here, but then it doesn't make a very good story. Like the phrase:
That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence. Good typical description in a standard street conversation. But it doesn't grab the attention of those who might be walking by. Try something that drips color, like: The notes and the rhythm cavort on the edges of my emancipation
You see..., some one passing by and just catching a couple of those words is going to stop and think about what they heard! And if they hear a little more, then their interest might have them listening with a need and a yearning to finish the story. When someone tells the story, they always put some feeling into the words and the tonal quality of each and every word. You have to grab your readers attention with words that are going to make them think.

Oh yes, I almost forgot. When spelling a word that ends in 's', the plural and/or possesive always activates when you use a comma. Not an 'es'. Such as "Edipus' mother".

 

[Angeline]

I like the thought and the plot behind it, intropection is very complicated. But you have to get your readers more involved. You have a nice discussion here, but then it doesn't make a very good story. Like the phrase:
That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence. Good typical description in a standard street conversation. But it doesn't grab the attention of those who might be walking by. Try something that drips color, like: The notes and the rhythm cavort on the edges of my emancipation
You see..., some one passing by and just catching a couple of those words is going to stop and think about what they heard! And if they hear a little more, then their interest might have them listening with a need and a yearning to finish the story. When someone tells the story, they always put some feeling into the words and the tonal quality of each and every word. You have to grab your readers attention with words that are going to make them think.

Oh yes, I almost forgot. When spelling a word that ends in 's', the plural and/or possesive always activates when you use a comma. Not an 'es'. Such as "Edipus' mother".

That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence. Good typical description in a standard street conversation.

We must not inhabit the same streets, maybe even the same planet. Where have you have heard That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence. in a "standard street conversation?" People don't talk this way.

Nor do they talk like this The notes and the rhythm cavort on the edges of my emancipation. What are "the edges of my emancipation"? It's vague and as a reader I have not a clue what it is supposed to mean.

No disrespect intended, but I don't see how this advice will help anyone improve their poetry. Language is about communication. Big, nebulous words may be strung together in syntactically correct sentences, but that doesn't mean they communicate.

Good poetry, like any good writing, needs to say something, It needs to relay its points through images that a reader can grasp. You can't grasp generalities.

rockon, my suggestion to you would be to take your poem and try to rewrite it in terms of specifics. Why doesn't he know himself very well? What does it mean to be destined for stars and cellophane? That's not a bad line, but without a context, I cannot grasp its point. How is a virgin unfettered?

I do agree that you need a story. If you read more poetry, here and elsewhere, and think about how specifics communicate in poetry (read some of the poems recommended in the new poems thread or poems by well-known poets), you'll get a better feel for how to go about this.

 

[Willows_Tears]

Response to Angeline:
You make a lot of sense and write with diplomacy. Amen on the street conversation.

 

[The Mystery Valiant]

3 strikes

That's the last of this crap for me! I have just been struck and mugged three times in not less than an hour. Nighty-night ya pills.

 

[Angeline]

Response to Angeline:
You make a lot of sense and write with diplomacy. Amen on the street conversation.

Thanks.

I wasn't trying to be difficult or "mug" anyone, but the notion that people walk around saying things like "The notes and the rhythm cavort on the edges of my emancipation" is just ludricrous. Who talks this way?

Mystery V, I'm a polite person. People here who know me will attest to that. If you want to improve your poetry (you, me or anyone), you need a thick skin. My comments are intended to address how to improve writing, not as a personal assault.

 

[Willows_Tears]

I enjoyed reading this poem. At the end of it, I did not feel like I really knew the speaker of the poem, though. There were many mixed messages maybe because the words used to describe him were not exactly as you intended? I am not sure. When I read a poem I like to feel like I am given privelaged information. A good poem is like a beautiful woman who walks down the street, turning everyone on in her path. A great poem "accidentally" lets you see her camisole. What poem lets you see her undress before the window? showing her beautiful body in siloutte, you get to see more than she intended maybe?

