10 hours ago
I read this poem as a commentary on how we distance ourselves from our own actions or lack thereof. The passive voice both represents failure to act and then failure to own up to our own negligence. Passive voice is strategically used throughout the piece, only when the speaker does not want to outright admit their role in what occurred. The man grimaced, the man ate both barrels, the widow made brilliant meatloaf. But the grief *went unnoticed,* the promises *were broken,* because the speaker struggles to accept that they missed the grief and broke the promises. Even when the speaker does use active voice ("Declined to leave a message... Could not convince my voice..."), they don't start the sentence with *I.*
The line that made me re-read: "If I had called you lover..." Was the dead man the speaker's lover? That would explain their reluctance to call his wife. I hope you don't mind this comparison, but the piece sort of reminds me of Brokeback Mountain - the dead lover, the avoidance of calling the widow. The theme of missing out on fully expressing yourself to someone you love due to internalized shame and fear.
Regardless of how accurate my interpretation is, a poem was read and a review was attempted.
The line that made me re-read: "If I had called you lover..." Was the dead man the speaker's lover? That would explain their reluctance to call his wife. I hope you don't mind this comparison, but the piece sort of reminds me of Brokeback Mountain - the dead lover, the avoidance of calling the widow. The theme of missing out on fully expressing yourself to someone you love due to internalized shame and fear.
Regardless of how accurate my interpretation is, a poem was read and a review was attempted.