Cataclysmic

[StandingAlone]

She was a dark angel
in a sea of sparkling light,
Her wings were black and broken,
theirs were perfect white

Smoke didnt work,
and bruises fade.
She desired more pain,
a more permanent thing.

But one scar wouldnt do,
there had to be more,
She fought with her demons,
but lost the war.

[rowens]

What do you want to do with this? Anything? It's pretty straightforward.

[Tiger the Lion]

I would consider some internal dialogue in the piece. What questions was she asking/What was she struggling with?

[Erthona]

"theirs were perfect white" Who are "theirs"? This could use some/a lot of context.

She was a dark angel
underneath a bright streetlight,
her body bruised and broken,
they were perfect white

That basically says the same thing. It just removes the mythos, and in the end, it is the human element that we connect with.

The next two stanzas add little to the first.

"Smoke didnt work,
and bruises fade.
She desired more pain,
a more permanent thing." <"thing"? Why, and put out her eyes, chop off body parts>

"But one scar wouldnt do,
there had to be more,
She fought with her demons,
but lost the war. "

Cataclysmic usually refers to an extreme event in nature, not something that happens to an individual. For this to work she would need to be the personification of a natural force, or at least a major goddess, although more likely a god such as Poseidon who can create cataclysms such as tidal waves, or hurricanes.>


Best,


Dale

[StandingAlone]

"theirs were perfect white" Who are "theirs"? This could use some/a lot of context.

She was a dark angel
underneath a bright streetlight,
her body bruised and broken,
they were perfect white

That basically says the same thing. It just removes the mythos, and in the end, it is the human element that we connect with.

The next two stanzas add little to the first.

"Smoke didnt work,
and bruises fade.
She desired more pain,
a more permanent thing." <"thing"? Why, and put out her eyes, chop off body parts>

"But one scar wouldnt do,
there had to be more,
She fought with her demons,
but lost the war. "

Cataclysmic usually refers to an extreme event in nature, not something that happens to an individual. For this to work she would need to be the personification of a natural force, or at least a major goddess, although more likely a god such as Poseidon who can create cataclysms such as tidal waves, or hurricanes.>


Best,


Dale

Im not sure you get it. Theirs is referring to the sea of sparkling light (the happy people without problems) smoke is legit smoke (a cigarette) a more permanent thing is her cutting her wrist to produce a permant scar, there had to be more is just the way it is when you self harm, but i doubt you understand that. Her demons were the voices in her head, and things she struggles with. She had them because everyone is born with them (duh). And for the title, its a metaphor. You said it referred to nature or a goddess? Its the destruction of an angel.. I think thats a bit of both. Sorry if it was all just a little over your head[/color]
Your response to critique is not unusual in the Newly Registered Forum but you do not dignify yourself or your poetry by showing pique. The critics on this site are encouraged to speak honestly. As far as that goes, you should be grateful...but you should be aware that there are those who will challenge your expressed views (poetic or conceptual) with the advantage of experience...often in depth and first hand. Take note.
Best,
Mod

[Todd]

"theirs were perfect white" Who are "theirs"? This could use some/a lot of context.

She was a dark angel
underneath a bright streetlight,
her body bruised and broken,
they were perfect white

That basically says the same thing. It just removes the mythos, and in the end, it is the human element that we connect with.

The next two stanzas add little to the first.

"Smoke didnt work,
and bruises fade.
She desired more pain,
a more permanent thing." <"thing"? Why, and put out her eyes, chop off body parts>

"But one scar wouldnt do,
there had to be more,
She fought with her demons,
but lost the war. "

Cataclysmic usually refers to an extreme event in nature, not something that happens to an individual. For this to work she would need to be the personification of a natural force, or at least a major goddess, although more likely a god such as Poseidon who can create cataclysms such as tidal waves, or hurricanes.>


Best,


Dale

Im not sure you get it. Theirs is referring to the sea of sparkling light (the happy people without problems) smoke is legit smoke (a cigarette) a more permanent thing is her cutting her wrist to produce a permant scar, there had to be more is just the way it is when you self harm, but i doubt you understand that. Her demons were the voices in her head, and things she struggles with. She had them because everyone is born with them (duh). And for the title, its a metaphor. You said it referred to nature or a goddess? Its the destruction of an angel.. I think thats a bit of both. Sorry if it was all just a little over your head

If people don't "get" the poem. Sometimes the problem is the poem. That said, we all get critique we don't agree with--being condescending to someone who spent time giving you feedback is a path to getting no additional feedback. Usually a "Thanks for taking the time to comment" would be enough.

Best,

Todd

[ellajam]

Hi, standalone, welcome. If you decide to edit, here are a few notes I hope will help.

She was a dark angel
in a sea of sparkling light,
Her wings were black and broken, Should "her" be capitalized?
theirs were perfect white I don't know who "theirs" refers to. Period.