What about if she invites you in, showing scars? Taking off a wig to show a bald head? Removing her bra to show she has had one breast removed?

A few technical questions:
Why the stanza breaks all marked with I. ?

Have you considered throwing in a twist -- a verse that does not follow the "the speaker of this poem" pattern? Sometimes the most powerful thing you can do with repetition or predictable structre is to break it. With good reason. With the main thing you are looking to share, to tell the reader. What is it you wanted us to know, exactly? What did you want us to feel?


I apologize for going on and on, I sometimes figure things out best for myself when writing to another poet.

I am not sure you are fledgling. There are signs in your poem pointing to experience. And a big sign saying "I want to grow as a poet" Good signs.

all the best,
Willow

Could you please give me some feedback on my poem?

"Omphalos"

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself very well.
Because how couldn’t he,
When he’s trapped behind his lips
Sealed with inferiority?

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself too well.
Because the rest of the privileged world exists
Elsewhere.
They make many sounds with their voice.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself very much.
Because his reticence
Has enclosed him alone in a dome
In which love can be shared with no one.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself too much.
Because he likes to think
That he’s destined for stars and cellophane
That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to giggling during conversations.
Because when five people sit around him at a table
And start their ping-pong extravaganzas of sound,
He remembers that he can only love himself in solitude.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to an is.
Because behind the caged doors of aloofness
And dullness
And complacency
And yeses,
Lies a virgin,
Unfettered.

 

[The Mystery Valiant]

Thanks.

I wasn't trying to be difficult or "mug" anyone, but the notion that people walk around saying things like "The notes and the rhythm cavort on the edges of my emancipation" is just ludricrous. Who talks this way?

Mystery V, I'm a polite person. People here who know me will attest to that. If you want to improve your poetry (you, me or anyone), you need a thick skin. My comments are intended to address how to improve writing, not as a personal assault.

Nice people don't make gross misunderstandings and then pile more filth on top of it. You haven't done anything but piss me off more. If you want me to improve my poetry, I think you better talk to the poetry fans over in the United Kingdom. I don't think they would be happy with the way I'm being called "a poor poet'.

 

[Tzara]

Nice people don't make gross misunderstandings and then pile more filth on top of it. You haven't done anything but piss me off more. If you want me to improve my poetry, I think you better talk to the poetry fans over in the United Kingdom. I don't think they would be happy with the way I'm being called "a poor poet'.

Yikes! You're not going to be one of those hypersensitive types, are you?

If you are happy with your phrasing and suggestions to the originator of this thread and you disagree with what Angeline and Willows_Tears said, then ignore them. Ignore me, too, while you're at it, as I agree with what they said.

This thread isn't about your poetry anyway. It's about a poem by rockon1.

 

[Tzara]

Could you please give me some feedback on my poem?

"Omphalos"

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself very well.
Because how couldn’t he,
When he’s trapped behind his lips
Sealed with inferiority?

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself too well.
Because the rest of the privileged world exists
Elsewhere.
They make many sounds with their voice.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself very much.
Because his reticence
Has enclosed him alone in a dome
In which love can be shared with no one.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself too much.
Because he likes to think
That he’s destined for stars and cellophane
That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to giggling during conversations.
Because when five people sit around him at a table
And start their ping-pong extravaganzas of sound,
He remembers that he can only love himself in solitude.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to an is.
Because behind the caged doors of aloofness
And dullness
And complacency
And yeses,
Lies a virgin,
Unfettered.

Hey, r1.

Your title is a bit of a puzzle, unless you mean it to refer to the self-centered or introspective nature of the poem ("navel gazing"). If so, it's kind of funny, but probably lost on most people.

The "I." starting each strophe is very strange. I am assuming you mean it as a "sentence," i.e., "I" ("me"). If so, it would be less confusing if you actually made it a more normal structure, e.g. I, the speaker of this poem knows himself very well. As is, it's very odd looking.

