I am senior to most of you (though younger than Mr. Wilbur), and I think this poem is excellent. The zucchini piece, on the other hand, I find embarrassing and tasteless. That is my opinion, for what it's worth, and nobody else has to agree with it.

Well, I for one, agree with you, Carol.

How does one "make" you read anything?

I guess now is neither the time nor place to note that, with all the sex-themed posts flying around, the other day I thought I saw a new thread called, "Spanking Off On a Hummock Side."


For my money, Mary Beth and Dee have it right about this one.

Frank

Given that the strength of this poem is its marvellous range of innuendoes, it is surprising that some are transfixed by its literal 'in 'u end, o!'.

This has been a very instructive discussion for me. I who like Kavanagh "know nothing of women, nothing of cities," have learned much by the insights expressed by everyone on both sides of the divide, especially those of the women. Thank you.

I think it's disgraceful, Rose, that you didn't select a group of sonnets that were all written in a similar style, with subject-matter that could not offend my lace-clad, lilac-haired granny.
And while you were at it, could you not have selected poems that everyone liked? Is that too much to ask?

Whatever you chose, someone would have objected to your choice. Basically, it's an impossible job.

You posted a wide variety of sonnets that demonstrate the versatility of the form, and sparked a lot of interesting discussion.

Clearly, you've failed miserably. http://www.ablemuse.com/erato/ubbhtml/smile.gif


Regards, Maz

When I read this I asked myself, What would happen to my ass if I flipped my wife over and finished her doggy-style?

Then I wondered, Why would I even want to do something like that? I just don't see the upside.

Finally I realized, This is one female's sexual fantasy. Which is fine, but it's no wonder it doesn't make any sense to me.

Dee's comment is interesting, but the genius is there only if the poet and N have different viewpoints.

Maz,
For Pete's sake, nobody is attacking Rose. Of course she selected a diversity of styles. Rose is one of my favourite poets and commentators and one of the best things about her is her frankness.
Janet

I thought CONTENT WARNING was written to warn parents of young children and to attract adolescents and adults.

Shameless

I think the "content warning" for this poem is really, really silly and unnecessary. I find it discouraging and sad that a group of veteran adult writers find it necessary to "protect" another adult (Mr. Wilbur) from a poem or to slap a label on it warning others they are afraid might be of "delicate" sensibility. I don't see anything in the poem that warrants this. If you don't like the poem, speak up and say so (and why) or just move on to something else. I will never understand the idea that we need to protect adults from words.

Janet,
I'm sorry if you thought my comment was aimed at you, because it wasn't. All you did was explain was why you personally didn't like a particular poem, not suggest that it shouldn't have been chosen.

Regards, Maz




[This message has been edited by grasshopper (edited May 09, 2008).]

I think we should send both poems to Mr. Wilbur. Hey, I could use a friend over on GT.

I think this sonnet is excellent, by the way. It deals with sex in a very upfront way, but doesn't make a big deal about it. For me, it's an example of how formal poetry has come of age, and can tackle any subject-matter. The author makes no concession to the idea that a sonnet has to be in any way 'precious' (in the worse sense of the word).

This is an adult straight-talking sonnet which acknowledges sex as an important part of life, and something which reveals the nature of a relationship.
I'll admit that all my sympathy is with the narrator here. Here's a man who's made her feel like dirt, who she feels hasn't treated her as a woman, let alone a human being. That image of shoving her face into the pillow--chillingly effective, I think.
I didn't think it was about anal sex myself, just about rear-entry sex being used as a method of de-humanisation, and to avoid 'facing' issues in the relationship. The more I read it, the more I like it.

Regards, Maz

I am not vetted as a poet to vote here, but I am loving the poems and comments. When I first read "Finale" for the reasons you state, Maz, I thought "wow". Working to illustrate it for 14 by 14, I struggled, wanted the art to fit the poem but not to offend readers. I did several illustrations for it, but opted to submit to Peter something I thought was "safe". I am not sure I am proud of that now.

I am so glad Rose solicited this favorite of mine.

Pat

I think the key to understanding the poem, at least on one level, may be in the title, Finale. The narrator is able to be jaded and matter of fact and upfront about this very intimate and personal experience because she's the final stage of a crappy relationshiip. Maybe at one time she really was patient, then forgiving, then hurt, then later angry, and now it's gone on long enough that she's reached the point that she doesn't really even care. He treats her as an object available purely for his gratification, and she's finally given up on the idea that he will change. Bottom line (pardon the pun), the guy's an ass. Her satisfaction is finally found not in a relationship of mutual love and respect, but in knowing that she sincerely cares even less than he does. Of course this is purely a guess.

I think it's brilliant, though.

annie

This is an excellent sonnet, well written and thought provoking. The more I read it the more I like it really. I don't categorize it with the zucchini poem at all which I thought was blatant.

I really don't find this mysterious at all. Men view sex differently than women, obviously. Guys can be very selfish and objective while women lean toward love and intimacy. The poem illustrates this morass (lol) poignantly.

This guy has problems beyond being a selfish pig however. He is consistent in his method. It never varies as she knows what he is doing even now. The mother reference is interesting. The whole Freudian thing. I don't have the credentials to discuss that but suffice to say that he has hang ups that ended their relationship. She lashes out wondering if he's gay and or trying finally to silence his mother. Why did it last as long as it did? That's another question that fascinates me.

Why do women stay in abusive relationships? Why do some love "bad" boys? Why do they "love" and abet men who are clearly poison? Ah, the things we do for love!


p.s. And Finale refers to climax.




