02-12-2016, 01:01 PM
Center justify is generally only use in concrete poetry and old lady coffee table books, primarily because it makes the reading much more difficult; same goes for capping the start of every line
Most of man knows life as time, (which part of man would that be?)
but privy few know that ebbs and tides not shackled by time, ("but the privy" however "privy does not really seem the correct word here, maybe "privileged"? syntax)
is what make life divine; ("makes")
The eternal sunset on the horizon waves, (I was unaware sunsets could preform this action)
and if there is a paradise I would sprint its way, (non-sequitur)
and if past the sunset an inferno lies,
I would do good a deed and temper vice today; (inversion, "I would do a good deed")
And as muscle dies and senses fail, (Is this only one muscle?)
and if the spirit withers away, (and, and ,and... is "withers" really a good word usage?)
that I say is the worst of fates! ( yes, dying is, pointless line)
Not life at all, but (a) brief mirage, a charlatan: (what is "not life at all"?)
it imitates, and masquerades; (what is "it")
For man’s torch can only flare and dim,
but remains a speck in a great abyss; (this usage/metaphor is trite; does not work with the sunset metaphor and is in fact counterproductive to it)
The eternal sunset comes closer still,
Should I live in wait or run to it with all my will? (Rhetoric, not poetic)
________________________________________________________________________
First sentence:
Most of man knows life as time, but privy few know that ebbs and tides not shackled by time, is what make life divine; the eternal sunset on the horizon waves, and if there is a paradise I would sprint its way, and if past the sunset an inferno lies, I would do good a deed and temper vice today; and as muscle dies and senses fail, and if the spirit withers away, that I say is the worst of fates!
Second sentence:
Not life at all, but brief mirage, a charlatan: it imitates, and masquerades; for man’s torch can only flare and dim, but remains a speck in a great abyss; the eternal sunset comes closer still, should I live in wait or run to it with all my will?
The sense here is that the writer, especially with the center justify, is trying to be poetic, or has some idea about what that means and is attempting to imitate it. However poetry is not about an out of date style, run-on sentences, dropping articles, or other poor grammatical choices. That is to say, it is not about trying to look or seem poetic. This is, however, not uncommon for the novice poet. This is how we all begin, but we must past beyond the superficial. We must look at what we write and ask, have I said anything that makes sense, and beyond that, have I said anything of value. For the poet, his intent must be clear. He must have clearly in his head what he is saying, even if it is mostly a transcriptions coming from the inner muse, it should still be transcribed as clearly as possible.
Still, before the more esoteric aspects of poetry, there are the skill areas. Here, grammar comes to the fore the most, once one gets beyond the center justify. The sentences, especially the first one run so long that by the end one wonders what if anything it said. The second sentence while shorter starts with a negative subject "Not life at all", "well" one asks, "if not life, then what?" Unfortunately the reader is never told. One must assume death, but why all this pussyfooting around?
As mentioned earlier this is all commonplace for the beginning writer, the question is can the writer rise above the lack of clarity and bring more to whatever subject matter is on the table. I will look forward to future efforts.
Best,
dale
Most of man knows life as time, (which part of man would that be?)
but privy few know that ebbs and tides not shackled by time, ("but the privy" however "privy does not really seem the correct word here, maybe "privileged"? syntax)
is what make life divine; ("makes")
The eternal sunset on the horizon waves, (I was unaware sunsets could preform this action)
and if there is a paradise I would sprint its way, (non-sequitur)
and if past the sunset an inferno lies,
I would do good a deed and temper vice today; (inversion, "I would do a good deed")
And as muscle dies and senses fail, (Is this only one muscle?)
and if the spirit withers away, (and, and ,and... is "withers" really a good word usage?)
that I say is the worst of fates! ( yes, dying is, pointless line)
Not life at all, but (a) brief mirage, a charlatan: (what is "not life at all"?)
it imitates, and masquerades; (what is "it")
For man’s torch can only flare and dim,
but remains a speck in a great abyss; (this usage/metaphor is trite; does not work with the sunset metaphor and is in fact counterproductive to it)
The eternal sunset comes closer still,
Should I live in wait or run to it with all my will? (Rhetoric, not poetic)
________________________________________________________________________
First sentence:
Most of man knows life as time, but privy few know that ebbs and tides not shackled by time, is what make life divine; the eternal sunset on the horizon waves, and if there is a paradise I would sprint its way, and if past the sunset an inferno lies, I would do good a deed and temper vice today; and as muscle dies and senses fail, and if the spirit withers away, that I say is the worst of fates!
Second sentence:
Not life at all, but brief mirage, a charlatan: it imitates, and masquerades; for man’s torch can only flare and dim, but remains a speck in a great abyss; the eternal sunset comes closer still, should I live in wait or run to it with all my will?
The sense here is that the writer, especially with the center justify, is trying to be poetic, or has some idea about what that means and is attempting to imitate it. However poetry is not about an out of date style, run-on sentences, dropping articles, or other poor grammatical choices. That is to say, it is not about trying to look or seem poetic. This is, however, not uncommon for the novice poet. This is how we all begin, but we must past beyond the superficial. We must look at what we write and ask, have I said anything that makes sense, and beyond that, have I said anything of value. For the poet, his intent must be clear. He must have clearly in his head what he is saying, even if it is mostly a transcriptions coming from the inner muse, it should still be transcribed as clearly as possible.
Still, before the more esoteric aspects of poetry, there are the skill areas. Here, grammar comes to the fore the most, once one gets beyond the center justify. The sentences, especially the first one run so long that by the end one wonders what if anything it said. The second sentence while shorter starts with a negative subject "Not life at all", "well" one asks, "if not life, then what?" Unfortunately the reader is never told. One must assume death, but why all this pussyfooting around?
As mentioned earlier this is all commonplace for the beginning writer, the question is can the writer rise above the lack of clarity and bring more to whatever subject matter is on the table. I will look forward to future efforts.
Best,
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.