Some of the language is, as others have pointed out, referentially nebulous. It doesn't fix an image or picture in the reader's mind as it isn't clear exactly what is meant.

As for this comment

When spelling a word that ends in 's', the plural and/or possesive always activates when you use a comma. Not an 'es'.

the only thing in your poem that I can possibly think is being referred to is the word "yeses," which is the correct plural of "yes," at least in American English (see the definition of "yes" in the American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language).

 

[champagne1982]

Nice people don't make gross misunderstandings and then pile more filth on top of it. You haven't done anything but piss me off more. If you want me to improve my poetry, I think you better talk to the poetry fans over in the United Kingdom. I don't think they would be happy with the way I'm being called "a poor poet'.

I would not think that anyone disagreeing with another could ever be misconstrued as piling filth on them.

Maybe that's what the problem is here, Mr Valiant, you're so used to having a pitchfork handle up your ass that you forget there's an end that throws shit as well. Every tool in a poet's arsenal should be used to make the verse cleaner.

Hanging 20 dollar words on a 10 dollar poem isn't going to make the poem worth 30 dollars, is it? You devalue the language when all you go for is sound. Not that sound isn't important, but it is less so, than meaning.

By the way, no one ever called you a poor poet but we all know that poetry will never make a poet rich.

Why would the poetry fans be upset about a personal opinion about one citizen in the entire United Kingdom? Are you Andrew Motion, the Poet Laureate?

 

[rockon1]

Responses

Hey everyone. Thanks so much for your critique. I do agree that my poem needs more specificity, which I can hopefully accomplish when I revise it. But my more pressing concern is the poem's general lack of creative wordplay. My problem with writing poetry is that whenever I try to think of imaginative imagery and "artistic" syntax, I just end up obfuscating the poem's theme. Like many people, I have a similar problem when I read poetry--I get so caught up in trying to decipher the meaning of every last word that I'm left enormously confused by the time I reach the end of the last line. Then I go to read an analysis of the poem and it all makes total sense. But at the same time, I feel unbelievably stupid, because I would never be able to explicate a piece of writing with such specific insight. (I guess I really do have a problem with specificity, don't I?) How can I possibly write intellectually challenging poems if I have such trouble reading them?

P.S. The "I" at the beginning of each stanza has two meanings. I mainly used it as a Roman numeral to number each stanza as "one" (as opposed to progressing to II, III, IV, and so on) to represent the speaker's inability to move forward from his reticent condition as well as his lonely entrapment within himself. It can also signify the first-person singular pronoun, which indicates both the speaker's full knowledge of his true self as well as his extreme vanity, the result of his extraordinary desire to become famous in some capacity (which I did not fully explain in the poem) and be revered as a result.

Oh, and Mystery Valiant, this post is about my poem...not yours. It seems that our poetry suffers from completely opposite problems: mine suffers from generally dull diction (and over-generalization), while according to the others, yours suffers from too much flowery language. Maybe we can learn from each other....

 

[The Mystery Valiant]

Maybe you should look deeper

Yes it is about your poem. But the criticism against my advice was at how I view structure within poem's and how I view how improvement is made. Simplicity is a beautiful form. However, if you never bother to stretch yourself, how far may you improve? The comment was made that my 20 dollar words aren't spoken on the street's. I never made that point. Thus an unfair and cruel misunderstanding based not on how you can improve, but how I damage any poetic structure and thus, force less creativity. Therefore, the comment is that I can't write poem's with any structure, much less, any formative notions. As for any notions as to my identity..., I don't think I need to defend any of my credits to those who find my work, incomprehensible. I don't like people who make such comments without even trying.

 

[Angeline]

Nice people don't make gross misunderstandings and then pile more filth on top of it. You haven't done anything but piss me off more. If you want me to improve my poetry, I think you better talk to the poetry fans over in the United Kingdom. I don't think they would be happy with the way I'm being called "a poor poet'.

Filth? Cause I didn't like one of your lines? lol.

I didn't call you a poor poet, you called yourself that. I don't use those terms.

