Is it possible...

[bodkin]

...to sail beyond the sunset?
To lash yourself to the wheel,
captain the foundering vessel of life
through the terminator line
to unknown seas of dark and strife:
the night that lies beyond?

By what dark unstars might we steer
to sail straight on 'til morning --
discovering the undiscovered country as we go --
and might there turn out to be one?
A morning, that is...

It seems too much to hope,
gifted as we are
with this transcending miracle of life.
How could we ever dare to ask
for more?

Yet the scoping of the universe
is vast beyond our ken;
would it be so much to ask
that such as we might happen again?

I do not ask it,
do not expect it,
will not pray for it.
I would not reject it.

I will sing
as loudly as anyone
should there turn out to be
an unexpected tomorrow.

[dedalus]

This is good ... kind of wistful, hoping ... but where, realistically, is it going??
Where do we go, silly humans, when this poem ends?

The language, that said, is quite alluring.

[David]

A pleasing rumination, but perhaps a little too close to Hamlet's most famous soliloquy. As you must know, given your nom de plume. You've even got the undiscovered country!

That said, it also reminded me of A Salty Dog, and I don't object to that at all.

So, nicely done.

Cheers

David

[R. Broath]

I think this is crying out for the poet to take control and SHOW us Can we sail beyond sunset? Dare we ask for more? Too many unresolved questions and one or two cliches have crept in - lash yourself to the wheel - beyond our ken - too much to hope.
I think with a little work this has the makings but at present it fails to deliver.
Look forward to reading when tightened a little.

Jimmy

[bodkin]

Hi Dedalus, David, Jimmy,

Let order a reply by topic rather than person:

A Salty Dog -- afraid I don't know that. I looked it up on Wikipedia but I don't have a copy myself...

Hamlet -- well not really, that was about living or dying, but in this case one is definitely dying. The question is whether anything comes after that... I think Hamlet barely touched on that?

Vagueness -- unfortunately is the point. We don't know. We can't know. So I'm not sure what I could make up to add anything that wouldn't just be a distraction from the reality...? I do have poems about actually surviving death, but they are more fantastic where this one is philosophical... or that's my take.

Clichés -- I'm afraid I don't always get people's objection to clichés. I mean, yes, OK, if one picks a metaphor that has been used many times before then people will find it tired. But "beyond our ken" and "too much to hope" are just turns of phrase. Common, yes. But they mean what they mean, which was the meaning I wanted. Substituting them for contrived phrases isn't better in itself.

"Lash yourself to the wheel" isn't a metaphor but a literal action to perform on the (admittedly metaphorical) ship. Maybe it is just the word "lash" which is a clichéd word for "tie" in the context of ships? Would "bind yourself to the wheel" lose the clichédness?

I will go back over the whole poem with an awareness of clichés but as I said, I'm not sure I 100% get the issue. Glad to discuss in further depth, however.

Thanks all,

Ian

[amergin]

Ian. I think that when people object to cliches they are saying that the phrase or whatever is tired and lifeless and that in a poem one is looking for a renewal of language through a new use of a word or a fresh sharp image. Now having said that there is a poetic device that permits reusing a phrase that might be called cliche this is 'allusion' where a line or phrase from a well known poem is used deliberately because that phrase brings with it all that the original poem meant. Eliot opens 'The Wasteland' with 'April is the cruellest month' which alludes to Chaucer's ' April is the sweetest month....'. in fact Eliot does this a lot.
I think ' undiscovered country is acceptable here in your poem because of the Hamlet soliloquy and it is not therefore cliche but allusion.
You are also right to say that certain phrases like 'beyond our ken' are common usage and can be used but only to establish character when put into somone's mouth if you know what I mean.
Just a few thoughts Arthur

[bodkin]

Thanks Arthur,

I think that is similar to what I was asking... "undiscovered country" is obviously allusion.

I get what you mean about putting common phrases in someone's mouth. In this case however there's no particular character other than "the narrator"... But I still feel that an ordinary phrase is what is needed, and because I am saying an ordinary thing, there is no need for extraordinary phrasing. It would be like coming into the office and saying "Radically excellent diurnal felicitations!" to everybody, factually correct and definitely more interesting that "Good morning!" but totally beside the point?

