The Spell at the Oak

[jameso]

This is a long poem, [edit] a romantic fantasy tale . Again something I would envision illustrated in a book. Probably full of cliches. Anyway, please let me know what you think. The title is an afterthought and open to suggestions.

The Spell at the Oak


They met in a clearing, in a shaded space,
Somewhere in the west of the woods.


Of the fruits they ate, and of much they spoke.
Then at last made love by the shade of an oak.
Danced they three rings round the old oak tree,
Where a spell was cast that they didn’t see.
But far away could be seen its glow
Rising up from the west of the woods.


In a forest so vast and of such an age,
There are many a fruit and an oak tree’s shade.
“Such a time may i spend, and moreover, again!”
So to triple his pleasures in search went the man.
But his logic would fail for a spell did prevail
At an oak in the west of the woods.


Now in this calm clearing came the lovers to dwell.
To enjoy of the fruits, and the shade, and the spell.
“A home must we build in this west wood so dense!”
“With a hearth, and a roof, and a bed, and a fence.”
And fast did it come, for served were they well,
By the spell, in the west of the woods.


A time came to pass when the union need pause.
A fortnight’s pilgrimage east was the cause.
While the man undertook, leaving woman alone,
To a nearby oak did she venture to roam.
And there did she sense of his failed dalliance,
And the discarded fruit in the woods.


In a pain and grief struck rage was she.
“A home of lies have he buildeth me!”
As she tore and kicked and burned it all,
The spell was broke and the smoke rose tall.
So she left. The fire cooled. And returning came he,
From the east to the west of the woods.


His spiritual sojourn had played its good part.
The prescribed introspection had opened his heart.
So with love it was that he drew near their home,
To find ashen foundations, like smouldering bone.
And a mournful tread could be heard all the night
As he circled the oak in the woods.


“Oh woe is me!” Cried he, cried he,
With bitter regret and dismay at his deed.
“That it comes like a claw to carve at my chest!”
Well a lesson learned hard is a lesson learned best.
So as this soaked his bones, in an ashen bed
Lay the man in the west of the woods.


And of our woman should our man have known;
In another time she’d another home.
And another man, when her heart was whole,
Had forsaken her and scarred her soul.


So from lessons taught are lessons learned.
A house is built, a home is burned.
And though a fire may scar an oak,
Much more will pass where once was smoke.
For fruit and shade will there ever be,
Somewhere in the west of the woods.

[Nester]

This is a long poem, a fantasy epic. Again something I would envision illustrated in a book. Probably full of cliches. Anyway, please let me know what you think. The title is an afterthought and open to suggestions.

The Spell at the Oak


They met in a clearing, in a shaded space,
Somewhere in the west of the woods.


Of the fruits they ate, and of much they spoke.
Then at last made love by the shade of an oak.
Danced they three rings round the old oak tree,
Where a spell was cast that they didn’t see.
But far away could be seen its glow
Rising up from the west of the woods.


In a forest so vast and of such an age,
There are many a fruit and an oak tree’s shade.
“Such a time may i spend, and moreover, again!”
So to triple his pleasures in search went the man.
But his logic would fail for a spell did prevail
At an oak in the west of the woods.


Now in this calm clearing came the lovers to dwell.
To enjoy of the fruits, and the shade, and the spell.
“A home must we build in this west wood so dense!”
“With a hearth, and a roof, and a bed, and a fence.”
And fast did it come, for served were they well,
By the spell, in the west of the woods.


A time came to pass when the union need pause.
A fortnight’s pilgrimage east was the cause.
While the man undertook, leaving woman alone,
To a nearby oak did she venture to roam.
And there did she sense of his failed dalliance,
And the discarded fruit in the woods.


In a pain and grief struck rage was she.
“A home of lies have he buildeth me!”
As she tore and kicked and burned it all,
The spell was broke and the smoke rose tall.
So she left. The fire cooled. And returning came he,
From the east to the west of the woods.


His spiritual sojourn had played its good part.
The prescribed introspection had opened his heart.
So with love it was that he drew near their home,
To find ashen foundations, like smouldering bone.
And a mournful tread could be heard all the night
As he circled the oak in the woods.


“Oh woe is me!” Cried he, cried he,
With bitter regret and dismay at his deed.
“That it comes like a claw to carve at my chest!”
Well a lesson learned hard is a lesson learned best.
So as this soaked his bones, in an ashen bed
Lay the man in the west of the woods.


And of our woman should our man have known;
In another time she’d another home.
And another man, when her heart was whole,
Had forsaken her and scarred her soul.


