The Art of Stoning

[emuse]

The Art of Stoning

Before a stone is thrown, it must first be examined—
not too large to take a life in the first or second blow.
Not too small to do no harm. It will be the correct size
to strike the woman wrapped in a shroud
before the men gather to dig a pit.
Big enough for her body but too small to escape,
like a constrictor’s jaw that stretches to consume prey

greater than itself. Like a confession squeezed out
of the lungs by a judge’s intuition. When a stone is thrown,
no one knows who tossed it. When the rock hits its mark,
no one can tell who took out the eye. Who can say which rock
crushed a nose. Split the lips that kissed a daughter.
When a stone is thrown, will anyone notice
how the woman buried to her breasts in dirt
could not lift an arm
could not loosen the wrists tied behind her back
to protect the jugular -- the river that flows from head
to heart – the silky cleft of her neck,
the place she would have wanted to know
tenderness?

When a stone is thrown, no one knows who threw it.
The brother or the father?
The husband who needed an excuse to marry
his 14 year old bride while her children
are forced to watch? The uncle’s honor killing
that returned his family pride. Who can hear
her pleas amid the shouts of God’s greatness
as the shiny cell phones recording the moment
catch the glint of our closest star.

And isn’t her last look now there in your eyes.
Late at night when your lids shut in the darkness.
You inspect each stone you've swallowed.
The ones where you did not ask a question,
or looked away
or decided it wasn’t your stone at all
because you were sure someone else pitched it.
The invisible roundness still lodged in your throat,
this weight you can never carry.

[calico]

Oh. Upsetting. Very brave of you to look at this so closely, and imagine each impact of the stone, something we desperately want to shy away from.
I think it really gets going in S2, the ending is fabulous, and the recording on cell phones fantastic detail. I think there are a couple of places where the rhetoric is too much and not adding so much - for example, the beginning part of S3. It could just be that the question marks there are making the tone a bit shrill.
Another nit was this simile

Like a confession squeezed out
of the lungs by a judge’s intuition.

didn't work for me. The subtlety of intuition seemed at odds with the violence of the poem.
I also think it could benefit from some really close attention to stanza breaks and line breaks. Something I don't have much instinct for, but in some places the breaks are not helpful, like the break between S1 and S2. Possibly the rhythm here could be improved.

But, really good. The way you have tackled the subject works very well, and the ending particularly reinforces a human empathy for suffering.

[Ros]

I think calico's comments have summed it up for me too - great first and last verse, perhaps a little heavy in the central sections. Some parts are a little too much comment and less poetry, I feel:

The uncle’s honor killing
that returned his family pride. Who can hear
her pleas amid the shouts of God’s greatness

it's a difficult balance to strike, particularly when you're trying to tell a story. But here you can probably trust the reader a little more. Very powerful stuff, though, and great to examine it through the stones.

Ros

[delph_ambi]

Exceptional poetry.

I disagree slightly with the two previous comments in that I think you should stop at the end of the third stanza. The fourth is telling the reader what to think and how to interpret what has happened. You don't need that. You weaken the impact that way. Leaving it at the cell phone image says it all far more strongly than any of the preaching to the reader that follows.

[brianedwards]

Sorry Lois but this reads like something better served by journalism. Current affairs and poetry rarely make comfortable bedfellows and this proves the point, for me. Reading it I feel like the poet is throwing stones at me, the reader. That may be desired but it is certainly not welcome. I know I'll be in the minority here . . .


B.

[ray miller]

I thought the first verse was terrific, first twelve lines, really. The rhetoric becomes overblown and too insistent for my liking - the "will anyone notice" section, in particular - until the last verse (first line needs a question mark?) Actually, you're missing 3 question marks!
I realise that the last verse interrogates us all, but as far as the actual stone throwers are concerned aren't they more likely to exaggerate their marksmanship rather than examine their guilt?

