Hi Alessio,

My impression is that English is not your first language. It seems to me that some of your phrasings have a thesaurus feel to them, meaning you looked up words to express what you wanted to say rather than having them come naturally. Maybe not. It doesn't matter. Some of the phrasings could use some work for whatever reason. I don't think I'm capable of explaining why some of your choices don't work for me so I am going to offer you an edited version of your piece to try to show you what I mean. I don't consider this a rewrite, because I would never write these words on my own behalf. They are an edited version of your words IMO, with a few new ideas thrown in. Some members here would not like such an extensive edit. Let me know if it bothers you and I'll delete that part of my comment:

I've said too much opposing being spurned
After wasting nights I spent in holding back,
When, as a flower, dying, droops downturned,
I laid my head upon your charnel lap.

I cursed the day first saw your lure of smile.
But now, the barb is set, and bait’s been struck.
I was the fish that flashing specks of joy beguile.
I bit the glittering fly and felt your touch

That pierced my cheek, and hooked, I’d stay.
Since then you’ve hauled my flesh to every state,
And kept my love on ice by trick and way,
And when did I protest for pity’s sake?

But I must find my rest! Unlike the fish,
My trip throughout the loveless, lifeless sea
Has never had thee, love, fulfill my wish
Of resting, dressed out, gutted, safe from 'thee.'

All the best,
Jim

Hi Yves,

Thanks for your opinion, although comparing me to a soulless machine that doesn't comprehend words is a bit of a stretch don't you think?

If a few resembling words seem to fulfil the criteria of imitation for you then, with all due respect, I think every single poet is guilty of imitation. I can agree that maybe my expression is a bit more inclined towards some archaisms since I have indeed locked myself in my own library, and the introduction to poetry I had were the old books of verse I had furnished it with. Would that be cheap machine-like imitation? Or would it just be the way in which I express myself in certain similarities due to my own exposition to such, and the study of it?

Also, what do you mean by "At this point it's not even a poetry problem"?

Do you have any recommendations for good 21st century formal poets? I'm completely clueless of any apart from the present Poet Laureate in the UK.

Cheers,

Alessio.

Hi Jim,

Actually my first language is English, due to my 15 year stay in Hong Kong, so I'm surprised as to why you feel that it isn't. Apart from the stupid error of "strook" in the original version which I just overlooked, I don't personally think there were any grammatical depravities that would suggest such, apart from maybe a couple words I looked up to double check their definition was being used correctly in the phrase.

Your rewriting of the poem does not bother me of course, anzi, I'm happy thar you took the time and effort to rewrite some of it so I thank you very much. The final verse in your version sounds better to me, and, if you don't mind, I might actually apply that in red to the poem as your suggested correction. By your attempted explanation what I get is that you essentially just wanted it to be more straightforward. This is shown in S2 where the connection with the fish is more outrightly stated, unlike mine where it is kind of compared or used as a simile. Your poem is more total about it. I don't know if this makes sense, but was I correct in assuming such?

Cheers,

Alessio