Paralytically Metaphoric About The Negativity of An Ever Favoured Face.

[dukealien]

Paralytically Metaphoric About The Negativity of An Ever Favoured Face.
 

1. Tempestuous twining embarked, now I turn
   
2. To such wining, then whining; my soul will not learn,
   
3. And I scream for reform, but my heart wills me not,
   
4. Whilst my mind laughs and cries at its morals, forgot.
   
   
5. Alas not to sleep, act directed as told.
   
6. But to break, to mutate to this monstrous behold,
   
7. Which she retinally claws with both fear and contempt,
   
8. ‘Fore appeasing my rants with her tears often spent
   
9. For I. She cannot really spend her hours
   
10. In ardent towers of lovers stained with blood,
    
11. Or flood my green with flowers of trust and love
    
12. Whence with such strength she’s made a stand, and stood.
    

With all due respect to a first submission,  this also has the flavor of a parody.  However, giving "serious" in the title its due, to work.

The title brings to mind the myth of Daphne and Apollo, which would harmonize with some of its (to modern readers) archaic features (capitalizing each line, "['f]ore," and the like).  The poem does not, however, seem to refer to this myth except in L1 ("embarked"), and Daphne was virginal rather than libertine.  I see nothing wrong with the capitalization, though it is not favored on this site.

The first stanza (L1-4) makes a certain amount of sense.  L3 and 4 contain inversions ("wills me not" and "morals, forgot") which confuse an already confusing narrative.  Better a steady or appropriate rhythm in blank verse than distortions to produce rhymed couplets, I say.

The second stanza switches to third person narrator from first person.  No problem with that, and the line-space is appropriate to the change, but it should be clearer.  However, L5-8 (including the beginning of L9) are simply incoherent:  "act directed," "monstrous behold," and "retinally claws" do not make sense.  General comment on this below.  "[R]etinally claws" also breaks any rhythm I can hear.

Beginning with L9 (which "I" replaced with "me" could help salvage since this is an enjambment from L8 - but who is "I" or "me" here, Apollo?) you have four lines which can be read as iambic pentameter (allowing "flowers" and "towers" as one syllable each, an attractive internal rhyme) and an imperfect but better than eye-rhyme of "blood" with "stood."  This quatrain is actually rather nice, especially L12, but jarring because the preceding lines are anything but iambic.  You could say that now the lady's turned vegetable she's assumed a more stately, regular (paralyzed?) rhythm, but one suspects you were just getting better at it as the poem progressed.

Bottom line:  This was (for me, at least) very difficult to read and seemed both incoherent and inconsistent.  In my opinion, it should have been submitted in "Novice Poet and Critic" where our friendly critics could have gently unwound its infelicities and encouraged the writer to edit and learn.  Whatever good poetry is, it is not (unless for very good reason) incoherent.  My suggestion is that, since *you* know what you were trying to say, you write it out in clear, telegraphic prose ("Girl hates her immoral past," etc.).  Then write something that seems insipid to you, but has a definite beat and perhaps some rhymes (don't force them), especially internal rhymes - for which you have a real talent or instinct.  Add a little chrome, then submit to Novice or Mild.

I would hate to have received a blistering critique for my first submission, but you have jumped in at the deep end here.  Good luck!