So from lessons taught are lessons learned.
A house is built, a home is burned.
And though a fire may scar an oak,
Much more will pass where once was smoke.
For fruit and shade will there ever be,
Somewhere in the west of the woods.

I'm not familiar with the structure of fantasy poetry, so please keep that in mind. In general, I think you are forcing the word order in some of your lines, and it sounds archaic and unnatural (i.e. the way we sometimes think poetry is supposed to sound). For example, there are several lines with a word order like "So to triple his pleasures in search went the man". This word order, where the subject (i.e. the man) is at the end of the sentence, stems from Roman oratory: in Latin, word order is largely arbitrary, so orators like Cicero would put the most important element at the end of the sentence for rhetorical effect. For a long while, people tried to model English grammar on Latin grammar, but for the past hundred years or so, it has been recognized that this just doesn't work. Thus, what works in poetry today is natural word order that has interesting rhythmic qualities.

Like I said, I don't know the conventions for fantasy poetry, so this critique may not apply to your poem. However, one of the first lessons today's poets are usually taught is to not try and write like the Old Masters.

Hope this helps,

Nester

[Erthona]

I would agree with Nester  on the grammar idea, adding only that we stopped using Latin grammar when we discovered that English was devolved from the Germanic language branch and retained the Germanic structure. In it's simplest form subject->verb, as oppose to the Romance languages which are verb->subject. The confusion occurred because of the invasion of the Norman French in 1066 and then further re-incursions, so that about 60% of the words in English are of French or Latin origin. This was due to Latin, or a dialect of Latin called Old French being spoken in the high courts which were of course compose of the Norman French.    
_________________________________________________________________________________________
Form: Accentual verse. Approximately four accents per line with the exception of the last line in a stanza which has only three and one truncated stanza. Usually the line opens with two, sometimes three unaccented syllables. As there is no consistency between the number of unaccented and accented syllables, there is nothing to suggest any sort of meter, thus, accentual verse.  

To say a poem is epic and long is to repeat oneself, as by definition an epic poem is long. This is not an epic poem as it covers too little ground and although there are many words, it says little.

Both Tennyson and Coleridge introduced similar elements of magic into some of their poetry: "Christabel" and "Idylls of a King" are two such examples, and no one has ever felt the need to make up a category called "Fantasy Poetry" to describe these examples.

Most poems of note are not classified in any way by the writer, this is the job for the academician; when the writer does it, it is though he is trying to justify the poem by putting on airs, so to speak. Most probably a habit one would wish to stay away from outside of the area of parody and satire.  
________________________________________________________________________________
As said before, the poem uses many words, but says little and what it does say could be condensed into much less space. A synopsis:

guy and girl have sex
magic sex spell bonds them, could have a happy ending but,
guy doesn't want to be bonded wants sex with other girls
can't have sex with other girls because of spell
somehow his heart is opened, explanation nonsensical
girl feels betrayed, destroys home, no insurance
vague reference of other life
everybody loses
the end.

The poem does not describe who the man or the woman are, so they are generic and the reader has no reason to care about them, or about what happens to them.

Epic poems generally draw upon a myth or create one, this does neither.

As this is in mild I have already far exceeded the limit of critique for this forum, despite the fact I feel, as always, that I have been overly terse in my explanations.

Best,

dale

[jameso]

Ok thanks for the feedback folks. Interesting to hear some of our language's history. I had just been thinking before you replied that I should edit my preface because 'fantasy epic'doesn't really fit. I'll do that now.

Out of interest, I know it's also mentioned as a rookie error in this forum, why are poets taught not to write in the old style?

[milo]

Ok thanks for the feedback folks. Interesting to hear some of our language's history. I had just been thinking before you replied that I should edit my preface because 'fantasy epic'doesn't really fit. I'll do that now.

Out of interest, I know it's also mentioned as a rookie error in this forum, why are poets taught not to write in the old style?

For a number of reasons:

1. You are writing it wrong. It is no longer the way you read and write so you are inconsistently applying it, much like writing in Spanglish or broken English.

2. Because it is not the language we speak or use today it reads contrived, artificial or faux-poetic.

[jameso]

Ok thanks for the feedback folks. Interesting to hear some of our language's history. I had just been thinking before you replied that I should edit my preface because 'fantasy epic'doesn't really fit. I'll do that now.

Out of interest, I know it's also mentioned as a rookie error in this forum, why are poets taught not to write in the old style?

For a number of reasons:

1. You are writing it wrong. It is no longer the way you read and write so you are inconsistently applying it, much like writing in Spanglish or broken English.