[Sharra]

Wow! This whacked me round the face as I read, very powerful stuff.
I think I will need to come back before I can be objective as I'm too caught up in the emotions of it on first reading.
Nicky
x

[emuse]

Very very enlightening to read all of your comments. I'll be back with specifics and revisions to this as I want to get it right. Just wanted to thank you for now for your thoughts. There are so many factors which make this heinous act deplorable but one of the many is the fact that everyone throws a stone so that no one person can be blamed -- there is something in this that scores my mind with a sharp edge when I think of society's penchant for violence and revenge since the beginning of recorded history. So I will take my time with this poem until it captures the layers I am hoping for. Thanks once again for telling me what works and what doesn't. And Brian Robert Bly would be out of a job if I thought that way. So would Ferlinghetti for that matter.

Smiles.

e

[brianedwards]

And Brian Robert Bly would be out of a job if I thought that way. So would Ferlinghetti for that matter.

I wrote "rarely" Lois. And with all respect, you're not at that level . . . yet?

B.

[stuartryder]

Hi Emuse

The language feels rather formal to me, like commentary without capturing the spirit. I'm sure you will work it into more than it is.

Have you read the poem by Clare Pollard on a similar theme?

Stuart

The Art of Stoning

Before a stone is thrown, it must first be examined—
not too large to take a life in the first or second blow.
Not too small to do no harm. It will be the correct size
to strike the woman wrapped in a shroud
before the men gather to dig a pit.
Big enough for her body but too small to escape,
like a constrictor’s jaw that stretches to consume prey

greater than itself. Like a confession squeezed out
of the lungs by a judge’s intuition. When a stone is thrown,
no one knows who tossed it. When the rock hits its mark,
no one can tell who took out the eye. Who can say which rock
crushed a nose. Split the lips that kissed a daughter.
When a stone is thrown, will anyone notice
how the woman buried to her breasts in dirt
could not lift an arm
could not loosen the wrists tied behind her back
to protect the jugular -- the river that flows from head
to heart – the silky cleft of her neck,
the place she would have wanted to know
tenderness?

When a stone is thrown, no one knows who threw it.
The brother or the father?
The husband who needed an excuse to marry
his 14 year old bride while her children
are forced to watch? The uncle’s honor killing
that returned his family pride. Who can hear
her pleas amid the shouts of God’s greatness
as the shiny cell phones recording the moment
catch the glint of our closest star.

And isn’t her last look now there in your eyes.
Late at night when your lids shut in the darkness.
You inspect each stone you've swallowed.
The ones where you did not ask a question,
or looked away
or decided it wasn’t your stone at all
because you were sure someone else pitched it.
The invisible roundness still lodged in your throat,
this weight you can never carry.

[emuse]

And Brian Robert Bly would be out of a job if I thought that way. So would Ferlinghetti for that matter.

I wrote "rarely" Lois. And with all respect, you're not at that level . . . yet?

B.

I wasn't intimating that I was Brian but I wouldn't avoid a subject because I didn't feel I had the ability to write about it. This is how we grow.

[emuse]

[quote="stuartryder"]Hi Emuse

The language feels rather formal to me, like commentary without capturing the spirit. I'm sure you will work it into more than it is.

Have you read the poem by Clare Pollard on a similar theme?

Stuart I'm not familiar with her poem but I'd like to be. A quick google didn't locate it but if you would like to share a link, I'd be grateful.

[brianedwards]

I wasn't intimating that I was Brian but I wouldn't avoid a subject because I didn't feel I had the ability to write about it. This is how we grow.

Did I suggest you avoid the subject because you didn't feel you had the ability to write about it? That's certainly not what I meant, of course. It just seems to me that there are certain subjects that are better served by other mediums. That is not to say we shouldn't try, and I certainly wouldn't wish to prescribe a list. The stoning of women is certainly a subject that should not be avoided. Perhaps it is the recent news story that is affecting my reading of this poem, but your aesthetic feels inappropriate for the subject matter. There is too much authorial intrusion in the language, I can almost feel the elbow in my ribs.