If you can't take constructive crit, you shouldn't publish your poems here or elsewhere.

Unending praise does not promote growth.

Oh and rockon is right, it's his thread not yours, Catch a clue.

 

[Angeline]

Yes it is about your poem. But the criticism against my advice was at how I view structure within poem's and how I view how improvement is made. Simplicity is a beautiful form. However, if you never bother to stretch yourself, how far may you improve? The comment was made that my 20 dollar words aren't spoken on the street's. I never made that point. Thus an unfair and cruel misunderstanding based not on how you can improve, but how I damage any poetic structure and thus, force less creativity. Therefore, the comment is that I can't write poem's with any structure, much less, any formative notions. As for any notions as to my identity..., I don't think I need to defend any of my credits to those who find my work, incomprehensible. I don't like people who make such comments without even trying.

That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence. Good typical description in a standard street conversation.


You never said this? And my point wasn't that you or anyone uses 20-dollar words, but that vague generalities (that may or may not include big words) are not typically heard in "street conversations." Who would you say this to? The cop on the corner? The clerk in the store? A passing stranger?

And while I'm here, let me also point out that your little grammatical lesson to rockon was followed by a series of mistakes on the same grammatical point in your previous sig line. Don't tell your fans in the UK that I noticed.

 

[Angeline]

rockon, I apologize for not responding more specifically to your request for feedback when I first posted. I actually do a fair amount of critique, but I've been pretty busy lately and I glossed over your poem--and digressed--when I should have given it more careful attention.

I agree with Willows_Tears that what you've written suggests you are not a "fledging poet" or, if you are, you have a good sense of how to put words together.

I like the overall structure of your piece, although I don't think calling each strophe (or section) I is achieving the purpose you want. I understand that you want it to emphasize solidtude, but it comes across to the reader as numbering gone wrong. If you want to repeat your sense of "oneness" in each section, you can do that in the actual lines or you could even use subtitles that summarize how lonliness/introspection is explored in each section.

I love your title and its suggestion that what follows in introspection--navel gazing. I think it works really well for your theme.

I also like the structure that offers contrasting parallels with each pair of strophes. You might want to restructure them somewhat--maybe label them more clearly--to underscore their connection. This seems to be an important feature of your poem, but the repeating I and no other indication that they should be viewed in pairs makes it hard to pick up on this. I don't think your readers should have to work to tease this out--it's too thematically important.

I think the structure works pretty well in all but the last two strophes, which are not constructed in line by line parallels as the previous pairs are. Also the first line in those last two strophes is neither as short nor as clear as in the other stophe pairs. "giggling" and "is" don't present a clear, meaningful constrast--maybe something with sound and silence might work better?

I think you have the framework for what could be a wonderful poem because the summary statements in each line (and they really are no more than summary statements at this point) are intriguing. My sense is that you need more. Why does the narrator see these contradictions in himself? I'd like to see maybe twice (or three times) as much info in each section that gives specific info/imagery to make the contradictions feel real to me.

There are some awkward phrasings in the poem, but the ideas are sound overall. If you do revise it, I'd try to flesh it out first--get the ideas down and then think about what words/phrases/images more precisely show what you mean. If you do this and want additional feedback, just repost your edited version in this thread. I'll comment on it and others will too, I'm sure.

You probably know this poem already, but if you want to read (in my opinion) one of the best poems ever written on this theme, check out T.S. Eliot's The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock.

Hope you find my suggestions helpful. They're are only my opnions, of course--use whatever works for you.

Again, my apologies for getting sidetracked earlier. And welcome to the poetry forum.

Could you please give me some feedback on my poem?

"Omphalos"

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself very well.
Because how couldn’t he,
When he’s trapped behind his lips
Sealed with inferiority?

