03-12-2012, 07:31 AM
Is this your poem or Tom Kirby's? Well here are some comments on the first stanza. I won't go beyond that until I know this is your poem.
This Winter sent piercing spikes—glass-brittle, hard as flint—(where?) Because "piercing spikes" is not a common description like "snow", it begs the question of "where"? Like in the sentence, "Billy sent roller skates." One wants it to tell "to who" or "where". Because it leaves one hanging, it is moderately disruptive to the reading. That it is the first line, it sets that as an overall tone for the poem. Additionally, if you are going anthropomorphize "Winter", then you need to drop the article. After all you would not say "This Billy sent..."
Above I used the em dash to parenthetically present (glass-brittle, hard as flint), allowing for a conclusion to the sentence. If you want the sentence to stay open ended, then a colon would suffice as in:
"Winter sent piercing spikes: glass-brittle, hard as flint.
However with the em dash you can include the sentence fragment that follows. Thus:
"Winter sent piercing spikes—glass-brittle, hard as flint—
not yielding to the sword of light they grow
inch on inch, glint by glint: of water freed
from fused fine jewels, once held in snow."
As the last part is in present tense, I would recommend you use present tense with everything. So:
"Winter sends piercing spikes—glass-brittle, hard as flint—
not yielding to the sword of light they grow
inch on inch, glint by glint: of water freed
from fused fine jewels, once held in snow.
These transient gems in nature’s crown
no feeble sun can render down,
this Winter's morning."
This is an interesting idea, although for me it is less than ideally developed. It is somewhat lacking in metaphorical and descriptive originality, and has to many grammatical, punctuation, and agreement problems. It tries to cover over these problems with "high-flown" language, which is somewhat imitative of the later romantic period of English poetry: sacrificing substance for appearance.
Dale
This Winter sent piercing spikes—glass-brittle, hard as flint—(where?) Because "piercing spikes" is not a common description like "snow", it begs the question of "where"? Like in the sentence, "Billy sent roller skates." One wants it to tell "to who" or "where". Because it leaves one hanging, it is moderately disruptive to the reading. That it is the first line, it sets that as an overall tone for the poem. Additionally, if you are going anthropomorphize "Winter", then you need to drop the article. After all you would not say "This Billy sent..."
Above I used the em dash to parenthetically present (glass-brittle, hard as flint), allowing for a conclusion to the sentence. If you want the sentence to stay open ended, then a colon would suffice as in:
"Winter sent piercing spikes: glass-brittle, hard as flint.
However with the em dash you can include the sentence fragment that follows. Thus:
"Winter sent piercing spikes—glass-brittle, hard as flint—
not yielding to the sword of light they grow
inch on inch, glint by glint: of water freed
from fused fine jewels, once held in snow."
As the last part is in present tense, I would recommend you use present tense with everything. So:
"Winter sends piercing spikes—glass-brittle, hard as flint—
not yielding to the sword of light they grow
inch on inch, glint by glint: of water freed
from fused fine jewels, once held in snow.
These transient gems in nature’s crown
no feeble sun can render down,
this Winter's morning."
This is an interesting idea, although for me it is less than ideally developed. It is somewhat lacking in metaphorical and descriptive originality, and has to many grammatical, punctuation, and agreement problems. It tries to cover over these problems with "high-flown" language, which is somewhat imitative of the later romantic period of English poetry: sacrificing substance for appearance.
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.