This is a resubmission of sorts. It's changed a little, but not too horribly much, since I've had it here. I was going to send it off to some journals, despite the efforts of a few people to talk me out of it, until an unrelated suggestion sort of changed it all. Someone pointed out a metaphor they thought was cliche, I agreed and changed it and ever since I haven't been able to help but see the piece as good for what it is, but falling short of what it could be, as far as good metaphors go. Since I put a good bit of work in it and am now considering it axed, I thought I'd put it back up here.
I'm still proud of it, but I think I'd be selling the topics and situations here--which is where the real loyalty of the piece lies--short by getting this published before it's anything short of the best I can do with it, in language and the strength and structure of the ideas/metaphors/visual presentation. I'm going to be hacking it back apart and seeing where the idea really needs to end up over whatever amount of time it takes, so wish me luck. Feel free to comment as loosely or critically as you wish--but this preface is a bit of a warning that any critique will probably not be rolled into this version of the piece (so don't be disappointed, I'll still read it and if you're making good points consider those when I'm reworking things.)
*there are some formatting limitations that prevent the presentation as-intended.
***Big thanks to =
JenniferStarling for suggesting this. She's wonderful. Go read some of her poems, or a few chapters from the BOOK she's working on!
I'm not entirely sure if each of the parts are told from a personified sin (as in Piers Plowman) or if there is one central narrator. Perhaps that could be clarified.
"There was laughynge and lourynge and " Lat go the cuppe!'
[Bargaynes and beverages bigonne to arise;]
And seten so til evensong, and songen umwhile,
Til Gloton hadde yglubbed a galon and a gille" (5.337).
You're hitting on where I really want to come back at the topic again, fresh. I think the Biblical parallelisms and connections are some of the strongest parts of the current poem but that it was under-done in general, as well as some reasonable theme issues that come up.
Sweet... Lordy...
*bows and kisses your feet* Teach me your ways!
(and slip into the Soft Slippers, Sloth. )
in a world where extra organs and too much gall both
call for consequences.
raining (a) fluorescent light. Seethe anger
might subside before I dive
under glowing lights (which, by the way,
are only good for growing debt (/new line)
and death.)
in too much greed to ‘lease (want) for (need)— (those work fine as generalities, and the pluralization can be removed)
hunting freedom with hungry eyes,
hoping it hides not under guise. (take the comma out after not. is it really necessary?)
with life—that specific shade we grow
after the fire of youth has burned through
all the passion, hope and love we care to lose,
leaving the Bitter Ash of Ire loose to suck the sunshine
out of life and dye its greenhorns blue.
(every once in a while, i'll be reading a poem and this one thought comes into my head. END IT THERE!
And it's a very difficult piece of critique to leave because it's kind of pompous. You want me to cut out the end?
Screw you pal. I have a poem to write, not a fantasy of yours to create/enact. Nevertheless, my senses pressed
for the ending after "grow." I like the concept of ending it with that hopeful notion of growth. not good nor bad.
just growth. separate from our distinction of good vs. evil. in the end, there will always be growth. hurrah!
So, what do you think about throwing a comma after shade, and a period after grow?
Thanks for the crit. <3