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself too well.
Because the rest of the privileged world exists
Elsewhere.
They make many sounds with their voice.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself very much.
Because his reticence
Has enclosed him alone in a dome
In which love can be shared with no one.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself too much.
Because he likes to think
That he’s destined for stars and cellophane
That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to giggling during conversations.
Because when five people sit around him at a table
And start their ping-pong extravaganzas of sound,
He remembers that he can only love himself in solitude.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to an is.
Because behind the caged doors of aloofness
And dullness
And complacency
And yeses,
Lies a virgin,
Unfettered.

 

[champagne1982]

Yes it is about your poem. But the criticism against my advice was at how I view structure within poem's and how I view how improvement is made. Simplicity is a beautiful form. However, if you never bother to stretch yourself, how far may you improve? The comment was made that my 20 dollar words aren't spoken on the street's. I never made that point. Thus an unfair and cruel misunderstanding based not on how you can improve, but how I damage any poetic structure and thus, force less creativity. Therefore, the comment is that I can't write poem's with any structure, much less, any formative notions. As for any notions as to my identity..., I don't think I need to defend any of my credits to those who find my work, incomprehensible. I don't like people who make such comments without even trying.

The Mystery Valiant -- Your inference that you can't write poetry is your own. Congratulations for noticing.

I merely asked if you were the gentleman in possession of the UK laureate title. If you are or are not would have been a simple thing to say.

Try to take this post personally. It was meant to be.

 

[My Erotic Trail]

I didn't know that the UK had poets <laughing>

I thought it had been to quiet around here, I just knew y'all were chewing on some one <grin and no body called me for the feasting. Everytime a poet asks for a critique the critics argue and feast on one another <grin

anyway, my two cents from what was written, Angeline was not impolite in her reply nor rude in her comments. I have to agree that we do not speak this way in public and if you did around my neck of the woods they would say you were in need of feeding the gators.

anyway, if they get out of line... give'em hell grasshopper <grin

 

[wildsweetone]

Could you please give me some feedback on my poem?

"Omphalos"

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself very well.
Because how couldn’t he,
When he’s trapped behind his lips
Sealed with inferiority?

I.
The speaker of this poem knows himself too well.
Because the rest of the privileged world exists
Elsewhere.
They make many sounds with their voice.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself very much.
Because his reticence
Has enclosed him alone in a dome
In which love can be shared with no one.

I.
The speaker of this poem loves himself too much.
Because he likes to think
That he’s destined for stars and cellophane
That will make the sounds dance around his transcendence.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to giggling during conversations.
Because when five people sit around him at a table
And start their ping-pong extravaganzas of sound,
He remembers that he can only love himself in solitude.

I.
The speaker of this poem is still just reduced to an is.
Because behind the caged doors of aloofness
And dullness
And complacency
And yeses,
Lies a virgin,
Unfettered.

here's my opinion... i hope something in here is of use to you. and hello!

1. i love the title! lol it has a kind of meditation sound in an erotic way - probably not quite what you were expecting but it's still highly enlightening.

2. i love the 'I.' i find it a statement. i find it a roman numeral in the manner of the Steven's poem 13 Ways of Looking at a Blackbird. and I find it in an intention to move forward that hasn't been able to move forward yet. in the latter it fits with the title well.

3. take out the capital letters at the beginning of each line unless they are for the beginning of a sentence - or do you have them there for a reason.

4. take out any unnecessary words to tighten what you're saying. i.e. stanza 1, line 3 reads 'When he’s trapped behind his lips'. take out the word 'his'. also, take out the word 'very'.

5. let it rest for a couple of weeks and then go back with fresh eyes and see if there's any changes you would like to make.

6. to get past the lack of wordplay, choose a phrase you have written within the poem and write it again four different ways ensuring the last way has no semblance to the first way. put it back into the poem. does it carry a poetic sound? a twist? a new way of looking at the same image? keep working it until it does. i find that i get stuck with mundane - i have to write the mundane first and then that frees up my thoughts to move on to the new way of saying something. very recently, it's begun to move into more of my poetry on the first attempt - still needs working on, but the difference is obvious to me at least.

keep writing!

