04-28-2024, 12:33 AM
Hi Knot,
Thank you so much for the detailed critique! I'm working on a new edition from it that I should be able to post here later today unless I get caught up in other stuff too much. Also, I need to actually figure out how that works because I looked last night but I was too tired to comprehend... Now I'm going to respond to your critiques and hopefully shed some light on this weird poem (I've got worse coming, just you wait haha).
I'll start with a little explanation of what I was trying to accomplish with this poem and why it didn't work—yet.
I based this one off of Of Mice and Men by Steinbeck a little bit, so that's why "he" acts like a small child.
Okay, I'll try to explain my thought process as I go along through your actual comments.
The title
Yes, the title is bad. It's supposed to represent an outcome of the end of the book, but I don't want to spoil that in case you haven't read it. It didn't come out exactly as I'd hoped, although the earlier titles were somehow much worse. As it stands, I like your suggestions to change the title to represent the three strikes somehow. I haven't decided on exactly what I'm going with for the next edit yet, but something along those lines.
not sure what 'best' means here. I guess I meant it as "most clearly" as well as sort of "fondly", if that makes sense?
I think the second 'after' really weakens this verse, and I'm not sure about 'courting'. Perhaps a slight change ... Yes, I agree. In the edition that I'm workshopping now, I'm cutting out the entirety of the third and fourth lines because they don't add anything other than vapid imagery.
the sudden 'strike one' makes me wonder what the point of the opening verse is. It feels like you've jumped into another poem. Yeah, I can see how that might be jarring. I still want to open with something similar to the first two lines just to kind of set the stage, but I'm going to drastically decrease the size of the opening verse and switch to couplets for the entire poem so the strikes can have their own verses.
shrieked? I'm going to keep that. The character that the character in the poem is based off of reacts to painful or confusing situations by crying.
I'd be tempted to use this as the beginning of the second verse. Something like ...
This is the couplet that replaces that section in my current half-finished edit:
I recall how he sat hungry for a taste of freedom,
denied by a pile of dust.
I liked your suggestion to reuse "I recall", and I decided to change the cliched "twist of fate" to the more specific "pile of dust". The pile of dust refers to the Dust Bowl, the cause of the Great Depression.
all rather melodramatic (not my taste, so take comment with a pinch of salt.) I agree, it's quite a bit over the top. I've toned down the melodrama quite a bit and cut some lines around here. You'll see exactly how when I post the edited version, after I figure that out.
Surely 'strike two' should begin its own verse?) It does now! Also "unto" is gone, in addition to most of the verse it was in. It was criminally corny.
I can't see what contribution this verse is making to the piece. It doesn't really advance his 'character' nor the narrative/story. I can see that, but it feels necessary to the idea I have in mind. The issue is that I keep jumping around with different time frames. I think the speaker is sort of building up to maximum nostalgia before the dam bursts ie Strike Three. I can explain that thought process more if you'd like
Okay. That was a lot of typing. Hopefully I cleared some things up, you certainly did for me. I'll have a version 2 out fairly soon, I might wait to see if anyone else points out anything new before I post it, though.
Quick edit: I think a big issue with this poem was my attempt to ape the insipid, overly cryptic free verse that I was seeing in small lit mags I wanted to be published in. Would it be a good idea to try to add a more direct reference to OMAM? That way the poem might feel less meaningless and a little more focused.
Also I removed a lot of my explanations because I missed the bit where I'm not supposed to do that unless asked. Sorry! I'm still figuring everything out.
Regards,
ArmadillosareCool
This is becoming a cumbersome handle, maybe I'll begin to abbr. it like you do.
Thank you so much for the detailed critique! I'm working on a new edition from it that I should be able to post here later today unless I get caught up in other stuff too much. Also, I need to actually figure out how that works because I looked last night but I was too tired to comprehend... Now I'm going to respond to your critiques and hopefully shed some light on this weird poem (I've got worse coming, just you wait haha).
I'll start with a little explanation of what I was trying to accomplish with this poem and why it didn't work—yet.
I based this one off of Of Mice and Men by Steinbeck a little bit, so that's why "he" acts like a small child.
Okay, I'll try to explain my thought process as I go along through your actual comments.
The title
Yes, the title is bad. It's supposed to represent an outcome of the end of the book, but I don't want to spoil that in case you haven't read it. It didn't come out exactly as I'd hoped, although the earlier titles were somehow much worse. As it stands, I like your suggestions to change the title to represent the three strikes somehow. I haven't decided on exactly what I'm going with for the next edit yet, but something along those lines.
not sure what 'best' means here. I guess I meant it as "most clearly" as well as sort of "fondly", if that makes sense?
I think the second 'after' really weakens this verse, and I'm not sure about 'courting'. Perhaps a slight change ... Yes, I agree. In the edition that I'm workshopping now, I'm cutting out the entirety of the third and fourth lines because they don't add anything other than vapid imagery.
the sudden 'strike one' makes me wonder what the point of the opening verse is. It feels like you've jumped into another poem. Yeah, I can see how that might be jarring. I still want to open with something similar to the first two lines just to kind of set the stage, but I'm going to drastically decrease the size of the opening verse and switch to couplets for the entire poem so the strikes can have their own verses.
shrieked? I'm going to keep that. The character that the character in the poem is based off of reacts to painful or confusing situations by crying.
I'd be tempted to use this as the beginning of the second verse. Something like ...
This is the couplet that replaces that section in my current half-finished edit:
I recall how he sat hungry for a taste of freedom,
denied by a pile of dust.
I liked your suggestion to reuse "I recall", and I decided to change the cliched "twist of fate" to the more specific "pile of dust". The pile of dust refers to the Dust Bowl, the cause of the Great Depression.
all rather melodramatic (not my taste, so take comment with a pinch of salt.) I agree, it's quite a bit over the top. I've toned down the melodrama quite a bit and cut some lines around here. You'll see exactly how when I post the edited version, after I figure that out.
Surely 'strike two' should begin its own verse?) It does now! Also "unto" is gone, in addition to most of the verse it was in. It was criminally corny.
I can't see what contribution this verse is making to the piece. It doesn't really advance his 'character' nor the narrative/story. I can see that, but it feels necessary to the idea I have in mind. The issue is that I keep jumping around with different time frames. I think the speaker is sort of building up to maximum nostalgia before the dam bursts ie Strike Three. I can explain that thought process more if you'd like
Okay. That was a lot of typing. Hopefully I cleared some things up, you certainly did for me. I'll have a version 2 out fairly soon, I might wait to see if anyone else points out anything new before I post it, though.
Quick edit: I think a big issue with this poem was my attempt to ape the insipid, overly cryptic free verse that I was seeing in small lit mags I wanted to be published in. Would it be a good idea to try to add a more direct reference to OMAM? That way the poem might feel less meaningless and a little more focused.
Also I removed a lot of my explanations because I missed the bit where I'm not supposed to do that unless asked. Sorry! I'm still figuring everything out.
Regards,
ArmadillosareCool
This is becoming a cumbersome handle, maybe I'll begin to abbr. it like you do.