07-01-2014, 11:34 PM
Tom,
Some of the switch offs between iambic and trochee are not as smooth as are usual for you, especially the extra half foot at the end of L1 making it difficult to start the iambic in L2. Also "he" is used as an accented syllable in L1, is used as an unaccented syllable in line two. Necessary because "kills" in L1 has a harder accent and "he" compared to"who" has the harder accent, in L2 "leaves" is stronger than "he", making for a forced start of iambic that is metrically disruptive to the poem.
The simile in L2 "displayed like fallen, broken stars", does little to enhance the the idea of "He leaves the dead in disarray".
The next two lines read well enough, even though the meaning, or the point being made seems a bit obscure.
The transition from trochee to iambic in L5 seems a bit rough, and disruptive to the reading.
L6 appears to deviate from the eight foot lines that proceed it as it reads as a seven foot line.
The usage of "insertions" in the middle of L8 seems a bit awkward, despite the fact that the meter reads correctly.
L10 is also a seven foot line, although it does not seem disruptive.
Not only is L11 a nine foot line, it has an inelegant second half as it forgoes the article before "ground".
Purely personal. I would like to see/hear a rhyming couplet at the end. I would suggest the last part of the last line read "should do, and does best". Of course it also smooths out the meter some, though I suspect the irregularity is purposeful for emphasis.
The thrust of the poem seems ironic, if not satiric, unless of course it is simply a very long way around to say, "I support the killing of birds". I suspect, although I will not put words in the writers mouth, that this is more a musing about ethics in relation to "wild" animals. It does not seem strong enough to be an outright condemnation of those humans that participate in the sport of bringing about "the flying puff of feathered death."
Dale
Some of the switch offs between iambic and trochee are not as smooth as are usual for you, especially the extra half foot at the end of L1 making it difficult to start the iambic in L2. Also "he" is used as an accented syllable in L1, is used as an unaccented syllable in line two. Necessary because "kills" in L1 has a harder accent and "he" compared to"who" has the harder accent, in L2 "leaves" is stronger than "he", making for a forced start of iambic that is metrically disruptive to the poem.
The simile in L2 "displayed like fallen, broken stars", does little to enhance the the idea of "He leaves the dead in disarray".
The next two lines read well enough, even though the meaning, or the point being made seems a bit obscure.
The transition from trochee to iambic in L5 seems a bit rough, and disruptive to the reading.
L6 appears to deviate from the eight foot lines that proceed it as it reads as a seven foot line.
The usage of "insertions" in the middle of L8 seems a bit awkward, despite the fact that the meter reads correctly.
L10 is also a seven foot line, although it does not seem disruptive.
Not only is L11 a nine foot line, it has an inelegant second half as it forgoes the article before "ground".
Purely personal. I would like to see/hear a rhyming couplet at the end. I would suggest the last part of the last line read "should do, and does best". Of course it also smooths out the meter some, though I suspect the irregularity is purposeful for emphasis.
The thrust of the poem seems ironic, if not satiric, unless of course it is simply a very long way around to say, "I support the killing of birds". I suspect, although I will not put words in the writers mouth, that this is more a musing about ethics in relation to "wild" animals. It does not seem strong enough to be an outright condemnation of those humans that participate in the sport of bringing about "the flying puff of feathered death."
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.