Hello Frank,
            There are some elements in this poem I really like and others I´m less keen on. First, I found the poem ambiguous, which is what I guess Sally was referring to in her comment wondering if it was serious with some light bits, or light with some serious bits. I like the ambiguity and I understand it´s intentional, the narrator both desires and is distressed by these `ghosts´/memories. That´s why they are a temptation and why time seduces him/her, why memory is perverse. I think the line `time works so hard at seduction´ is a really great one, but the following line, `flows inexorably´ smacks of cliché. At the end of that stanza I would question whether you need to include `to recall´, though you might want to consider amending `assemble´ to `reassemble´. I would also suggest considering cutting the final line. I´m not sure you need the pun on weak/week in the title. There is an ambiguity in the presentation and somewhat in the diction/tone but this comes across very clearly to me as a very sad poem.
I hope this is useful.



Best wishes,   Mike

 > 
> Lähettäjä: Frank <[log in to unmask]>
> Päiväys: 2004/03/09 ti PM 01:55:31 GMT+02:00
> Vastaanottaja: [log in to unmask]
> Aihe: Sub - ghosts (weakly)
> 
> ghosts (weakly)
> the ghosts form a temptation
> three inside a week
> is enough to think of karma
> cosmic intentions
> inevitability
> 
> and time works so hard at seduction
> flows inexorably
> to carry away the sense of why
> leaves only misty traces
> that need effort to assemble
> to recall
> 
> then memory practices perversity
> raises up images
> of the things I want
> to experience
> again
> that I can almost touch
> if I reach out
> losses I regret
> 
> I hate ghost weeks 
> 
> ~
>