We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’
our adult neurons never split
to generate new cells: mind grows
by forming fresh connections. It
relies not on mouse-cleverness
to learn a maze, imprinting on
rejuvenant forgetfulness,
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them.
Minds are thus
conservative, each rodent craze
for novelty a heedless fuss.
In time, our aging neurons die–
more human, that, than multiply.
edit1;
We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’
our adult neurons never split
to generate new cells: mind grows
by forming new connections. It
relies not on rat-cleverness
to learn a maze, imprinting on
erupting all-forgetfulness,
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them. Minds are thus
conservative, each rat-like craze
for novelty a heedless fuss.
In time, our aging neurons die–
more human, that, than multiply.
original version;
We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’
our adult neurons never split
to generate new cells: mind grows
by forming new connections. It
relies not on rat-cleverness
to learn a maze - imprinting on
erupting all-forgetfulness -
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them. Mind is thus
conservative, each rat-like craze
for novelty a heedless fuss.
Eventually neurons die–
more human, that, than multiply.
Not sure what you'd call this - a curtailed sonnet, perhaps?
I'm fairly new to writing in form and exploring the world of poetic form, but after some light research I believe this is an English sonnet. The curtailed sonnet you're asking of is one that consists of 11 lines w/ a rhyme scheme of abcabc dcbdc or abcabc dbcdc. The wording gets a bit confusing at times in lines like the final one and lines 10- 12 starting at "Mind is thus..." but it's not unreadable. There are lines that stood out to me as being pretty good, particularly "erupting all-forgetfulness". More comments below
We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’ Edit: the apostrophes in rats' or crows' is not needed I'm sure
our adult neurons never split
to generate new cells: mind grows this last foot reads a little spondaic
by forming new connections. It
relies not on rat-cleverness the meter in this line gets a bit messy. I'd rewrite as "does not rely...", then I'll admit I get stuck on finding another word for rat cleverness while sticking to the rhyme and meter. Would it not give you a little more leeway if you wrote in iambic pentameter instead?
to learn a maze - imprinting on
erupting all-forgetfulness -
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them. Mind is thus
conservative, each rat-like craze
for novelty a heedless fuss.
Eventually neurons die– Readers might stumble over the ambiguous pronunciation of "eventually". I'd play it safe and write this line out the way people would normally pronounce the word and throw in an "our","the" or something of the sort before "neurons". Nitpick: why is the em-dash used differently here than previously in the sonnet?
more human, that, than multiply.
Not sure what you'd call this - a curtailed sonnet, perhaps?
We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’
our adult neurons never split
to generate new cells: mind grows
by forming new connections. It
relies not on rat-cleverness
to learn a maze, imprinting on
erupting all-forgetfulness,
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them. Minds are thus
conservative, each rat-like craze
for novelty a heedless fuss.
In time, our aging neurons die–
more human, that, than multiply.
@alexorande - Thanks for the well-informed critique. I didn't know "curtailed sonnet" was an actual thing... thought I was just chracterizing a Shakespearean with lines reduced to tetrameter.
I've made changes to address some, not all, of your criticisms. For one other, my defense explanation is labeled "Spoiler" below .
Thanks again!
The "s' "es in L1 are, as I see it, necessary because they're plural (more than one rat and one crow) and possessive (the splitting neurons belong to the rats and crows). Fully unpacked, the sentence fragment would read,
We learn that unlike rats’ (neurons) or crows’ (neurons) our adult neurons never split...
I realize the implication could be structured differently
We learn that unlike (the way it is with) rats or crows, our adult neurons never split...
which calls for a little more poetic license as well as, more strongly, a comma.
Hey Duke,
I appreciate how you rhymed here. I didn't even realized it rhymed until I was on my third reading of this poem, so nice work on that. I do have some thoughts:
We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’
our adult neurons never split -When it says "adult neurons" it made me wonder about children. Do their neurons still split? The first three lines do a great job of catching the reader's attention.
to generate new cells: mind grows
by forming new connections. It -Is the repetition of "new" intentional?
relies not on rat-cleverness
to learn a maze, imprinting on
erupting all-forgetfulness, -Every time I read this, this line made me stop. Why is all-forgetfulness being described as "erupting"? I feel like you should consider using a different word.
