Poetry Forum

"Music is good to the melancholy, bad to those who mourn,

and neither good nor bad to the deaf" – Baruch Spinoza


The first time I saw him, I quickened.

I knew it well. Gentle face, fierce eyes and

An ecstatic body that would not move right.

It never obeyed.


You said awkward; he moved dangerously,

High seas close to the surface could rupture

And over the dam his innards would spill.

His eyes swelled afraid.


A look of near madness, you called it,

When bold eyes wandered glassily about,

Hungrily searching; wondering what

Would bring the next hope


To feed a too calm façade. He looked. Sharp.

Probing. Then: there were always the pills, drink,

Smoke, words. He could fill with substances the

Groaning cracks and fight


A core of curious passivity.

And there it was - the Achilles heel - pain.

He would wait it out, stand rigid, wait it out.

It would pass… again.


Then one night it did not pass for him.

The words were insufficient because he

Had lost control. So, to the sounds of

Days when people hoped,


He ended it. Stopped swimming against the

High seas. Like a stony feather, succumbed.

But I have fire; stronger than your

Frozen appraisal.

Welcome to PG. Please have a look through the forum rules.

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=64

You are expected to write at least two crits before you post a poem. Please don't post more than two poems per day.

cheers

Barrie

Thanks. I will critique and post accordingly.

Hi Sarah

this builds up OK, but the ending lacks impact; how about giving us more of what his emotions are as he ended it (was it his life or a relationship that was ended?). Also this is about him, so think about losing the last 2 lines which aren't about him.

The pedant in me would question the link between high seas and a dam, as the dam would be on a river, not in the sea.

Hope that hasn't come over too negative, overall I think there's good potential in this piece.

Binz

Thanks for your swift response. I take your point about dams!
The thread running through this poem is intended to be the speaker's response to and identification with the figure being described, which explains the last two lines. Perhaps, I need to emphasise this more effectively somehow, as I have received similar criticism about the last two lines before. Also, it's focused on how he is perceived, rather than how he feels - maybe this too hasn't been made explicit enough.
Thanks again.