Hail Marie vers. 2 mercedes

[tectak]

Tom,

Well thank you for your answers to so many questions and I must say you answered them quite well. The only unfortunate thing is that few have little to do with any of the problems I brought up. I'm sure you weren't, but at one point it seemed as if you almost were suggesting that empathy should soften the critique; something I am sure that you would never adhere to nor try to impose on your good friend and sty mate, neither to use as a way to disparage or impugn his character as being less than savory, which we of course we already know is the truth.

dale

Hi dale,
been 'orf again to Shibden Mill Inn near Halifax. Great fun.
Re.above. You only asked one question so you got a great deal. (two meanings, of course...what else would you expect from me?)
Same alive or dead? I guess, yes. Sorry, I miss the point and it's my fault. The guy could be stroking the photograph...all photographs are memories whether the subject is alive or dead.
This piece needs looking at again and if possible simplifying even more. The repetitions are a cop out..once again, it is observed behaviour in the grieving and a precursor to the poem I never wrote called The Irrationality of Grief. I may write it yet as I accumulate more and more irrationalties.
No to the empathetic softening of crit...once again, and they are your words (or will be) , never combine character and author when critting; that would be to confuse crit with credence. I never believe what I write but the character often seems to.
Best,
your reciprocally fictional friend (see what I mean?),
tectak

---

Marie died a week ago. How do you read "Marie"? "Ma-ree" or "Ma-ri-yey"? I think three syllables would work better for this (Maria...).
I can't let go. I can't let go.
I loved her when hair turned grey.
Like yesterday. Like yesterday.
I touched her hand and stroked her brow.
A memory now. A memory now.
We said goodbye, we cried for you.
Friends loved you, too, they loved you, too. "FRIENDS LOVED you, too" is a mouthful compared to the other lines (a MEM'ry now, like YESterday, i CAN'T let go) Maybe remove these two lines, too? Everything else involves only one mourner -- it'll definitely strengthen the lonely feeling of the mourner.
Alone now with your photograph. Maybe a comma, instead?
I hear you laugh. I hear you laugh.
To sleep I hold your pillow tight. Maybe a comma, instead?
Alone at night. Alone at night.
In chill dawn air I make believe. Maybe a colon, instead?
I hear you breathe. I hear you breathe.
I doze beside you in the shade .
A dream we made. A dream we made. Maybe commas between "dream" and "we"?


This ending feels superfluous, like an attempt to infuse some deeper insight into a poem that seemed to focus more on the emotions of the speaker than meat. I'd just end it with a full circle, with the first two lines capping the whole thing, fulfilling how the speaker's grief, in this poem, started out in Marie's old age, then ended with the dawn of a new day -- besides, the following is basically a different and longer stating of those two lines.


The repetition is pretty neat, though. Drives in the obsession of the speaker for Marie real hard. A bit comic, yes, but only in the sense of being a bit too, er, sentimental or obsessive(kinda like one of them old tragedy ballads or a villanelle or something). Thanks for the read!
Marie died a week ago
but still I see her hair of grey,
and touch her hand and stroke her brow.
Her photograph is on the bed
propped on her pillow by my head.
I cried last night for me, not her.
In every moment she is there.
In dreams you sigh, "Remember me".
I do, I do, my Hail Marie.
tectak 2015

Hi river,
I may well stylise this piece with all your comma suggestions. It was not a Damascus moment when I realised that the repetition reward was counter productive. I think there is more economy in your way.
Why Marie? Expediency. It rhymes with "me" last lines.
I am not sure yet about the cheap Hail Marie. I once felt that a worshipful wordiness pervaded this poem...I am no longer sure.
What I am after is simplicity of surface intent but deep waters beneath.
Fail. Perhaps it is not possible.
Best,
tectak