06-16-2017, 07:18 AM
(06-15-2017, 11:07 PM)Todd Wrote: Some very good thoughts, Vagabond. I'll consider them when I pull together a rewrite. I appreciated the mirror you held up so that I could think about my choices. Oh and certainly, no woman would want to be an ingenue--especially if they considered the implications at least. The unreliable narrator is very precisely objectifying this person. I think he's more speaking about what other's (like himself) would call her and not trying to call forth her own self-identity--I honestly doubt that he considers even that concept relevant. I doubt there's any part of her that in his mind belongs to her. There has to be a slight level of malice present to justify the reduction of identity. Thank you for the way you engaged with the piece.
Best,
Todd
I kind of regret having put that bible quote in the comment (but couldn´t resist, it was too funny).
of course the women´s identity is not relevant in this poem´s concept, and being a poem this is not a thing that needs to be justified by the author.
well, it doesn´t seem to me that the narrator objectified the subject (if that even is possible), I´d rather say he added another (fictional) perspective.
i guess poetry shouldn´t have a lot of restrictions, but convey feelings, show different perspectives and evoke reactions. my perspective as a reader (mixing up 3 different perspectives) caused my reaction to this poem (which need not be justified either). so, no edit simply for reader´s reactions
