|
Post by Fire Monkey on Nov 11, 2011 11:07:27 GMT -6
I recognized when I said it that adding rhyme after the fact would be a tough one and I know that for many, even doing rhyme as you write in the first place can be a very tough thing. I'm not trying to over-stretch your poor brain just commenting on my view of things ;D What you have done is great, though I do hope you will try to add a bit more - either way though, you might think of using the idea to write another poem about it in a style that you feel more comfortable with - after all, a single story does not have to be limited to just one poem, you can see how different sorts of poems work for presenting the same content.
|
|
|
Post by heatherwordbender on Nov 11, 2011 21:54:03 GMT -6
I've worked on it a bit for you gents. In my cantankerous way...rather like the effect. ;D But I'd be glad of feedback...
|
|
|
Post by dustandwater on Nov 14, 2011 12:05:19 GMT -6
heatherwrdbender,
first of all, I'm a little confused. There seems to be an assumption circling that I had a problem with the repetition of 'and'. I assume that's also 'that one spot' that you think you have gone in the opposite direction of?
I have no problem with repetition. It often strengthens the cohesion of a poem. Also consider that we are talking about a refrain-heavy form built mainly on repetition. My suggestion had nothing to do with repetition; it was, as I said, purely semantics. Given the relationship between the lines in question, 'while' worked better than 'and'.
That addressed, congratulations on your expansion. It definitely works better than the original. I like the slow unfolding of the story that now takes place rather than the sensory overload that was the first attempt.
I do think, however, that it could do with a ruthless review in terms of cohesion from line to line. You need to look at exactly how one line relates to the lines before and after it. For example, in both instances, the line "That he should never see his unborn son" is very disconnected from the lines around it.
It can be effective to have each line independent from the previous and next, creating a fractured, abstract impression that can hint at mania and instability or the surreal. In this case though, there is a narrative and that conflicts with the idea of disjointedness as narratives rely inherently on cohesion. Furthermore, most of the poem is cohesive, which makes those that are not look more like mistakes than poetic devices.
Also, line 16 changes in the refrain at line 19.
I know that might all seem a little harsh but the truth is, I really like what you've done here. I think you've added to the initial challenge by attempting a narrative with such a repetitive form and in the extended version, you've done a great job of story-telling. For that, well done! Now, I think that you can clean things up a little, poetically speaking.
Take a look, make this the masterpiece it can be. Well done for expanding the original and for even trying a narrative in the first place!
-D&W
|
|
|
Post by heatherwordbender on Nov 14, 2011 15:11:59 GMT -6
Ah. Firstly, my thanks as always for the detailed feedback.
As to the "and" thing...it's only that I invariably manage to go in the opposite direction as that indicated, though I had actually conceived that portion as somewhat differently nuanced to what your suggestion of 'while' would have accomplished.
As to the other places. Indeed. They could do with a bit of polishing...
|
|