Poetry Forum

Even as the blue whale slides tapered greyness
through the grey ocean, you see where it starts
and ends, a definite whale or not-whale,
the one skin and blubber, the other transient wave.
Less easy with the honey mushroom
that spreads its mycelium under Oregon,
links trees with braids of shoestring,
glows luminescent with foxfire.
Descend to the microscopic and read cilia
and virus, and life runs into non-life,
the soil a mix of stone and microbe,
blind alleys of the very small
who know only water’s pull and the chemicals of prey.
Photoreceptors track the shape
of moon and sun, chase shadows,
see without observing;
build with the slow blink of evolution
a lens, a retina; turn towards the light,
wonder what makes a whale.



This is a revision of an earlier work which some of you may remember.

I don't remember the earlier poem Ros, but I loved reading this, it is exactly the sort of poem I enjoy. The image of the whale is a mile away from the mushroom, but illustrates the point exactly and fits so well even the way it reappears in the end. ' and the chemicals of prey.' provided a small bump while reading aloud, though I can't put my finger on why. Other than that excellent.

I can't remember what my specific complaints were before Ros (something to do with the speaker being smart-alecky?), but you seemed to have addressed them. More than that, the knowledge displayed has an incredible lightness. The sense of wonder is palpable. Astonishing.

Excellent work.

B.

I don't understand the fascination many poets have with scientific terms--they don't sound very pretty and there are usually more direct ways of saying them. I feel like it's a sort of mask a lot of poets put on to avoid their language sounding plain, but that's cheating and doesn't make for a good poem.

I think in Ros' case the fascination with science is quite genuine and the poetry is born from her interest in such matters. Personally I can't see a single word in there that sounds ugly to my ears, not that that is a major issue since a poem can use any words available to it and doesn't need to be limited to being a pretty bauble.

Ben, Brian, thanks - I'm always worried when revising something like this that I'm making it worse rather than better. I very much value your appreciation. I've been hacking away at this one for months.

Benjamin, ok, I'm interested as to how you would suggest a more direct way of saying scientific things without using the scientific terms. Surely anything else would be beating around the bush even more? Can you give an example?

Ros

was just going to ask the same thing, how could ros have said this in a more direct way?

I agree with what brian says about the knowledge has an incredible lightness - an argument which slowly unravels until it reveals that really we still don't have a firm grasp about the how's and why's of our evolutionary history - it really pulls the floor from beneath the feet. jack cohen and ian stewart did a similar thing non-fiction wise if my memory serves me right - instead of just telling the reader how much we know about the world, they then told us how much we didn't know. i think this is the first poem i've come across which has done the same thing.

the line with chemicals of prey stuck out for me as well - didn't feel as tight or precise as the other lines. was this split into stanzas before - i don't know if that would aid the reader a bit more if it was split into 4 stanzas, but then each sentence connects to the next so not sure if that would break the flow.

best poem i've read in a while, tess

Raincoat wrote:best poem i've read in a while, tess

Wow, that's quite a compliment! Thanks greatly, Tess.

I'll have a think about that line. I haven't split it up as I wanted it to flow smoothly without any breaks, but it might make it easier to read.

Ros

I agree that this is very good, Ros. When you returned to the whale at the end, my heart lifted.

On a non-poetical point, I thought the evolution of an eye was one of those things that it's very hard to explain in Darwinian terms ... or have they cracked that now?

Lovely stuff.

Cheers

David

It's well cracked, David. There are a whole series of proto-eyes - everything from simple photoreceptors that just sense a bit of light and shadow to complicated eyes with lenses, which have evolved at least 7 different ways in various organisms.

I'm glad you liked the poem.

Ros

Blimey,

Loads of the stuff on the experienced board I've been really struggling to get my head around, all this free form and weird punctuation, all so new to me, and I'm thinking, really is this poetry now? Really? This is fabulous, restores my faith. Loved it and made sense of things for me.

Thanks,

Nicky B.

Ros wrote:It's well cracked, David. There are a whole series of proto-eyes

Ros

I read potato-eyes the first time thought something wasn't quite right

Hi Ros,

I remember the original and this,for me, is a really excellent revision. The tone is perfectly realised and the whale / honey mushroom antithesis is memorable. For me, the greatest achievement is the narrative voice, guiding but not so leading or intrusive as before.

Much kudos,

Rich. Basnik

Aw, Nicky, thanks, I'm glad something here is making sense to you! I struggle with some of the stuff too...

Ben,

Rich, thanks, glad it's an improvement.

I tried to take all your earlier comments on board in the revision, so thanks to everyone who commented the first time round, as well as now. I've been struggling with this one for months, trying to get the tone right, and there's nothing worse than doing that and then everyone saying 'it was better before'!

Ros

I'm as far from being scientific yet still educated as is possible (I took no sciences in school after age fourteen) but there wasn't a single word in this poem that I didn't know and understand, so I don't think the 'scientific terms' argument holds water. They're not scientific terms any more than 'bucket' is a hardware term or 'dandelion' a botanic term. They're simply the correct words that give precision to the intended meaning. They also happen to be beautiful words that work beautifully in context.

Lovely poem. Unusual, distinctive, and with a superb ending.

Tis good Ros

I think one of its key strengths is the way it develops in an inverted way from large (whale) to small (virus). This is acheived almost effortlessly and then it expands again in the last couplet. Very controlled.

I offer these as observations rather than crits as I suspect you have worked this one enough.

First, is transient needed. I think the reader can work his/her own distinction between whale and wave and therefore to add a modifier to wave almost dilutes that contrast.

Second, would you consider some white space to give the reader a little time out during the descent from large to small. I would suggest possible breaks at foxfire and evolution. the last break in particular would present a chance for the reader to absorb the enormity of the closing couplet.

Thoughts only Ros as this is a good un

cheers

elph

Cathy, I'm glad it made sense to you without being too scientific. That's probably the note I was trying to strike. Thanks for the read.

Elph, thanks, I was wondering about splitting it into two, but three might be an idea. Thanks for the comments.

Ros

delph_ambi wrote:I'm as far from being scientific yet still educated as is possible (I took no sciences in school after age fourteen) but there wasn't a single word in this poem that I didn't know and understand, so I don't think the 'scientific terms' argument holds water. They're not scientific terms any more than 'bucket' is a hardware term or 'dandelion' a botanic term.

I kind of agree - and I do like this poem - a lot - but even "mycelium"? That was definitely the one that furrowed my brow. It's some kind of root system, is it?

It's the mass of thread-like stuff that fungi produce, as opposed to the mushroom-y bit which appears above the ground. It can spread for miles and miles and miles...

For me this was more interesting than enjoyable - and that's not to say I didn't enjoy it.I understood enough. I thought the best part was the four lines from "less easy .... foxfire".
stone and microbe/ microbe and stone? I'd vote for the latter.
Like others, I stumbled at chemicals of prey - for many reasons.

I'm nomming this for Feature.

Ros wow

One of the beautiful poems I read on here. Actually it does not sound too scientific as you maintain your voice throughout the whole poem, the voice which is not cold or emotionless.
I love images, I love the trees glowing with foxfire, roots braided like shoestrings, few more images, but sadly can't recite them as I type using my mobile, I can't look at your poem and type in the same time. Sorry.
Only one suggestion I have is to consider removing "the soil", firstly it sounds too much like N gives us a lesson, secondly it reads much better for me with "a mixture of stones and...."
Great poem.
Thank you for sharing.
Nino

Ray, thanks, I'm glad you found something to interest, if not enjoy!

Nino, very kind words, thanks!

Ros