2. Because it is not the language we speak or use today it reads contrived, artificial or faux-poetic.

Okay your first point I will take. As for the second - what if the aim is to encapsulate that ye olde poetry feel? ie. For an illustrated book with a traditional fantasy setting?

[milo]

Ok thanks for the feedback folks. Interesting to hear some of our language's history. I had just been thinking before you replied that I should edit my preface because 'fantasy epic'doesn't really fit. I'll do that now.

Out of interest, I know it's also mentioned as a rookie error in this forum, why are poets taught not to write in the old style?

For a number of reasons:

1. You are writing it wrong. It is no longer the way you read and write so you are inconsistently applying it, much like writing in Spanglish or broken English.

2. Because it is not the language we speak or use today it reads contrived, artificial or faux-poetic.

Okay your first point I will take. As for the second - what if the aim is to encapsulate that ye olde poetry feel? ie. For an illustrated book with a traditional fantasy setting?

That is why usually the advice is to avoid it unless using to good effect (satire, parody, etc.). Chances are, if readers are pointing it out then it is not working. The reason it is offered as blanket advice is because it works so rarely.

[Nester]

Ok thanks for the feedback folks. Interesting to hear some of our language's history. I had just been thinking before you replied that I should edit my preface because 'fantasy epic'doesn't really fit. I'll do that now.

Out of interest, I know it's also mentioned as a rookie error in this forum, why are poets taught not to write in the old style?

For a number of reasons:

1. You are writing it wrong. It is no longer the way you read and write so you are inconsistently applying it, much like writing in Spanglish or broken English.

2. Because it is not the language we speak or use today it reads contrived, artificial or faux-poetic.

Okay your first point I will take. As for the second - what if the aim is to encapsulate that ye olde poetry feel? ie. For an illustrated book with a traditional fantasy setting?

I think if you want to go that route, you'll need to spend some time both reading the Old Masters, and (more importantly) learning why their poetry works. I'd start by learning about formal meter (since epics always use it), as well as the different devices poets used to make the poem interesting while retaining that meter. Erthona suggested some poets to read: I would add "Paradise Lost", "Beowulf", and selections from "The Faerie Queen".

If that sounds like too much, you might try Keats, who touches on some fantastic themes with more contemporary language. You might also like Rudyard Kipling. Regardless, you *must* read Alexander Pope's "Essay on Criticism", both for the advice, and for the archetypical example of how to elevate the most cliched form (rhymed couplets) to true artistry.

tl;dr: If you're going this route, then respect the commitment, because it only works if you do it right.

Hope this helps,

Nester

[Achebe]

jameso - there is no such thing as 'ye olde poetry' - the poetry of Chaucer is vastly different, and of vastly inferior quality (the not so sorry truth) than that of Spenser, in turn very different than Shakespeare, he from Dryden, he from Tennyson, he from Yeats, and so on.
I don't mean personal styles - I mean the basic language itself.

So the first question for you is: which of these eras are you trying to imitate? My personal favourite is the Elizabethan, which is not quite as here's-a-crapper-let's-take-a-shit barbaric as the language of Chaucer, nor as prissy and periwigged (to steal an expression from Anthony Burgess) as the poetry of the 18th century, nor as suggestive of repressed sodomy as that of the Victorians (barring the great Hopkins).
The romantics are entirely different, Keats in particular. They were the greatest, and there's nothing you can do that will not look like a worthless imitation.

If I were you, I'd pick sweete Spenser, bard of the mercenary Elizabethan gods, and read Book 3 of the Fairie Queene, and all of Amoretti.
You can also look at Kipling, but only if you want to become an anachronism in your own lifetime 

But you need to read for yourself and decide.

[jameso]

Achebe, Nester, Thanks so much for these suggestions. I appreciate it. Might take me a while to get through this.

[Achebe]

Achebe, Nester, Thanks so much for these suggestions. I appreciate it. Might take me a while to get through this.

apologies - in my rant, I forgot that the greatest fantasy-style writer in English poetry was a Romantic:

1. Christabel: http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173227
2. The Rime of the ... http://www.poetryfoundation.org/poem/173253

[taratica]

Thank you, Milo. Your advise to Jameso was very useful to me, too. It makes complete sense!

Ok thanks for the feedback folks. Interesting to hear some of our language's history. I had just been thinking before you replied that I should edit my preface because 'fantasy epic'doesn't really fit. I'll do that now.

Out of interest, I know it's also mentioned as a rookie error in this forum, why are poets taught not to write in the old style?

For a number of reasons:

1. You are writing it wrong. It is no longer the way you read and write so you are inconsistently applying it, much like writing in Spanglish or broken English.

2. Because it is not the language we speak or use today it reads contrived, artificial or faux-poetic.