The Wizard of Love

[Derek]

THE WIZARD OF LOVE

1.11 a.m. 11th June 2004

They all came from miles and nobody spoke,
They all stared for hours but never he woke,
A man went around with a bucket for tears,
No one saw it coming but he had been for years,

He had died long ago but knew no one could know it,
He had to remain and live life as a poet,
Each held out their hearts up high to the sky,
"We no longer need these. Why did he have to die?"

They realised too late that love was alone,
He had died in pain with his heart turing to stone,
They say he called out but no one heard whose name,
And some blame the cande and some blame the flame.

copyright D.G. Allan

[emmaobrien05]

Hello derek,
I don't write much poetry but do enjoy reading poems. It's really nice to see someone write in their own style instead of trying to be like everyone else. I thoroughly enjoyed reading your poem and look forward to finding more.

[Bombadil]

It's really nice to see someone write in their own style instead of trying to be like everyone else.

I fail to see how this holds true. It rhymes for the sake of rhyming, not for the sake of flow, it is rather deliberately fantastical (and so a bit trite) and it very much resembles many other generic poems.

Now, that said. Derek, I like the idea. Keep posting.


Cheers,

Keith

[Derek]

Thank you both for your posts. I wrote over 2000 poems before i read the work of another poet so i did not take anothers style, if i was to be a poet then i wanted to write like myself. If i had never heard of a poet or read a poem i would have wrote what i write. Be it good or bad i never try to make my poems rhyme. I learn along the way and there is always a lot to learn. I like what people have to say. I really enjoy reading other poets now too. I still find it hard to tell a poet i do not like their work, i always just feel that it is not for me but is for many. Thanks again.

[emmaobrien05]

I liked the poem and dereks way of writing because to me it is different, the sentences aren't as you'd always expect. You are very mistaken, Bombadil, to think that only your opinion counts. I liked it and to me that's what is important.

[Bombadil]

Emma,

Glad you liked it. I don't think mine is the only opinion that counts, it was simply my own. I did not say you were wrong. I said "I fail to see..."

Just disagreeing with you. This used to be an acceptable and inoffensive practice.

La.

Cheers,

Bombadil

[pseud]

Having read many poems on here and other boards, I'd say it's quite like a lot of other poems. Not to trample on anyone's opinions, but mine counts too.

Glad you like to write like yourself Derek. But let's say we approach it from the other end: with respect, how can you be original, or even distinct in a piece of poetry, if you don't know what other poets have already said and done?

- Caleb

[k-j]

This poem has some nice rhythm but I'm afraid it doesn't really grab me. Perhaps it's part of a larger opus, chronicling the life and times of this wizard fellow? For me it would make more sense if you expanded on the story. I like a guessing game, but so much of this is inexplicable that it's hard to know where to start. For example, why could no one know that he had died? Why did he have to "live life as a poet"? Also, rhyming "poet" with "know it" is very hackneyed. Finally, I'm not sure why you preface it with a time and date. Does the fact that it was written at 1:11 a.m. on June 11, 2004 have some kind of relevance?

Cheers.

p.s. For some strange reason I'm thinking of seventies rock LPs, T-Rex in particular, when I read about the people holding out "their hearts up high to the sky".
p.p.s. Wait, is the subject Ted Hughes? I think it fits.

[mel]

I like this poem, many people who send posts seem to be offended by the fact that poems rhyme, I wonder why this is.
Rhyming poems may not be the contemporary modern way to write but just because a poem rhymes does not mean that it is forced. I personally much prefer this style of writing.

Derek has stated that this poem is original as it he did not read any other poets work.
Pseudonymous begs the question "how can it be original if you dont know what other poets have said or done" his translation of original must be the first person to write a view or idea

My reply to that would be that Derek's idea of original is something not copied or based on something else.

Carry on writing Derek.

[pseud]

aye, good points mel. But I think you'll find that most poets who are not exposed to other's works are predictable and are prone to the same mistakes. I just wonder if Derek can be original, or if not original, even distinct. Not all copying is intentional, mind you. If there is nothing to compare your work to, then it will always appear good, there is no growth.

- Caleb

[Bombadil]

Mel,

Welcome, first. Second, we (pseud and I) argue the opposite....It is based on other works, even if Derek doesn't know it. About rhyming: nothing against it, when it works and you're not making it. The general rule is, if you can read it and it sounds exactly like it would if you said it in casual conversation (i.e.: same syntax, lexicons; etc.) then it works. Inverting words or using archaic language contradicts this idea.

In hopes of clarifying,

Bombadil

[Derek]

This is getting silly. I do not care about being original, i do what i do. If we are all just copying then why bother? I am going to post poems and you can all argue about what is right and wrong. I have my audience, i give them hope and i inspire them, only a few hundred but its enough for me. All these new and old ways are new to me. I have been published many times and i have never heard anything about this before. Why are there rules to poetry and who writes them? I may even read them if they are somewhere. Until then i will do as i said, i will write and you can read. Thank you all for your comments. I think the reaction speaks up for this poem.