 

[bbwlove_it]

I liked the the story that seems to lie behind the words. It's very introspective and that is always difficult to translate with words.

Rockon1, I had two main problems with your poem. The first is the lack of a good rhythm between the words. I think a great poem absolutely needs a rhythm of some sort. Sometimes I find rhythm more important than the actual wording. I think poetry is very close to music. I think the lack of rhythm is inside the stanzas: I found them really hard to read. They don't seem to "flow", if you know what I mean. Each stanza has a very strong "beat" at the beginning, but then I feel like I can't keep up with the sounds and the words.

The fact you use complex words also makes things a little harder, but this may not be a problem IMO. There are many wonderful poems with complicated wording. Many other poems are able to "solve" the complexity of their subjects with just a simple, direct word. It's a matter of style. I can't really say this is good or wrong because I think it could part of your own style.

However, each word must have a meaning and a context. In this sense, I second what Angeline said:

Why doesn't he know himself very well? What does it mean to be destined for stars and cellophane? That's not a bad line, but without a context, I cannot grasp its point. How is a virgin unfettered?

I find this very true.

 

[rockon1]

Is this any better, or is it still too much unclear language and not enough substance?

Omphalos

I.

The speaker of this poem knows himself very well.
He dances across the smooth stage of his DNA,
aware of the rigid scientific structure,
the tightly-knit steel geometric equation,
the result of which = the abstractions and elusiveness
of the verb “to be.”

The speaker of this poem knows himself too well.
He illuminates the corners of the room
and watches all the action verbs
exchanging their monotonous conjugations,
which they know how to animate and maneuver
to look like neon outbursts of artificial colors.

He knows he is passive and irregular.

The speaker of this poem loves himself very much.
He accepts this condition of oneness
as the outcome, destined by science,
of the consummation of two ancient lovers
who only used their lips for each other,
who sowed the hollow seed
that the others in between left for the speaker to reap.

The speaker of this poem loves himself too much.
He knows that Him is different from Himself.
Him is the outside,
what the action verbs call the speaker
because they never tried to catch his name.
Himself is the feeling that hides
behind the mechanic conjugations,
the basis of all the other senseless action verbs,
destined to someday smoke cigarettes in a café
and help the speaker write novels with souls
and wrap itself in plastic and cellophane
(and this so it can preserve itself)
and become a pleasantly satisfying stereotype,
a wonderful identifiable stereotype
with a name and a place and a way of be-ing
that everyone knows

and loves

and reveres.

But that’s just a desire,
a banging against metal bars,
a cry for responses.

Himself just wants people to come up and pet him.

So now I have to cut the crap. (I am)
Because since I know my science so well, (You are)
I know where I exist in my tiny little world. (He/She/It is)
I can’t change the realm of my existence. (We are)
But I’ll try my best to invite people in. (They are)

Even though they are not.

 

[Liar]

Ok, that's beginning to look really good now, if you ask me. Not only did the morepart of your imagery go from abstract to concrete, you found some really eye-cathnig ideas and perspectives in the process. I really love the opening stanza. And the rest is almost as cool.

One little thing though... when I replied to this post and saw the poem quoted in my textbox, I see that you have indented lines here and there (lines that start with a few spaces). Sadly, that won't work in the forum. Are they important you think for how it is supposed to be read?

Is this any better, or is it still too much unclear language and not enough substance?

 

[annaswirls]

rockon, you have a very cool poem going on in there, nice work-- and while it is not good o see anyone struggle, it is good to see your dedication to getting this piece to be where you want it to be. The people giving suggestions are really only trying to do that, to help you figure out what you want for this poem, not to change it into something of their own-- you are very mature and confident to take critique and come back for more.

:clapping:

and :sending pm with more detailed suggestions:

 

[Angeline]

I really like this expanded version much better. The picture you've painted is clearer and I love the tension between the abstraction of syntax and the narrator's experience.

I'm waiting for the next iteration.

 

[Guest]

Just adding my 2 cents worth to say - kudos to rockon for the improvements.