B.

[emuse]

"with all respect, you're not at that level . . . yet?"

I completely appreciate that you don't like the poem, that you don't feel my treatment of it is correct. You've stated your views and I respect your right to say them. I hope you will respect my right to write to them.

I was very moved to write something about this subject after recent events and research. Now if you don't mind, I'll try to write a poem here

[k-j]

This doesn't offer any new perspectives on this horrifying ritual - which would be fine if it captured the horror, but it doesn't. If anything, after reading this I feel rather less outraged by the obscenity of it all: the language is effete and academic and seems to me to miss the point. Yes, of course write poems about these things, but don't tell us why it's bad. We know why it's bad, or at least anyone reading this poem does. Tell us just how bad it is, i.e. worse than we can imagine for ourselves, in the way e.g. that Ewart does in "The Gentle Sex". That, I think, is the only approach a poet can take to phenomena like stoning. Journalists or essayists, as Brian says, are at liberty to analyse but written like this - especially without any kind of vigor in the structure, any kind of metre to thump home the anger - it comes across as ineffectual, a shrug.

[calico]

hmm, for me it does offer new perspectives because it's not just about how horrific it is. I think, might be wrong, that it's about how a community allows itself to behave brutally. By not taking individual responsibility. And emuse is imagining the effect of this on the community, not just the victim. Which is interesting. I don't understand why there can be "only one approach".

[brianedwards]

I don't think anyone is suggesting there is only one approach Megan . . . are they? I hope I didn't imply that in my comments . . .

B.

[Mic]

Hi emuse -

I'm afraid this isn't working for me either becuase a) the subject isn't tackled in a way that deepens, alters, lifts or shifts my current understanding, b) because it doesn't feel like a poem: the language tends to ramble and lacks invention and c) the tone really is a wee bit 'preachy'.

I have very much enjoyed readiing other poems of yours. Just not this one.

Michaela

[ray miller]

Brian, k-j suggests there is only one approach:
Yes, of course write poems about these things, but don't tell us why it's bad. We know why it's bad, or at least anyone reading this poem does. Tell us just how bad it is, i.e. worse than we can imagine for ourselves, in the way e.g. that Ewart does in "The Gentle Sex". That, I think, is the only approach a poet can take to phenomena like stoning.

I wonder who the "we" are who know why it's bad. Anyone civilised enough to be reading a poem seems to be the implication.
On the subject of poets engaging with contemporary issues, I recall some entertaining sketches of Messrs Brown, Cameron and Clegg a few months back....

[brianedwards]

Brian, k-j suggests there is only one approach:
Yes, of course write poems about these things, but don't tell us why it's bad. We know why it's bad, or at least anyone reading this poem does. Tell us just how bad it is, i.e. worse than we can imagine for ourselves, in the way e.g. that Ewart does in "The Gentle Sex". That, I think, is the only approach a poet can take to phenomena like stoning.

I wonder who the "we" are who know why it's bad. Anyone civilised enough to be reading a poem seems to be the implication.
On the subject of poets engaging with contemporary issues, I recall some entertaining sketches of Messrs Brown, Cameron and Clegg a few months back....

Ahh, I missed k-j's "only approach" . . .
And again Ray, I didn't state that poets should avoid contemporary issues, but that they are often better served by other mediums, as was probably the case with my election poems too.

B.

[Sharra]

Ok, I’ve switched of the emotive part of my brain now. As I said before, this really whacked me. I do think though that cutting it back a little would make it even more effective. In places it feels a little over loaded.

I printed this out and scrawled all over it, so please excuse me pasting in an edited version – obviously this is just my take so feel free to ignore.

