Yesterday, 08:04 AM
(Yesterday, 02:40 AM)Naish Wrote: He wants a woman in a tank top and cut-offs,(I think the codes here (which say "L SEP" in a tiny dashed box) are Word codes having to do with white space. Check how the board is presenting what you pasted into it, to prevent this.)
legs slick with tangerine and coconut. Sets the tone of edibles, with a restrained near rhyme in coconut from cut-offs.
He wants her to make eggs when it rains—sunny-side up, Oh, she's a chicken? No.
splashed with Tabasco.
Saturdays, she's barefoot by the woodshed,
watermelon sweating on a tray, suggestions of bustiness
while he splits maple. Suggestive, but it's a woodshed, after all. "Splits maple" is sweet
Sundays after church, she's on the porch,
Bloody Mary in her hand,
cigar smoke on her lips. The picture doesn't quite jell here - smoke flat on lips, as if painted? You can do better.
But weeknights
he tends his salamanders.
For Caterina, two ounces of ham. These are his pets, whom he cares for. The only real females in his life...
Lorraine, the maraschino.
Then four fingers under That is, four fingers of whiskey in a glass... or subtracted from the bottle
his waistband, the cliche is "under his belt," but he's wearing suspenders, right?
he dozes on the sofa
until the next day wakes him.
In mild to moderate critique, this is a good description of the lonely man's day where the only things he really does are splitting some maple-wood, feeding his pet salamanders (caught in the bayou) then knocking back four fingers of bourbon and off to sleep. The visions of his dream girl run on weekly loop.
I did not get the whole thing on first read - substituting "waistband" for "belt" is cute but confusing, Same with smoke on her lips. I get the Al Capp woman smoking a ceegar, and "on" instead of puffing from the lips because this is a static fantasy image, but... maybe "round" her lips? Wreaths?
I might not have figured out the pet salamanders, had I not worked with a guy who kept a pet newt (yes, that was its name, DON'T SAY IT). I think I'm right, but @matsu didn't see it and I may be wrong. If I'm not, it's fun and a little touching. Should it be clearer? I'm gonna say no.
A fun read.
Non-practicing atheist

