[Joe Crocker]

Alexandra, thanks again for the work you have put in on this. Really helpful to know what you like and like less.

I seem to be enjoying this new version more than the original one, but without being able to see which parts were changed, and only being sure from memory of some parts that have not

I think I have revised this much less than you think. In fact the only thing I remember changing is the full stop after “head”, which Carl suggested.(It seemed such a small thing that I didn’t reference it underneath). But it’s good to know you saw more in it the second time around.

that’s an interesting choice to place a period after the title

That was just a typo. Oops

Initially, I was put off by the poem for the obvious, explaining quality of parts of it. I was feeling like this is one case in which the n actually sounding fully like the person he's depicting himself as—doddering, simple-minded--is not a successful approach.

That's interesting to know. And I get what you mean. You are less fond of the flatter, balder statements.

And another question mark next to "unsighted". For me, when someone is described as "unsighted", I wonder what they have been unsighted by. But I can see that next to "deaf" and "forgetful" it may be easier to understand it as "blind".

“The distance out of true”?

By "out of true" I'm thinking of what builders and woodworkers say when they think something is not properly square. Askew.

Do you mean that the list misses, or that it misses out on--or something else?

I just mean that the list these days contains fewer of the things that I have been used to doing in the past.

Similarly to Jim, I was thinking it might be nice to have a more colorful word than “talk” here, one that’s more specifically aligned with jokes. However, till I read his comment, I was blindered by the notion that one generally ought not to repeat a word in a poem, or at least not too soon, and thus had overlooked the possibility that he noted of simply using “laugh.” I think it’s actually a great idea—the effect in this case would not be one of redundancy, but of accumulating power. And yes, the sonics would be nice.

Thanks for making me take a second look at Jim's suggestion. I agree. It is a good idea. I guess I dismissed it first time for the same reasons as you. Apologies Jim.

in the US, we typically say “over my head” rather than “above my head”

Come to think of it, that construction is probably more common over here too. I may replace "above" with "over". It would disrupt the iambic meter a little, but I did say I wanted to loose the bindings didn't I?

And should "nearer now" refer to the far-off chatter or to the looming shadows? I had thought that the version written added an interesting ambiguity but can also see that it may just be irritatingly unclear.

Thanks for your help Alexandra