ahh but poeticizing is my thing!
just kidding. well, not kidding since it's true, but I will look into
it. I did intend a full-scale 'poeticization' with this, to be honest;
wonder if there's a way to make that work.
I just wonder, if I remove the poeticizing, what am I left with? the
shock-like soft image of late autumn is all this means to be, at this
stage..
thanks for that break suggestion, I see what you mean.
which is "the later bit"? the last stanza?
not sure how a sunflower growls either. intuitively? edits will poke
at that one.
thanks you Doug
KS
On 15/10/2007, Douglas Barbour <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Okay Kasper
>
> I like the opening, but feel the 2nd stanza & the later bit also
> personifying autumn should go; the imagistic tone of the first & other
> parts mitigates against such 'poeticizing'.
>
> not sure the sunflower should growl either (?).
>
> some line breaks work really well, as 'jays / away'....
>
> Doug
> On 15-Oct-07, at 6:13 AM, kasper salonen wrote:
>
> > is the link not showing up? or am I just impatient?
> >
> > I'd be very grateful if the round of advice I got, à la Bob urging me
> > to look at the Line as a morphable device, could be briefly continued
> > for this poem where I tried to take things of that nature into
> > consideration..
> >
> > don't mean to grub!
> >
> > KS
> Douglas Barbour
> 11655 - 72 Avenue NW
> Edmonton Ab T6G 0B9
> (780) 436 3320
> http://www.ualberta.ca/~dbarbour/
>
> Latest book: Continuations (with Sheila E Murphy)
> http://www.uap.ualberta.ca/UAP.asp?LID=41&bookID=664
>
> and this is 'life' and we owe at least this much
> contemplation to our western fact: to Rise,
> Decline, Fall, to futility and larks,
> to the bright crustaceans of the oversky.
>
> Phyllis Webb
>
|