[This message has been edited by Roy Hamilton (edited May 10, 2008).]

I don't think all women can be assumed to have the same reaction to this or any other poem. I think this one's excellent, but I wouldn't if I thought it was judging the man simply because he consistently prefers a particular sexual position. How is that any better than homophobia? I think N is writing him off because she's tired of him, she's done with him, and she thinks he's a jerk in general. For me, that phrase "in general" is an important distinction.

In fact...I think my take has been influenced by the comments. When I first read this for 14 by 14, I thought of it as a "fun" piece: a straightforward musing on a very down-to-earth subject. I didn't see N as bitter. The pair had split up, sure, but not necessarily because he was a terrible person. Nowhere in the poem does it say the woman expressed her displeasure and the man disregarded her feelings. I just figured they were sexually incompatible, and that was that. It happens. It's nobody's fault.




[This message has been edited by Rose Kelleher (edited May 10, 2008).]

Ouch! This is dandy. One hardly notices the form; the theme dominates it. Excellent character sketch with a surprise at the, er, end. For me, it's a tie with "Conductivity." I would not want to decide between them.

Alan

I doubt Dick Wilbur will be offended by the content, but he might be offended by the superficiality. Sex is usually so much more intriguing than this!

Thank you all, so much, for your close readings of the poem and for the intensity with which you defended or attacked it (as the case may be). However it fared in the voting tally, I am honored that it drew the greatest number of postings--it seems to have made people feel and/or think at a very passionate level, and that is the greatest goal that I can imagine for a single poem of mine. I believe with Kafka that "a book [or any work of literature, for that matter] should serve as the ax for the frozen sea within us" (and, yes, I realize that that might not be the best translation, but I came to it through the epigraph to Anne Sexton's ALL MY PRETTY ONES, and that is how she had it).

I don't want to say too much about "Finale," because a poem, once launched, belongs to its readers, and also because I wouldn't want my intent as its author to "fix" the poem once and for all like a butterfly chloroformed on a pin. I believe, as well, that when a poem truly arises from the imagination and not the ego (and Lord knows I've written my share of the latter, though this one felt like the real thing to me), it is likely to hold more meaning than its author intended at a conscious level. But I did want to clarify a couple of things!

First, as David mentioned, I wrote this poem under rather unusual circumstances. Last summer I was teaching at a National Writing Project site, where the participants (local teachers) each had to give a demonstration on how to use writing more effectively in the classroom. One of the teacher-participants had the rest of us brainstorm two lists on scrap paper: one of "subjects that would be suitable to write a poem about," and one of "subjects that would NOT be suitable to write a poem about." I really got into scribbling the latter list, which I assumed would be for my eyes only. Imagine my dismay when we were then told to pick one of the "unsuitable" topics and write a poem about it, then and there. I did as instructed, assuming that the results would be shredded and aimed at the wastebasket--but the damn poem turned out better (well, not in the opinion of some Eratosphereans!) than most of the serious/purposeful poems I'd been writing around that time. Like an unwanted cat or kitten that turns up on one's back porch, once it arrived (however unwanted to begin with), it was MINE from then on, and there to stay. I think its power had to do with the energy that is unleashed in violating a taboo--energy that (as with the fissioned atom) can easily get out of control. To my mind, at least, the taboo being broken by the poem is a SOCIAL one--that it was/is not "proper" to talk about the specific details of a physically intimate relationship, even after it is over--not a sexual taboo. The rhetorical stance of the poem (that of an "I" speaking to a "you") probably also amplifies the level of social discomfort experienced by the reader. I agree with many of the posters that there was nothing sexy about the poem, and nothing so intended.

I do also want to clarify, though, that I meant for the male in the poem to be repressed and for the act in the poem to be just one small step (flip!) removed from the missionary position--that's as far as that guy is going to go! As to the timing of his characteristic maneuver, it is always just prior to the moment when one would expect the greatest closeness or communion to occur between two lovers. To my mind, as well, the speaker is doing a post-mortem after the relationship has ended and the male has started an affair with a new woman--she (the speaker) is trying to fit the puzzle pieces together, trying to make sense of his "erasure" of her existence, then and now--but also, obviously, she wants to stick all the blame for the lack of emotional intimacy in the relationship, and for its failure, on him. The speaker does get the last word (another finale of sorts). I did mean for the ending of the poem to be ruefully funny, for the speaker to be moving toward some kind of acceptance of or perspective on the failed relationship (one-sided, of course).

Anne, thank you for that wonderful suggestion about not using the gender-specific "her" in the penultimate line--I am going to try to tweak it accordingly. Janet, Cally, Lo, Anne, Maz, especially, thank you for your sensitive readings. Marybeth and Dee, thank you for opening up some new ways of reading the poem, which challenged me. David, Roy, Carol, Rose, Roger, Pat, John, Mark, Bob, Annie, Alan, and others I may be forgetting, thank you for your generosity of spirit--there were mortifying moments while checking this thread (and the two other related threads) when I wished I had never submitted it to either 14 by 14 or the Bake-off, but y'all made me glad I did. Tim, Sam, and others, thank you for your unflinching honesty, even when it hurt!

I will definitely think long and hard before I tackle the NEXT item on my "subjects not suitable for poems" list!!

"I haven't come across your latest friend"?

Julie, I urge you not to drop the gender-specific pronoun in the penultimate line. If the pattern changed, what would N have to bet her butt on?

Carol