(09-19-2015, 11:33 PM)ellajam Wrote: I love reading this, it brings me there as I fully accept everything. But I still have a problem with the ending. I have been trying to figure out why, I think it might be the your and into or can.
i try
the chisel slips
red becomes the roses
as the chisel slips again
into my fingers
that only bleed
or
i try
the chisel slips
red becomes the roses
as the chisel slips again
my fingers
can only bleed
I think the second one. I know you have thought through every word, but somehow I just can't get your exact choices there.
Thanks for posting it, aside from that nit I continually enjoy it.
The poem is constructed using disyllabic feet (iambs and trochees).
It slips between iambic and trochaic lines with the help of added
weak and strong ending/beginning syllables. This enables it to maintain
a disyllabic rhythm while taking advantage of the different emotional
qualities expressed by each type of line. It also serves to relieve the
monotony of strictly disyllabic feet.
The variable number of feet in each line, while mainly used to punctuate
the elements of meaning, also relieve this same monotony by having that
slight pause we mentally introduced at the end of each line happen
at varying intervals.
And all of this serves to hide the fact the poem is constructed of poetic feet.
I feel it's better for the reader not to know this. What I hope to accomplish
is for the poem to seem natural, smooth, effortless -- and even, at times,
breathless -- without the knowledge that the whole damn thing is a contrivance.
(Yes, of course everyone knows the things are the most egregious
concoctions of trickery and deceit known to women or man; but if we spin
them around fast enough, they might get dizzy enough to forget it.)
Scansion of those last six lines:
i
try
the
chi sel
slips
your
red be
comes the
ro ses
as the
chi sel
slips a
gain
in
to my
fin gers
that can
on ly
bleed
Using articles "a,an,the", conjunctions "and,but,or,...", and other tiny words
to manufacture correct feet is cheating. Using them in free verse is -- and
luckily this has subsided somewhat -- considered abhorrent. Personally, I love
them as they provide the fresh air needed to let the poem assume its natural voice.
In the case of "the red" and "red", it's not just the rhythm or breath, it's that
I think "red" holds more emphasis if it is preceded by that tiny "the".
The "your" is there because I want to make sure the "red" is associated foremost
with the 2nd person and not with the rose.
The "can" is there because it connotes limitation, even despair, at not being able
to do something as opposed to only doing something.
But the "that", I'll give you, is just a contrivance to satisfy the meter.
And there you have it.
I'm reminded of what a good friend and wonderful poet once said to me:
"If you have to explain it, you need to rewrite it."
But I'm tired of this poem now -- it has taken up too much of my life as it is
(probably 10 to 12 edits of 15 to 60 minutes) -- so I hope you'll forgive me for
not attempting a rewite.
I sincerely appreciate you taking the time to comment and you even reading
the damn thing in the first place.
Ray
P.S. And speaking of taking time: Your pigpen efforts are to be lauded.