Smoke didnt work, didn't
and bruises fade.
She desired more pain,
a more permanent thing. "Thing" is a really non-descriptive word. It adds nothing that I can see and doesn't fit your rhyme scheme.

But one scar wouldnt do,
there had to be more,
She fought with her demons, Again, should "she" be capitalized?
but lost the war.

Thanks for the read.

[Isis]

I think the discussion happening in this thread is a good lesson in how the reader can only read the poem on the page or on the screen, and not the poet's mind. If you want the reader to get certain aspects of your vision for the poem, it's got to be in the poem in some kind of concrete way. We have to be able to read it, imagine it, feel it, or guess it from what's in the text itself. And it can be really hard for readers to guess what's in the poets mind from broad or abstract statements. I think that's what's happening with this poem - many of the descriptions and statements in the poem are vague or abstract.

That's why discussion and critique are valuable. It's possible to learn about how other people read your poem, and this can be really useful for revision. You know what readers get out of the poem, so it's possible to edit the poem to guide the reader towards what you want to say and away from confusion and misconception.

Anyway, I read the first stanza as stating some contrast between the "dark angel" and everyone else. "A sea of sparkling light" feels like a metaphor for something, but because I'm not clear on who the dark angel is, it's hard for me to tell what kind of metaphor it is, or even if it's a straightforward description of the view the speaker has of her, a monolithic dark figure against bright sunlight. Likewise, it's hard to tell what is description and what is metaphor in the second stanza. And I also wondered: "smoke didn't work" for what? To make her brighter? To kill her? The statement about pain is an example of a part of the poem that seems vague to me.

Ultimately, I think the poem is about suicide. I want to connect with the main character in the poem, but it's difficult because I don't know much about her as a person - just as a symbol in someone else's tale, the moral of some story.

I'll reiterate a question others have asked: what is your goal with the poem? Do you want to tell a story? Make us empathize with the character in the poem? Was the point to vent something inside yourself onto the page, just for yourself? Or do you want to communicate with a reader who doesn't know you and your poetry?

[abu nuwas]

[i]

She was a dark angel
in a sea of sparkling light,
Her wings were black a broken,
theirs were perfect white


Smoke didnt work,
and bruises fade.
She desired more pain,
a more permanent thing.

But one scar wouldnt do,
there had to be more,

She fought with her demons,
but lost the war.

I don't think it's so puzzling. First stanza says she's a bit miserable, with everyone else being goody-goodies, doing the right thing, and generally having a great time.

Second stanza, she is self-harming.

Third, does herself in.


I think a little more freshness, a little more appeal to the senses, a little more filling out of the character, and perhaps a little reading of some Beaudelaire, would do the world of good. Welcome!

[QDeathstar]

Im feeling that the scars refer to heroin or some sort of drug like that, not self mutilation.

---

Also, if she is fighting for pain, did she really loose?

[StandingAlone]

[i]

She was a dark angel
in a sea of sparkling light,
Her wings were black a broken,
theirs were perfect white


Smoke didnt work,
and bruises fade.
She desired more pain,
a more permanent thing.

But one scar wouldnt do,
there had to be more,

She fought with her demons,
but lost the war.

I don't think it's so puzzling. First stanza says she's a bit miserable, with everyone else being goody-goodies, doing the right thing, and generally having a great time.

Second stanza, she is self-harming.

Third, does herself in.


I think a little more freshness, a little more appeal to the senses, a little more filling out of the character, and perhaps a little reading of some Beaudelaire, would do the world of good. Welcome!

Thank you so much for understanding!!

[wishes1078]

I understood the poem, and I liked it. Some readers and writers alike may disagree with this, but I personally think that poems should be left to be interpreted by the reader. No meaning is a wrong meaning; I find more beauty in that.

[tectak]

I understood the poem, and I liked it. Some readers and writers alike may disagree with this, but I personally think that poems should be left to be interpreted by the reader. No meaning is a wrong meaning; I find more beauty in that.

Yes, interest is lime trees but on rivers most of the sago. Indeed, beauty is by the fire in case we wandered before a pearly postman. Such is beauty....but unlike Boris who could not fail disagree with you less, for me it is less than more on this plate.
Best,
tectak
...and furthermore, try to restrict what threadbare feedback you give to the poem and not give pointless opinions on "some" other readers.

[wishes1078]

I understood the poem, and I liked it. Some readers and writers alike may disagree with this, but I personally think that poems should be left to be interpreted by the reader. No meaning is a wrong meaning; I find more beauty in that.

Yes, interest is lime trees but on rivers most of the sago. Indeed, beauty is by the fire in case we wandered before a pearly postman. Such is beauty....but unlike Boris who could not fail disagree with you less, for me it is less than more on this plate.
Best,
tectak
...and furthermore, try to restrict what threadbare feedback you give to the poem and not give pointless opinions on "some" other readers.

cool