S1 – I’ve swapped around the emphasis from negative to positive in l2 & 3. I think this fits better with the idea of the Art of Stoning, and I did take out the pit description as I think it distracted from what was actually happening.
S2 I’ve just taken out a few words to tighten it a little.
S3 I’ve made it more in the present tense and tightened it a little.
S4 – I do think you have some lovely lines in here, especially ‘the invisible roundness’ but I agree with Delph – I think the poem would be better ending at this point, and allowing the reader to draw their own conclusions. Your comment on it feels unnecessary.

Anyway - here's the edited version I would probably end up with as my next draft if it was mine

Before a stone is thrown, it must first be examined—
too large it will take a life in the first or second blow.
Too small it will do no harm. It must be the correct size
to strike the woman wrapped in a shroud
before the men gather to dig a pit.

When the rock hits its mark,
no one can tell who took out the eye, or tell which stone
crushed a nose. Split the lips that kissed a daughter.
When a stone is thrown, no one will see
how the woman buried to her breasts in dirt
could not lift an arm
could not loosen the wrists tied behind her back
to protect the silky cleft of her neck,
the place she wanted to know
tenderness?

When a stone is thrown, no one knows who threw it.
The brother, the father?
The husband needing an excuse to marry
his 14 year old bride? The uncle’s honor killing
returning his family pride? Who can hear
her pleas amid the shouts of God’s greatness
as the shiny cell phones recording the moment
catch the glint of our closest star.

[Suzanne]

"The invisible roundness still lodged in your throat" this was a powerful line for me. We all know that feeling for one reason or another.

The poem was on an uncomfortable topic, I agree. I thought it was interesting and captivating to to the end. I would think it would be very interesting, and have a good result with impact on the reader if it were from the perspective of the stone, somehow. Just an idea.

Suzanne
(I enjoy your work and though I don't comment always, it is always nice to see you post. I usually remember the feel of your poems for a long time after reading them, thought i would let you know.)

[k-j]

I wonder who the "we" are who know why it's bad. Anyone civilised enough to be reading a poem seems to be the implication.

Just saying that this is preaching to the choir.

Mic said it better than my drunken rambling.

[BenJohnson]

An interesting choice of subject and a rather different subject to previous pieces I have read by you. I would say that as it stands it lacks the sure touch of your other poems. It feels like you are aware of how sensitive the subject is while writing and it causes you to falter while writing. As a result you often tell us how the stoning works then show us like:

When a stone is thrown,
no one knows who tossed it. When the rock hits its mark,
no one can tell who took out the eye.

Some parts that work well for me are the title, the opening complements that very well

Before a stone is thrown, it must first be examined—
not too large to take a life in the first or second blow.
Not too small to do no harm.

Up to that point it works very well for me. The line which give a little value added like

Split the lips that kissed a daughter.

the jugular...the place she would have wanted to know
tenderness?

though I wonder if you couldn't go further for example

Her jugular exposed, unprotected as though for the kiss of a loving husband (or something similar). I also wonder if you could continue the feeling from the opening as if the reader is being instructed on how to stone, how to select the correct stone, maybe being told to wait for the husband to throw first and the uncle for his honor. Maybe ending with 'I'm unable to tell you how to erase the image from the darkness behind your eyes, or to stop you feeling the weight of each stone you threw'.

There is a poem in there and you have most of the elements in place I look forward to seeing this one grow.

[Denis Joe]

I go along with Brian and Ros. I think that it is difficult to write a polemical poem without it losing its worth as a poem. It does read like journalism. It is this sort of poetry that leads me to believe that it is not the job of the poet to tell the audience what to think. This is very much something that you hear in open mic gigs in Britain, usually rants (though this has more class than a rant) but it seems that the aim of the writing is the same. It does nothing to challenge the reader either aesthetically or ideologically because, it is safe to say, that you are preaching to the converted. Though, personally, I find finger-wagging at other countries(especially those of the developing world) to be a bit of a cop out, it's hardly radical as western governments will all express the same sentiment.

Sorry. But this does nothing for me.