A line of hooded heads and strung wrists led out to the mark in front of the pock filled wall. One lone head amoung them, one unhooded womans face.
She slipped her cuffs beautif'li
I no'iced before the rest, told her run with my eyes while I laid down cover left and right. Watched her scale the perimeter fence, knew where I'd find her waiting for me later on.
"Fire your weapon Abbott! fire your weapon."
"Sir" -dead voice-
The sound of semi automatic rounds ingite in the chamber and the harps melt away- he's still in rank listening to the monged pulsing of his dead heart slow in his ears, like the thudding of falling corpses against the floor of his inner ribcage.
Look at the sudden shape of their skulls.
"Sir."
"What is it Abbott."
"I'm going to be with her."
He discharges his weapon for the second and last time.
Love at the execution.
Normally I don't understand my writing, but this one does a loose progression of plot. It's about a soildier imagining, perhaps halucinating, that he saves the life of and falls in love with one of the prisoners he has to execute, because she refuses to wear a hood during the execution. In real life all he does is hesitate before shooting her, then shoots himself. I'm still working on it really. It might help if I tell you the the passages with illisions are intended to signify the the soildier inner monolgue.
-
Ros
- Moderator
- Posts: 7963
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 4:53 pm
- antispam: no
- Location: this hill-shadowed city/of razors and knives.
- Contact:
I get the plot, which is nicely paced, but where's the poetry? 
Rosencrantz: What are you playing at? Guildenstern: Words. Words. They're all we have to go on.
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
-
Arian
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 2718
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:41 am
- antispam: no
- Location: Hertfordshire, UK
Good point. What exactly is peotry (sic.)?
As to the piece, I'm afraid - sorry Leigh - I didn't recognise anything in this that I'd connect to poetry. But then, I'm a bluff old traditionalist, very set in my ways, so I wouldn't take my remarks seriously. I'm sure it's at the cutting edge, really.
All the best
peter
As to the piece, I'm afraid - sorry Leigh - I didn't recognise anything in this that I'd connect to poetry. But then, I'm a bluff old traditionalist, very set in my ways, so I wouldn't take my remarks seriously. I'm sure it's at the cutting edge, really.
All the best
peter
I'm not sure if it is or isn't poetry really- I don't mind if anyone see's it as peotry or not. It would be nice, I think, just to find out how it makes people react, how it makes the reader feel. I think its more important to express myself in a manner I feel is true to me, if my work is peotry or not is something that I'm hugely concerned with as it could always be debated- with my work as with anyone elses. Alternately, if you wish to continue with the 'poetry or not' thing, then you could perhaps tell how it might be made into poetry. It's not very contsructive to simply say it isn't poetry.
-
Ros
- Moderator
- Posts: 7963
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 4:53 pm
- antispam: no
- Location: this hill-shadowed city/of razors and knives.
- Contact:
Well, it doesn't have any of the things that poetry has - economy of language, some sort of form (even if free verse), alliteration, metaphor, simile, sonics... it's a story, in prose. Which is fine, but you placed in a poetry forum, so why do you consider it poetry?
Rosencrantz: What are you playing at? Guildenstern: Words. Words. They're all we have to go on.
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
-
Arian
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 2718
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:41 am
- antispam: no
- Location: Hertfordshire, UK
Leigh, I certainly didn’t mean to be unconstructive. I’m sorry if it seemed that way. It’s just that, in this case, I don’t know how to be constructive. You say: “tell me how it can be made into poetry”, implying that I, or others, “know” – definitively – what poetry is. But I don’t. If I – or anyone - did, if I could say, without fear of contradiction, this is poetry, and here’s how you make it, then I (or the lucky alchemist with the secret) would make a fortune. At least, I/they would, just for a while. Because such an exposition would also reduce poetry to an arithmetical exercise, done to a formula. Anyone could do it. And they would. So it would become valueless.
You, quite legitimately, want to write what you want to write. And, what’s more, in the way you want to write it. That’s fine. But it’s equally legitimate for readers to like what they like. In saying I don’t recognise your latest piece as poetry, I’m saying precisely that – that I don’t. I. Me. Not other people, who may love it. I can’t tell you why ( well, I could, but it would be one person’s view, and therefore meaningless). I simply didn’t enjoy it as poetry in the way I enjoy other pieces. That’s all. End of story. You should attach nothing to this – except that, for reasons you would have to ask her about – Ros had a similar reaction. I have no proof, but I suspect many (but not all) others might feel the same.
If you want me to guess, and I realise I’m going out on a limb here, it would be this: that you recognise poetry lacks a precise definition, and – therefore – you think that anything goes. You think that because nothing can be said, unambiguously, NOT to be poetry, then – ergo – everything is poetry. But it isn’t. I don’t know (nor does anyone), what the precise definition of poetry is, but it’s undeniable that it does exist, even though it's through a de facto mechanism. A mechanism, that is, of practice rather than principle. Readers, in other words, like what they like. You, as a poet, can write what suits you, nothing wrong with that - but it won’t necessarily be enough to make people like it. You’ll have to conform to – whether you like it or not – perceived “rules of the game” – immensely flexible, and incredibly elusive, though they are.
