11-04-2020, 04:00 AM
therabbitisme,
Your first stanza is in iambic trimeter with an abab rhyme pattern, good solid formal poetry, even though a bit rudimentary and singsong. Except for your fifth line it maintains this form until the ending couplet and the fifth is merely missing its head.
The rhyme "God" and "wad" does rhyme, however the term "wad" has such modern connotations as to maybe seem less than worthy. If you are trying to be a bit bawdy and humorous...then sure. I find it hilarious myself and trimeter does lend itself to levity. "God" may be better as lower case "g," as we are talking Greek mythology.
The first line should read "he" not "who". "(Who) He sees himself reflected" Using who makes this a question, yet by context we can conclude it is not a question. The "he" is the personification of "narcissism" as a person, which becomes confused in the second stanza as "he" Narcissus cannot reflect in man, if anything man my show narcissism, but man is neither reflected nor reflects, at least in this sense. The writer seems to forget that the personified thing cannot stand in for an actually thing. Secondly it makes no sense to say that man plays the same function in God as narcissism does in man. This is an unproven assertion, even in the poem. Also "God" is a non-descriptive term, as when people think of the idea of "God" they tend to think of many different things. The writer here, seems to assume that "God" is the same thing to all people. It is not.
In the third stanza the second part (the second two lines) does not follow the first, that is to say it is nonsensical. Platonic forms have nothing to do with narcissism, so there is no correlation between the two. Plato's forms have to do with the archetypal image of a thing, such as a tree. We have this general idea of tree (the archetype) and through that we recognize all other trees as trees, even though we have never seen some trees before. Narcissism is not a mental construct, it is a label associated with a mental type, not as a thing in itself, ie., 'being' in the world. Secondly, Plato is not alone in his forms, that in itself is nonsensical.
The last two lines follow along in this same vein.
"As he reflects,
He sees himself"
Insert mirror for "he".
As a mirror reflects,
it sees itself.
I assume that the "he" here is Narcissus, but this makes little sense as in the myth Narcissus needs echo to reflect back to him, as he is unable to do it for himself.
Even though I have given a lot of criticism, I think could be a workable idea once you have it more clearly in you mind and actually create coherency within the poem.
best,
dale
Your first stanza is in iambic trimeter with an abab rhyme pattern, good solid formal poetry, even though a bit rudimentary and singsong. Except for your fifth line it maintains this form until the ending couplet and the fifth is merely missing its head.
The rhyme "God" and "wad" does rhyme, however the term "wad" has such modern connotations as to maybe seem less than worthy. If you are trying to be a bit bawdy and humorous...then sure. I find it hilarious myself and trimeter does lend itself to levity. "God" may be better as lower case "g," as we are talking Greek mythology.
The first line should read "he" not "who". "(Who) He sees himself reflected" Using who makes this a question, yet by context we can conclude it is not a question. The "he" is the personification of "narcissism" as a person, which becomes confused in the second stanza as "he" Narcissus cannot reflect in man, if anything man my show narcissism, but man is neither reflected nor reflects, at least in this sense. The writer seems to forget that the personified thing cannot stand in for an actually thing. Secondly it makes no sense to say that man plays the same function in God as narcissism does in man. This is an unproven assertion, even in the poem. Also "God" is a non-descriptive term, as when people think of the idea of "God" they tend to think of many different things. The writer here, seems to assume that "God" is the same thing to all people. It is not.
In the third stanza the second part (the second two lines) does not follow the first, that is to say it is nonsensical. Platonic forms have nothing to do with narcissism, so there is no correlation between the two. Plato's forms have to do with the archetypal image of a thing, such as a tree. We have this general idea of tree (the archetype) and through that we recognize all other trees as trees, even though we have never seen some trees before. Narcissism is not a mental construct, it is a label associated with a mental type, not as a thing in itself, ie., 'being' in the world. Secondly, Plato is not alone in his forms, that in itself is nonsensical.
The last two lines follow along in this same vein.
"As he reflects,
He sees himself"
Insert mirror for "he".
As a mirror reflects,
it sees itself.
I assume that the "he" here is Narcissus, but this makes little sense as in the myth Narcissus needs echo to reflect back to him, as he is unable to do it for himself.
Even though I have given a lot of criticism, I think could be a workable idea once you have it more clearly in you mind and actually create coherency within the poem.
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.