[k-j]

Derek,

you don't seem particularly interested in receiving constructive criticism of your poem. Was there any point in my reading and commenting on it, or was it a waste of time? I don't really understand why you bother posting your poems on a poetry forum if you're just going to blithely stand behind them as they are and state that you "do what you do". I'm sure you will write, but if you're not willing to take advice on board - or even acknowledge it - then I think I'll excuse myself from reading.

Cheers.

p.s. I don't care how many people you inspire: you could be the Aga Khan for all I care. Although frankly I've read more inspiring things than this poem on the backs of cereal packets.

[Bombadil]

Derek,

Perhaps you misunderstand the purpose of this site. It is not to gain an audience, it is to improve your craft. I don't give a shit (and neither do a lot of others here) how many times or where you've been published. This is not place to rest on your laurels. We all can learn from one another, if we are willing. You seem not so. I hope this isn't the case but if it is, you will soon have no "audience" other than yourself--at least so far as this site is concerned. Again: constructive criticism is the order here, if you can't take that--leave.

I do, however, hope that you stay. You have much to learn, and we can learn from you as well.

Best,

Bombadil

[Derek]

Thank you Kieth. You are right. I have never been on a site before. I am going to read all the posts and leave the writing for a little. I understand now about the forum. I will wait until i feel confident about a poem.

[Asbo1]

Nobody would say treat a poet with kid gloves but perhaps the main aim of a site like this is one of encouragement rather than seeking to point out as many flaws as possible.Certain posts on here leave me feeling...uneasy.There is a certain superior attitude coming through.

Having criticised a poem to death it is not enough to simply add.."But keep it up.." or some such platitude.

[emmaobrien05]

I agree with ASBO1, I'm shocked to see derek simply being pulled apart and really think that a bit of encouragement wouldn't go a miss.
To me it seems like they are a small clique who build themselves up by putting others down.
I'd like to tell derek that there are other poetry forums who are willing to welcome newcomers rather than bully them. I will contact you through your website and pass on some info. Good luck derek.

[Bombadil]

You are both new, so perhaps you have not read Cameron's intro or at least not taken it seriously:

Quote:

"This is a serious poetry forum not a "love-in". Constructive criticism is the order of the day. "

Pseud and I were being constructive. Derek, in fact, acknowledged this to me privately. This is not an ego stroke site. If a poem has shite in it, we'll say so. It does no good to pat someone on the head, and say "gee that was swell," when in fact it was totally to counter.

Derek is not being pulled apart, as perhaps he will confirm, he is being rebuilt. Sometimes, hurt is required for growth.

Cheers.

[pseud]

Couldn't disagree more ASBO. I don't have to read a poem to post a "good job." I do have to read a poem to pick out it's specific weaknesses and strengths. I'd take a "well done" from a picky critic any day, over some luke-warm one liner like "good-job," from someone who's probably skimmed the poem. Don't preach about platitudes without acknowledging all kinds.

But alas, how could I change your mind? Now it's apparently egotistical to give someone's poem time and analysis. Interesting...

- Caleb

[susie g]

Jeez,people!!!
I only registered yesterday and read through this series of postings. I feel completely flayed and I can only hope Derek doesn't feel as raw as I do.
I fully understand that this is serious site, but does it usually get this harsh?
I haven't written much, and I still prefer a more traditional and structured style to my own work. I find it keeps me more focused and I enjoy the discipline of crafting a phrase to fit the meter. Will this immediately call down approbrium on the piece? I enjoy the use of metaphor and allusion, but is that too old fashioned, re-actionary and posturing?
I make no pretence of any experience or any suggestion that anything I have written is of any merit. I would like to learn, but surely the emphasise is on CONSTRUCTIVE criticism?

[Bombadil]

Since you're new, perhaps you haven't had the time to read the first critiques the longer tenured of us have received. I was schooled for posting something substandard then, and I still am. Fuck, but we're being sensitive...we have just made comments, that's all. It is not that rhyme is held in contempt, nor are metaphor and allusion. All good things. Pseud and I have simply been trying to say that this kind of poem has been done and that he (Derek) might want to reapproach it in a more original way. Then everybody went and got offended on his behalf. He and I have since spoken and he is not nearly as wounded as the rest of you. Give it a rest. We are seldom vicious and only when cornered without reason.

Perhaps Derek would care to end this wee and small discussion?

Cheers.

[cameron]

Please read my post on Constructive Criticism for my view on this.

http://poetsgraves.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1563

Cam

[Macavity]

This is getting silly. I do not care about being original, I do what I do.

There are certainly plenty of aesthetics floating around in the poetry world defining the quality poem, absolutes on good and bad, right and wrong, but then history is littered with literary movements and conventions on the road to poetic nirvana

I vaguely recall being taught that the notion of 'originality' was a feature of Romantic poetry.

Enjoy your audience.

cheers

mac