The end result of this, cruel though it may sound, is that the onus is not on us, as readers, to explain why we don’t like something – but on you, as a poet, to make us like it. You can't pout at us, and demand that we give our reasons why we don't. You have to ensure that we do. If you don't, the failure is yours (or rather, the poet's), not the reader's. With this piece, and with this person, as well as (it seems) Ros, you haven’t made it. But that, in itself, means very little – plenty (if not the majority) of acknowledged poets have had “failed” experiments. You’re at least to be applauded for trying something new.
This, by some distance, is the longest post I’ve ever made, and I’m only doing so out of a slight sense of guilt at having “dismissed” your work. I stick by my original comment, but now – I hope – you’ll understand better where I (and some others) are coming from, if you’ll excuse the vernacular.
All the best
peter
You, quite legitimately, want to write what you want to write. And, what’s more, in the way you want to write it. That’s fine. But it’s equally legitimate for readers to like what they like. In saying I don’t recognise your latest piece as poetry, I’m saying precisely that – that I don’t. I. Me. Not other people, who may love it. I can’t tell you why ( well, I could, but it would be one person’s view, and therefore meaningless). I simply didn’t enjoy it as poetry in the way I enjoy other pieces. That’s all. End of story. You should attach nothing to this – except that, for reasons you would have to ask her about – Ros had a similar reaction. I have no proof, but I suspect many (but not all) others might feel the same.
If you want me to guess, and I realise I’m going out on a limb here, it would be this: that you recognise poetry lacks a precise definition, and – therefore – you think that anything goes. You think that because nothing can be said, unambiguously, NOT to be poetry, then – ergo – everything is poetry. But it isn’t. I don’t know (nor does anyone), what the precise definition of poetry is, but it’s undeniable that it does exist, even though it's through a de facto mechanism. A mechanism, that is, of practice rather than principle. Readers, in other words, like what they like. You, as a poet, can write what suits you, nothing wrong with that - but it won’t necessarily be enough to make people like it. You’ll have to conform to – whether you like it or not – perceived “rules of the game” – immensely flexible, and incredibly elusive, though they are.
The end result of this, cruel though it may sound, is that the onus is not on us, as readers, to explain why we don’t like something – but on you, as a poet, to make us like it. You can't pout at us, and demand that we give our reasons why we don't. You have to ensure that we do. If you don't, the failure is yours (or rather, the poet's), not the reader's. With this piece, and with this person, as well as (it seems) Ros, you haven’t made it. But that, in itself, means very little – plenty (if not the majority) of acknowledged poets have had “failed” experiments. You’re at least to be applauded for trying something new.
This, by some distance, is the longest post I’ve ever made, and I’m only doing so out of a slight sense of guilt at having “dismissed” your work. I stick by my original comment, but now – I hope – you’ll understand better where I (and some others) are coming from, if you’ll excuse the vernacular.
All the best
peter
Hi there.I just want to assure everyone that I'm not offended by anything anyone has said and appreciate your being frank. I agree with much of what you say Ros, though there is a simile in there. There are few other devices but I'm not entirely sure what they're called e.g. when a person or people are described as being solitary body parts- I'll do some research and elaborate. Also, when writing about suffering I'm not sure that it is fitting to be concerned with poetic device (of course you could then argue that perhaps peotry is a fitting mode for my idea, which could be correct).
Peter, I do see poetry in almost evrything, though I agree that some things are poetry and some things aren't- if that statement has any logical value what so ever. I appreciate your right to like or not to like it and I completely agree with you that the onus is on the writer or poet to inspire the readers imagination. On reflection, when I wrote "How can it be made into poetry" what I was really asking was why is it not poetry. It really isn't that I'm upset you had a negative reaction, just a little frustrated because you didn't say why: when people say that something isn't poetry it is fair to assume they don't really like it, but that could be for any number of reasons.
I feel I should perhaps explain a bit more what I hope to gain from posting here. Often when I have an idea they ussualy begin as a poem, or what I would call a poem: which I freelly admit is loosely defined as a group of up to roughly 150 words. Very often they develop into or become part of larger narratives. Sometimes they are expressed in another media altogether, but they almost always start as poems. Sometimes they stay as poems but at least %70 of the time I tend to use these smaller, or framed, ideas as stepping stones in a larger scheme. This is why I don't like to limit my writing to poetic convention. Maybe I shouldn't be posting here and any suggestions of other sites or forums would be well received. I realise I will receive chriticism based on poetic convention, but I'd really appreciate some emotional responses; perhaps my work is not emotive, in which case I'd appreciate you telling me why so I can develop.
Thanks for your time guys.
Leigh.
Peter, I do see poetry in almost evrything, though I agree that some things are poetry and some things aren't- if that statement has any logical value what so ever. I appreciate your right to like or not to like it and I completely agree with you that the onus is on the writer or poet to inspire the readers imagination. On reflection, when I wrote "How can it be made into poetry" what I was really asking was why is it not poetry. It really isn't that I'm upset you had a negative reaction, just a little frustrated because you didn't say why: when people say that something isn't poetry it is fair to assume they don't really like it, but that could be for any number of reasons.
