09-13-2014, 04:39 PM
Copyedit [line-by substantive edit]
[Diana]
--Names in poem's contribute to the poem's depth. This name will reference to the huntress to most readers. But the nothing follows through. The name is, tf, a miscue.
I paint her in summer sun,
--from a proofer's point of view, the problem is the pronoun-antecedent flip. A copyeditor's problem is more serious.
----previous readers understood that there was a painter, a model, and a painting. But there's nothing to suggest that. As written, you're painting on a person. SPECIFICALLY: there is NO EVIDENCE that this scene contains (1) a canvas or (2) paint. That might be cool, EXCEPT it contains a brush. That's maddeningly confusing to me.
the midday breeze caressing
Diana’s proud breasts,
warm fingers of August heat
tracing circles over taut flesh.
--recast all of the above in active verb tenses. Gerunds=bad.
----most problematically, the lines "warm fingers of August heat / tracing circles over taut flesh" are almost indecipherable. Is the heat tracing? Is August heating tracing circles? It's intuitive that warm fingers are tracing circles, but that's impossible, because they're doing it "over" and not "on" or "upon," and, more to the point
------there's a rule of construction that commands a reader to assume the author had all possible versions of a writing available. That means, here, I must assume that you decided against the "plainspoken" version of the thought. That is, you can't have meant "warm fingers trace circles on taut flesh," because that version was available to you, and you opted against it.
--------That means I'm absolutely at a loss as to your meaning here.
Brushstrokes mimic alabaster skin
--as stated in the proofer's marks, gestures (which is what brushstrokes are) can't mimic colors. At least, it is hard to imagine them doing so here.
dimpled with shades of barest pink;
--the phrase "barest pink" is nonsensical
--again, the gesture (here, "dimpled") can't be done with a color
her cheeks flush, fires stoked within—
--the literal construction here is that she had something burning in her mouth
she is aroused, and I am nervous.
--I can't understand what your nerves have to do with anything. How do they connect?
The model’s eyes narrow in mischief.
--"The model's" is what Bernstein called, sarcastically, "elegant variation." There seems to be no reason to use "The model's" instead of "her." The fact that you did confuses me. I start wondering if there are two women.
----THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE here, given the fact that most readers will believe there is (1) a model and (2) a painting of that model.
I ask her not to smile
--SUPER IMPORTANT. WHY?
but she does anyway.
--Again, WHY?
[Diana]
--Names in poem's contribute to the poem's depth. This name will reference to the huntress to most readers. But the nothing follows through. The name is, tf, a miscue.
I paint her in summer sun,
--from a proofer's point of view, the problem is the pronoun-antecedent flip. A copyeditor's problem is more serious.
----previous readers understood that there was a painter, a model, and a painting. But there's nothing to suggest that. As written, you're painting on a person. SPECIFICALLY: there is NO EVIDENCE that this scene contains (1) a canvas or (2) paint. That might be cool, EXCEPT it contains a brush. That's maddeningly confusing to me.
the midday breeze caressing
Diana’s proud breasts,
warm fingers of August heat
tracing circles over taut flesh.
--recast all of the above in active verb tenses. Gerunds=bad.
----most problematically, the lines "warm fingers of August heat / tracing circles over taut flesh" are almost indecipherable. Is the heat tracing? Is August heating tracing circles? It's intuitive that warm fingers are tracing circles, but that's impossible, because they're doing it "over" and not "on" or "upon," and, more to the point
------there's a rule of construction that commands a reader to assume the author had all possible versions of a writing available. That means, here, I must assume that you decided against the "plainspoken" version of the thought. That is, you can't have meant "warm fingers trace circles on taut flesh," because that version was available to you, and you opted against it.
--------That means I'm absolutely at a loss as to your meaning here.
Brushstrokes mimic alabaster skin
--as stated in the proofer's marks, gestures (which is what brushstrokes are) can't mimic colors. At least, it is hard to imagine them doing so here.
dimpled with shades of barest pink;
--the phrase "barest pink" is nonsensical
--again, the gesture (here, "dimpled") can't be done with a color
her cheeks flush, fires stoked within—
--the literal construction here is that she had something burning in her mouth
she is aroused, and I am nervous.
--I can't understand what your nerves have to do with anything. How do they connect?
The model’s eyes narrow in mischief.
--"The model's" is what Bernstein called, sarcastically, "elegant variation." There seems to be no reason to use "The model's" instead of "her." The fact that you did confuses me. I start wondering if there are two women.
----THIS IS A SERIOUS ISSUE here, given the fact that most readers will believe there is (1) a model and (2) a painting of that model.
I ask her not to smile
--SUPER IMPORTANT. WHY?
but she does anyway.
--Again, WHY?
A yak is normal.