[Mark McDonnell]

For reasons similar, though not identical, to Julie's I wondered about the explicit Shakespeare reference. Why not just "the King", rather than "King Lear"? In a poem so elemental it seems a shame to stop in the middle and point to the bookshelf to spell it out. The allusion would still be there and you would give the reader a little work to do. And I think it sounds better.

I like "shred-emptied". I read it as being reduced to shreds, or tatters, by the storm. I would guard against making these compounds that you are fond of into a poetic trademark, or shortcut to 'language-newness', though, which may dull their impact. Does that sound horribly prescriptive? I hope not. They work but perhaps not every poem needs them.

In the last stanza, it is not so much the metre but the sudden emergence of quite harsh enjambment that threw me. I'm sure you have your reasons to do with form matching content maybe, but it threw me, nonetheless. Could:

it is time the flood ceased: time the Fool emerged

to remonstrate with the aloneness that reigns

after rain: time he were not sheathed like a sword

in me, time for a silence to ripen a name

be something like

it is time the flood ceased: time the Fool emerged

to (shorter word) with the aloneness that reigns after rain

time he were not sheathed in me like a sword

time for a silence to ripen a name

I wonder if "form" in L3 is referring to poetic form and this is a poem about freedom and restriction in poetry (I use the word "about" tentatively). That would fit with John. This isn't a crit, just a wondering...

Mainly, I am mightily swept along with this, Cameron. I think it's really good. It's genuinely lovely to see poets writing about and for each other here, and such good poets and worthy recipients. (I did post a limerick on Facebook for Matt Q's birthday, if that helps)

Mark