I feel I should perhaps explain a bit more what I hope to gain from posting here. Often when I have an idea they ussualy begin as a poem, or what I would call a poem: which I freelly admit is loosely defined as a group of up to roughly 150 words. Very often they develop into or become part of larger narratives. Sometimes they are expressed in another media altogether, but they almost always start as poems. Sometimes they stay as poems but at least %70 of the time I tend to use these smaller, or framed, ideas as stepping stones in a larger scheme. This is why I don't like to limit my writing to poetic convention. Maybe I shouldn't be posting here and any suggestions of other sites or forums would be well received. I realise I will receive chriticism based on poetic convention, but I'd really appreciate some emotional responses; perhaps my work is not emotive, in which case I'd appreciate you telling me why so I can develop.
Thanks for your time guys.
Leigh.
-
Arian
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 2718
- Joined: Tue Aug 11, 2009 8:41 am
- antispam: no
- Location: Hertfordshire, UK
You might be thinking of metonymy, or the related idea of synecdoche.Leigh wrote:There are few other devices but I'm not entirely sure what they're called e.g. when a person or people are described as being solitary body parts
Leigh, it's not that I feel I have a right to dislike a particular poem, it's more automatic, more reflexive, than that. It's, if you prefer, an emotional response - I either connect with it or not. Usually, I connect with pieces that have some or all of those characteristics (as well as others) that Ros described. But it's worth remembering that (for me, anyway) the presence of (at least some) poetic devices is a necessary but not sufficient condition. That probably doesn't help, but I'm not sure I can explain any more clearly without boring you to death.
Cheers
peter
Errrrrrrrr putting everyone off from saying anything guys, is it not up to the individual/reader to decide;
Either way i thought it was good thoughtful and interesting and did read it on first posting but i found, i could not make a crit or anything else, as it was not to me poetry.....just me sorry if i upset anyone.AC
Either way i thought it was good thoughtful and interesting and did read it on first posting but i found, i could not make a crit or anything else, as it was not to me poetry.....just me sorry if i upset anyone.AC
It always happens when you least expect it. AC
-
Ros
- Moderator
- Posts: 7963
- Joined: Sun Dec 07, 2008 4:53 pm
- antispam: no
- Location: this hill-shadowed city/of razors and knives.
- Contact:
It's not an obsession with form, it's that (unless you're going to call everything poetry), poetry has some features that prose does not. And this really doesn't!
Ros
Ros
Rosencrantz: What are you playing at? Guildenstern: Words. Words. They're all we have to go on.
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
___________________________
Antiphon - www.antiphon.org.uk
-
Suzanne
- Perspicacious Poster
- Posts: 4902
- Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 4:46 pm
- antispam: no
- Location: Land of the Midnight Sun
Ooooo, welcome back, Leigh!
About this poem, your explanation was insightful. Will you edit this to make it clearer? It is a very complex idea. I look forward to following it out.
I liked hearing what kind of feed back you would like the read to give you.
Being still relatively ignorant of most of the academics of poetry, I will be happy to give you feedback on the emotional level.
What it is that you do is certainly a form of creative written expression and posting it in the beginner's forum seem very appropriate to me.
I have always seen your writing as a part of some whole project that is hidden from my view.
It is sort of a collage of words.
Having an understanding of why you post and what you want from the crits is very helpful since your work is out of the norm.
There is my two cents,
Suzanne
About this poem, your explanation was insightful. Will you edit this to make it clearer? It is a very complex idea. I look forward to following it out.
I liked hearing what kind of feed back you would like the read to give you.
Being still relatively ignorant of most of the academics of poetry, I will be happy to give you feedback on the emotional level.
What it is that you do is certainly a form of creative written expression and posting it in the beginner's forum seem very appropriate to me.
I have always seen your writing as a part of some whole project that is hidden from my view.
It is sort of a collage of words.
Having an understanding of why you post and what you want from the crits is very helpful since your work is out of the norm.
There is my two cents,
Suzanne
-
John G
- Preponderant Poster
- Posts: 826
- Joined: Thu Jan 17, 2008 3:36 pm
- antispam: no
- Location: London born and bred now resident of West Yorkshire
- Contact:
No to fussy if this is or isn't poetry.
I enjoyed the read which I guess is the main aim of you writing it.
Reminds me of the gulltine scene in Pefume for some reason.
I enjoyed the read which I guess is the main aim of you writing it.
Reminds me of the gulltine scene in Pefume for some reason.
After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say 'I want to see the manager.
Leigh, you should always (at least) try to understand your writing. It remains nicely
on serious mundane points which are important to us all the meaning more and all.
When I first saw "execution" I felt shocked; but it is entirely different yes?
Perhaps an execution for one being too much in love----and the sudden loss?
thankyou
on serious mundane points which are important to us all the meaning more and all.
When I first saw "execution" I felt shocked; but it is entirely different yes?
Perhaps an execution for one being too much in love----and the sudden loss?
thankyou