glad/hope you, unlike Jennifer, didn't take my response personally. how
egotistical does someone have to be to think someone's talking about them,
when the criticism is directed solely towards a poem.
I prefer to be honest rather than charming in cases of critique, Jennifer.
and yes, I prefer to keep charm out of it; why dilute when directness
carries no offense? I admit the response was brief, which I hope Lyn will
forgive. take it easy Jennifer, I'm not out to assault anyone.

Lyn: I think writing it about an actual bear would be less basic than making
it a metaphor for a nondescript relationship. it's something of a
phenomenon, actually, that seems to utilise one of the first things we're
taught about non-literal writing: 'nothing is as it seems', or something
along those lines. it's the impression that some image or subject only has
potency in a poem if it's a vehicle for something more general. not saying
you feel this is the case, this poem just happens to veer quickly into
cliché by its very form.
in the spirit of proving I meant no harm, here's explanations to two of the
other adjectives I used for the poem.

1. "tell-y"
not a professional term, but I think you know what I mean by it. I'm not one
of those people (I know one or two) who want to root out every suggestion of
common language in a poem with the justification that simple language
"tells" rather than "shows". and really, the boundary between these two
oh-so-commonly cited modes seems to me to be about original use of language
alone; rain doesn't fall, it might "sizzle down"; water may not freeze but
"go into seizures"; &c. and in that vein, this poem really does feel
lacking, enough to spoil its otherwise useable concept (concepts or subjects
are never cliché, it's the way they're presented). the poem is description
of what we either already know or are informed of as soon as the poem
starts: "The skin of a polar bear / is black". this in itself is a weak
opening because of its bland prosaicness. the skin being black, & the given
that polar bears are/appear white, already insinuates the next three lines.
it's the manipulation of insinuations like these, I think, that is one of
the things that makes good poetry. originality in language, in image.

2. "obvious"
this is my point about the polar bear's 'false skin' being a metaphor alone;
but also about the fact that the metaphor is in no way subtle. the last two
words of the poem bring its already teetering frame crashing down. one
alternative way of presenting this metaphor (or conceit, as it may be) that
I thought of would be to insinuate the "Like you" in the title. not easy to
do subtly, so here's a dumb example: "You Polar Bear". in this way, the
banally obvious last words can be omitted entirely, because the 'gag' is
included in the title, & this affects all of the poem already; BUT: the poem
may still be read as fairly 'straight up', hence the metaphor isn't hammered
violently home. now because any poem may, in any case, be read 'straight
up', the form needs to be interesting. this version of this poem is not.

KS

On 04/12/06, Lyn Moir <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> I agree, Kaspar, as (my) syllabics tend to be dry and simplistic, and I'd
> agree more if this were about bears, polar or otherwise.
>
> Lyn
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "kasper salonen" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, December 03, 2006 9:50 PM
> Subject: Re: Snap Syllabic
>
>
> > how plain. I find the fact that polar bears are black fascinating, that
> > setup alone can be used to effects much better than this tell-y,
> > simplistic,
> > obvious piece.
> >
>