Entropy

[Truerenigma]

"Maybe read some poetry" isn't useful. I'm sorry you're frustrated. A "series of strung together fragments" is, in fact, a sentence. S2 starts, "Sharp, grey eyes, cold, hungry, don't /
Follow him. But once, they would have lunged." The subject is "eyes" the verb is "don't follow" and, not that it needs it, the predicate is "him." I redrafted it this way in response to your critique that the snake is the most vivid image. I could have culled the others; instead, I chose to try strengthening them.

Yes, I would like some suggestions on what to read. I've taken your others. I'd especially appreciate suggestions related to the issues you're seeing with what I wrote.

"Doesn't work for me " isn't specific. It's vague. And you didn't say, "this doesn't fit the tone," you said, "why the bub nonsense?" I didn't open on a fragment, I opened with a pronoun lacking an antecedent. It's one of the most common devices in modern poetry. If you'd like me to post some examples from the November issue of Poetry Magazine, I believe there were two.

Lastly, in response to your notes, the reason I didn't say "the rabbit is us" is because that's the opposite of what I said. I said we're dumb, while the rabbit is acting wisely.

Now, let's take a breath.

Rigorous critique is undermined by aggression. This is dear work to me, and I made hard changes based on your line-by-line critique of half the poem. And that's good. I'm here to learn how to make hard choices.

You've posted a ton since you started in March. I respect that. If you tell me what you're after, I'll do my best to respond in kind. Please don't try to make me feel dumb or incompetent--I kinda feel that way already. If I wanted to get flamed, I'd go on 4chan.

---

Also, "would you like for me to rewrite it for you again?"

It's a rare few that wouldn't have been offended by you rewriting it the first time. That said, yes! Whatever you think the best form of a critique is, I'll take it. Rewriting it again would probably teach me something. It's presumptuous and confusing, but I'd be happy to, like the last time you rewrote my work, try to comprehend and respond to your feedback.

I don't aim to insult. Nonsense is actually a technical term. It's not a nonsense poem, is it?

I don't have the time right now to rewrite your poem, nor do I think it is what's best right now. (Of course I don't always know what's best.)

"It's us" could be tacked on to the beginning of almost any poem and not change it a bit (aside from making it more confusing) unless of course it was followed with something like " 'it' is...[define 'it' here]".

As far as breathing and aggression, emotions do not come into play for me when discussion the technical aspects of poetry. I don't want to have to be the sole provider of crit for your poetry, but your responses are heading things in that direction. I am not frustrated. I do not hold your replies against you. You can not hurt my feelings, and my comments aren't made out of spite. I'm sorry if they were taken that way, and at the risk of going off topic no more will be written on the matter by me.

That being said; do not lose the bones of your first draft. I do like it. The issues I have with it lie beyond the realm of "dislike" or "like": just clean up your line breaks; shoot for double meanings, strong noun and verb clause caesuras that add perspective and point towards your central idea, etc. (I'm sure you have already been reading up on line breaks); and correct the grammar, fix the tenses; and arrange the poem in a rational and chronological order.