Anybody else have something to add? I'm keep to hear your opinions. I'm trying to get into the different between merely a difference in style (where I might do it differently from somebody else, but neither would be inherently a better approach) and something that could generally be improved irrespective of the style...

I'll perhaps start on a revision this evening.

Ian

[David]

Ah now, I never suggested the undiscovered country was a cliché. It's obviously an allusion, but one which I thought - as I said - made the whole thing too Hamlet-like.

As a rough rule, I would say that if you use a phrase, knowing its provenance, and taking due account of that provenance, it's an allusion. Otherwise it's likely to seem like a cliché.

A common phrase that has no such provenance - like beyond our ken - is likely to be a cliché tout court.

And I do think it's very Hamlet-like still, Ian. Hamlet at a much lower wattage. (That's not an ad hominem remark - we all run at a lower level than Hamlet.)

"The question is whether anything comes after that... I think Hamlet barely touched on that?"

I think

To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause

and

But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?

come close enough.

Which is all to be unduly negative. Let's not forget that it's a nice piece in itself.

Cheers

David

[bodkin]

I didn't mean to suggest anybody had called "undiscovered country" a cliché, I was just confirming that I understood Arthur's explanation of allusion.

Afraid I don't know what "tout court" means...

Are you saying that any phrase which has been often used is bad (or let's say "less good") for poetry? If so then that is the part I may not agree with. Using an image that is a cliché -- that is going to detract from the poem (unless, of course, you use a clichéd image as a metaphor for something far more original). But, when there is something ordinary to say, and you have an ordinary phrase (which isn't in itself overly abstract, metaphorical, or contrived) surely in that case then everyday speech is the way to go. Wouldn't doing otherwise attract unwanted attention to the way it was phrased at the expense of the simple meaning?

What I am trying to decide is whether to replace those specific phrases with something more original, but I'm worried that in doing so (unless I use some other very commonplace talk) I will change what I meant to say...

I still think Hamlet, while he does mention a possible life after death, it isn't what he's talking about. He's talking about whether to die or not. But I don't object to the comparison, not that I am Lord Hamlet, or meant to be...

Ian

[David]

Definitely agree with you about using the plain and simple phrase where it's appropriate, Ian. Everyday speech is always better than something unnecessarily contrived. But what does "unnecessarily" mean? Ah well, you pays your money and you takes your choice.

I don't think we're a million miles apart.

Cheers

David

[bodkin]

Fair enough then. I'll just keep the word cliché in mind as I do the revision.

Thanks!

Ian

[R. Broath]

But "beyond our ken" and "too much to hope" are just turns of phrase. Common, yes.

Ian. I think you have answered my initial 'consternation' with this quote. I agree that it is sometimes necessary to make use of 'common' language - indeed it is almost de rigeur with some poets. But my contention is that if such phrases litter any piece of writing they tend to alert the reader to a certain laziness; a sort of anti-writing, maybe even a touch of contempt on behalf of writer for reader. In prose such a tendency is sometimes overlooked if it is buried in otherwise stylish writing but in poetry, where I presume the writer intends each word to fight for its place, such intrusions are, I think, to be avoided if possible.
I think only the very best writers are capable of sustained originality and yes, when appropriate will use a 'turn of phrase' to their advantage. The danger comes when such phrases find their way onto the page almost unconsciously - and I do of-course include myself in this category.
I suppose what I am advocating is for our writing to be as choice as our reading. I imagine few of us close our eyes and wander along the bookshelves with an outstretched finger to decide what our next reading experience will be; so be it, I say, with our writing - let us be choosier.

Again, I emphasise that I must heed such advice as much as anyone.

Jimmy

[Ros]

It would be like coming into the office and saying "Radically excellent diurnal felicitations!" to everybody,

Actually, I could see you doing just that

[BenJohnson]

It would be like coming into the office and saying "Radically excellent diurnal felicitations!" to everybody,

Actually, I could see you doing just that

Does that mean I shouldn't? No wonder they all look at me strangely at work