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them. Minds are thus -I know you have a rhyme scheme here, but I wish there was a way to isolate "and then to build them". It's just such a wonderfully ominous line within the context of the poem.
conservative, each rat-like craze -The animal of the rat gets mentioned three times in the poem. I might be missing something, but why is a rat so important to warrant the repetition?
for novelty a heedless fuss.
In time, our aging neurons die–
more human, that, than multiply. -I love the last two lines. They sum up the poem, but also say something about the human condition (for lack of a better phrase).
We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’
our adult neurons never split
to generate new cells: mind grows
by forming new connections. It
relies not on rat-cleverness
to learn a maze - imprinting on
erupting all-forgetfulness -
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them. Mind is thus
conservative, each rat-like craze
for novelty a heedless fuss.
Eventually neurons die–
more human, that, than multiply.
Not sure what you'd call this - a curtailed sonnet, perhaps?
Overall, my biggest suggestion would be reexamine some of your choices in repetition and decide whether or not you need them. I look forward to seeing where you take this piece from here.
Yeah I just learned of what a curtailed sonnet was when I researched it at the time. If you hadn't coincidentally mentioned it I wouldn't have known. And while your sonnet is written a foot shorter than the standard pentameter, I believe it's still a Shakespearean. I MAY be wrong but the amount of metric feet does not change the nature of a sonnet so long as there is some sorta switch-up in tone/perspective, is iambic, and follows its rhyme scheme. I have to ask though... why'd you go for tetrameter?
So far I like how you tweaked the penultimate line and replaced the dashes with commas. Oh, and your defense explanation is understood
We learn that unlike rats’ or crows’
our adult neurons never split
to generate new cells: mind grows
by forming fresh connections. It
relies not on mouse-cleverness
to learn a maze, imprinting on
rejuvenant forgetfulness,
but rules cemented from its dawn
of consciousness to solve each maze
and then to build them.
Minds are thus
conservative, each rodent craze
for novelty a heedless fuss.
In time, our aging neurons die–
more human, that, than multiply.
Thanks to both critics. @Richard - tried to implement all or most of your fine suggestions. @alexorande - why tetrameter? Just because... the subject seemed too light for IP until the final couplet-- and by then it was too late . Big and pointless explain below.
This harks back to a situation in bioscience. For many years, following some (by now primitive, but exacting) research, it was "settled science" that human neurons do not divide. (It was not known until recently that it's the connections that multiply, not the cells - research on giant sea slugs led to this discovery.)
Then, in the 80s (I believe it was), more sophisticated research showed that brain cells *do* divide. This discovery resulted principally from experiments on rats; carry-over to humans was mostly presumed and confirmed in only the most cursory manner. From this new settled science, vast quantities of textbook and nutrition text flowed - what to eat to keep those little gray cells dividing happily, and how this shows people are just like what were formerly called "lower" animals where it counted.
But lately, further research has shown that the situation is more nuanced: human brain cells do divide in youth, but in maturity this ceases: human adult brain cells become "immortal" in the sense that they don't divide (not that they never die). This suggests, when taken with the research showing how connections form between brain cells, that human "mind" is founded on retaining all those connections intact (barring death of the "swtichboard" neurons) and adding to them rather than adding cells as (yes) lower, unminded animals do. It also reflects the observed path of maturity: curious, learning, somewhat feral childhood maturing into set-in-its-ways but rational, mindful adulthood.
This congruence with cultural wisdom makes me a little nervous: are researchers still in thrall to preconceptioins as the adult-cells-divide bunch were? Those fought tooth and nail against the new no-adult-neurogenesis science, and you can still find textbooks and nutrition advice pushing "brain food" to help adult brain cells "keep dividing" instead of keeping those "immortal" cells healthy and alive. The defeated were not gracious, and some still deny. It's a pattern not limited to bioscience.
Non-practicing atheist
.
. Big and pointless explain below.