05-05-2018, 05:07 AM
[Without looking at the other critiques, forgive any repetition]
An interesting Socratic poem, which for that branch of philosophy might arrive at ideal forms (of leaves, colors, etc.).
One thing you might try is replacing the verb to be with more active or diverse (e.g. "Or night lurks, immanently dark?") This would reduce the didactic nature of the poem, though that is also one of its charms.
The variant interpretations toward the end are also quite nice: "My light may not be light for you" suggests meanings for "light" beyond the physical--- spiritual, illumination. And the last line could reference the grue-bleen hypothesis (that something green today might be blue tomorrow - in ideal form, not just the vagaries of the seasons).
One thing (if no one else has mentioned it): on this board, use of traditional poetic typography (capitalizing the first word of each line regardless of sentence struction) is frowned upon by some and considered archaic. I disagree, but do see their point in that line capitalization can create emphasis where it's not intended. You might consider going to lower case except where capitalization is otherwise required (proper names, first word of a sentence) and see how you like it.
Asks some interesting questions - good effort.
[/quote]
Thanks so much for the critique dukealien! The interesting thing is that while I didn't have in mind Socrates, ideal forms, etc. while I was writing this, I do enjoy philosophy a lot and I've read Plato. Oh, and I really do love the so-called Socratic method, asking questions, etc. Otherwise, your interpretation is pretty much spot on (at least with the way I wanted the poem to be understood).
Like you guessed, I deliberately used only 'to be' because I wanted to keep the poem simple and kind of didactic. It probably would sound better if I used a different verb at least once though.
I see, I will go for lower case from now on. Thank you for letting me know!
An interesting Socratic poem, which for that branch of philosophy might arrive at ideal forms (of leaves, colors, etc.).
One thing you might try is replacing the verb to be with more active or diverse (e.g. "Or night lurks, immanently dark?") This would reduce the didactic nature of the poem, though that is also one of its charms.
The variant interpretations toward the end are also quite nice: "My light may not be light for you" suggests meanings for "light" beyond the physical--- spiritual, illumination. And the last line could reference the grue-bleen hypothesis (that something green today might be blue tomorrow - in ideal form, not just the vagaries of the seasons).
One thing (if no one else has mentioned it): on this board, use of traditional poetic typography (capitalizing the first word of each line regardless of sentence struction) is frowned upon by some and considered archaic. I disagree, but do see their point in that line capitalization can create emphasis where it's not intended. You might consider going to lower case except where capitalization is otherwise required (proper names, first word of a sentence) and see how you like it.
Asks some interesting questions - good effort.
[/quote]
Thanks so much for the critique dukealien! The interesting thing is that while I didn't have in mind Socrates, ideal forms, etc. while I was writing this, I do enjoy philosophy a lot and I've read Plato. Oh, and I really do love the so-called Socratic method, asking questions, etc. Otherwise, your interpretation is pretty much spot on (at least with the way I wanted the poem to be understood).
Like you guessed, I deliberately used only 'to be' because I wanted to keep the poem simple and kind of didactic. It probably would sound better if I used a different verb at least once though.
I see, I will go for lower case from now on. Thank you for letting me know!