To Me, Fair Friend, You Never Can Be Old

[busker]

Killingwithasmilexd,
I am very pleased you enjoyed the concept.  I had fun trying to thresh it out.  That acceptance no matter what is one of the concepts that I had hoped to illustrate.  Thank you for reading this and commenting to me what you received from it.

---

Busker,


Thank you so very much for your response, and the time you invested in this.  I admit I was probably a little too ambitious for my current abilities.  

I chose the common abstraction of love and used cliches in a desire to not convolute my attempt at symbolism.  That symbolism was obviously not ascertainable.  Since I was using common cliche I tried to compound them in a unique image.  The design for the sailing thing was to be as if you sailed down a river, say the Mississippi, towards the ocean.  While clearing the delta you face the ocean tides.  The illusion was to be that the other side of those tides (the destination) is unseen and in the unknown.

As to the usage of "flagrant": I am super pleased that you harkened back to the etymology.  That word was specifically chosen for it roots. Without saying, "flaming funeral pyre" I was endeavoring to show flames on the winds surrounding them.  I tried do the cliche of pyres at death differently.  The term "flagrant winds" was also used by an 18th century religious scholar in an essay on elocution.  That checked so many boxes of where I wanted to go with this (antiquated verbiage; unique image; the multiple usage effect of flames to help tie in the symbolism aspect; Mr. Enfield's use of it in collusion with a water theme; the assonance with "stay", "may", "day", and even how some pronounce "accuse"; its usage by a religious author; and yes, it did fit with the trochaic rhythm).  This is in no way a defense in an attempt to say I made a good word choice.  It is clearly evident I did not.  However, I did want to state that it was not simply a "filler" word choice.

I am grateful for your incredibly kind words, and will strive to improve.  I know that this piece is severely lacking, but was unclear as to exactly what and where it is lacking.  Your response was very instrumental in helping me see how it fails for the reader, and that is exactly what I was desiring.  Any other points where I need to improve or adjust are welcome.  I do understand that there are a myriad of issues with this piece, I just do not quite understand what those issues exactly are.  Thank you again for your time.

Thank you for taking the crit in the right spirit. 
Small clarification on 'flagrant winds' - I didn't mean to say that it was an expression which could never be used. For instance, we've suffered many a flagrant wind day here in the bushfire season down under recently. However, if the day is calm and sunny, and the night holds the possibility of nimbus clouds, then flagrant winds - while still a possibility in the face of an unpredictable weather change - don't quite fit the extended metaphor.