as a matter of fact archaism is something I've been trying lately to
snap out of, it's all due to me reading too few poets & too much
50s-70s modernism. too few *contemporary* poets is also true; but all
I've encountered on my short trips that way is the exact opposite of
archaism & equally stupid: prosaicness, dullness, uninventiveness. at
least two of which, however, occurred in this poem anyway..
KS
On 31/08/2007, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I'm not sure I asked for it really. I was looking for responses to
> something other than news stories & theories for a change. well, I got
> them, so in that sense you're right.
> and yeah, wikipedia was undoubtedly more interesting than this thing
> that I wrote, agreed again. I just wonder why it was necessary to
> knuckle that into me rather than try to convey it in some less
> dickheaded manner than what Barry exhibited. but, it's not important.
> on to your shake/take.
>
> - absolutely, the only use I made of the fish was the fear it struck
> in me just from reading about it, it was a conscious unexploitation
> but a bad choice obviously.
>
> - I was actually slightly partial to the colons in the 4th, but I can
> see why it would appear sloppy. or does appear, or is.
>
> - there is definitely a Lorca vibe in this, re: archaism & the direct
> addressal, so much so that I had thought it would be picked up on. I
> hesitate to remind that this was, and is, a snap.
>
> - the second stanza refers to the fact that I read about it & was
> intrigued (as you were) by that description alone. not effective, I
> know.
>
> - I concur to all those line-examples; it's ridiculous how I always
> agree so readily with critique, because the observations made have all
> been made, first, by me! I should just correct them to begin with.
> the "you" is also a weak device that I overused as a kind of first
> draft 'bookmark' for a possible future tone of the poem. but I've kind
> of lost my interest in the topic anyway. I'm not good at religious
> symbolism, at all. among other shortcomings that Barry will surely be
> happy to point out. ;)
>
> - I was going for a contrast at the end, between horror & something
> comical and far from that world of imagery. fantasy, I don't see that
> really, but the switch is probably too sudden & tries to make up for
> other flaws in the piece.
>
>
>
> Bob, thanks very much for this review.
>
> KS
>
> On 31/08/2007, Bob Marcacci <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > whoa... serious slashing there, Barry... you asked for it, kaspers... happy
> > to learn about this fish... and Barry's right... Google yielded some
> > interesting stuff... here's my shake...
> >
> > river/sea at the beginning? this is a freshwater fish? this fish swims into
> > body orifices? the poem could be much more vivid with such a reference...
> > what a great metaphor unexploited here...
> >
> > ugly punctuation, particularly in the fourth stanza... form could work much
> > better to also relate your message...
> >
> > generally unsurprised by use of language... a bit archaic at times but not
> > used in a fresh way... is it necessary? we need more if it is... water which
> > gives life is pretty obvious... and you bang on it twice here...
> >
> > a little caught off guard by the second stanza... are we in meta-poetry
> > territory? "text" one of many words which feels out of place... are tenses
> > important?
> >
> > the fourth stanza beginning with "the devil" could be much stronger... it is
> > the most important part of the poem...
> >
> > i expect the individual line to stand up on its own, removed from the poem,
> > thus an individual line should work quite hard... many lines here are simply
> > weak, these being the most obvious:
> >
> > you are not soft <-- how about giving us an image of this
> > death to you <-- die! cluttered by verbosity
> > that which we don't see <-- clumsy
> > and had you, evil fish <-- missed opportunity for a strong birth image
> > that whatever kills you becomes. <-- weak
> >
> > incidentally, almost all of them contain the word "you"...
> >
> > the ending is too comic... everything before is a bit on the
> > horror/Revelations scale with fire and brimstone and blood... then at the
> > end we're transferred to a fantasy movie...
> >
> > write 99 more poems about candirú...
> >
> > --
> > Bob Marcacci
> >
> > Three grand essentials to happiness in this life are something
> > to do, something to love, and something to hope for.
> > - Joseph Addison
> >
> >
> >
> > > From: kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Reply-To: "Poetryetc: poetry and poetics" <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 16:35:30 +0300
> > > To: <[log in to unmask]>
> > > Subject: Re: snap 'dire symbol'
> > >
> > > irritable coccyx syndrome. you are excused.
> > >
> > > so does everyone else have a similar excuse?
> > > this isn't me being a self-centered attention-hogger, I'm just
> > > genuinely surprised that nobody wanted to say anything at all about
> > > the poem I put up. also, what sort of an example are we giving Lynda?
> > > I'm among the guilty there, I've been meaning to reply to her latest
> > > piece but with the first week of university I've been a bit tuckered
> > > out.
> > >
> > > everyone get off your asses. I mean coccyxes.
> > >
> > > KS
> > >
> > > On 31/08/2007, andrew burke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >> Yes, today, I am very passive. Went to shoo a dog out of the
> > >> schoolchildren's way two days ago and ended up flying through the air and
> > >> landing on my posterior. Very sore coccyx. My back is now also ginger. So my
> > >> mood is extremely irritable but my programme in life is nowadays to be
> > >> gentle and kind to my fellow humans. Passive, yes. Still waters run
> > >> irritably. I may approach your poem tomorrow if football doesn't get too
> > >> exciting.
> > >>
> > >> Andrew
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On 31/08/2007, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>> well that's passive for you. if you don't have anything at all to
> > >>> comment about the poem, that's fine. I was just under the impression
> > >>> that this was a POETRY mailing list.
> > >>>
> > >>> KS
> > >>>
> > >>> On 31/08/2007, andrew burke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>>> Neither, just didn't know from what was sent.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> A
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 31/08/2007, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> andrew, what did you mean by "did you write that"? was it positive or
> > >>>>> negative disbelief?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> anyone else have anything to say?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> KS
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> On 18/08/2007, andrew burke <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>>>>> Did you write that, Kasper?
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> On 18/08/07, kasper salonen <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > >>>>>>> http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dfr8jjpv_32cgm7xg
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> KS
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> --
> > >>>>>> Andrew
> > >>>>>> http://hispirits.blogspot.com/
> > >>>>>> http://www.inblogs.net/hispirits
> > >>>>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/aburke/
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>>
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> Andrew
> > >>>> http://hispirits.blogspot.com/
> > >>>> http://www.inblogs.net/hispirits
> > >>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/aburke/
> > >>>>
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> Andrew
> > >> http://hispirits.blogspot.com/
> > >> http://www.inblogs.net/hispirits
> > >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/aburke/
> > >>
> >
>
|