[Joe Crocker]

Thanks David, Susan, Clive and Matt for your criticisms and your encouragement. There’s a lot to think about here

The "arse", especially, has elements of affection to it which you probably don't want here. Or so I think, at least.

David. So “Arse” is problematic. On first read it seemed you thought it was too affectionate? On second thoughts, probably not. I think Susan also thought the image was a misstep in that it was inappropriately affectionate (ie offensive). I think I want elements of both of affection and lust. And for the first stanza to end teetering onto transgression. When I began the poem “arse” was a key word I wanted to be prominent. I feel that several commentators are gently steering me away from it, perhaps fearing I may make a fool of myself or attract vitriol. So it may pay to let it sleep for a while and see if I flush with shame when I look at it later.

Joe, there is a difference between lust, which almost everyone feels, and rape. If you made clearer that the lust in the first part is more loving, you could play up the more violent actions of the engineers.

Susan. I agree. I had hoped the that S1L2 with “the way it holds its heart” gave that sense of loving. The transition to lust may be too abrupt.

Clive. (Re tricky words see above)

I do like half-rhymes. I like the way they hold lines together unostentatiously. They make the plot less predictable but are still satisfying. The final couplet is a perfect rhyme now, but wasn’t in version 1. And coming at the end, the drum roll and cymbal clash seem more acceptable. I had no particular plan with the organisation of half-rhymes but “arse” is a tricky one to find a perfect partner for. I will think what difference perfect rhymes might make. And given “arse” draws the attention, it might be better if it were less on display.

I get what you say about beginning the S2 with “But”. That was how I had it in an earlier version. I left it out because I recognized it as a tic in my own speech habits that I overuse (ie statement followed by counter or qualification) and am getting bored with. I start too many sentences with “But”. But (there I go again) it may help the meaning here. (And it helps the IP)

And I wonder – in this context – what distinction separates “arrogance” and “pride”. More generally, I think the whole sequence of “self-belief”, “trust”, “courage”, “arrogance” and “pride” might benefit from closer interrogation.

“Pride” to me is more than a synonym of “arrogance”. It clearly goes before a fall, but it has good connotations too. You can be proud of your kids, your football team, the poem you got published, the bypass you helped build.. It doesn’t always mean vainglorious. So I saw courage=good, arrogance=bad and pride as good & bad, which I hoped would convey my ambivalence, the discomfort combined with admiration I feel for this feature. “Self-belief” was about how sure the planners and engineers were that they could pull this thing off. “Trust” is the more complicated word of your selection. I originally had it as “lust” which linked the stanza more clearly with the first. But it seemed to unnecessarily repeat that theme and was one-dimensional compared to “trust”. I felt ”trust” could refer to the engineers trust in their skill, society’s trust in the commissioning of the project, and even the landscape’s trust that it would survive the surgery. Using “trust” with its several different possibilities also seemed more appropriate to turning into a question.

I hope all that doesn’t sound too defensive. There may always be better words, than the ones we choose.

Matt. Sorry if I implied that you had a problem. I was only trying to paraphrase what I thought you thought the problem was with what I’d written.

The difficulty is the poem has 2 distinct images, one of beauty/love/lust and one of a kind of violence/achievement/hubris. And I’m suggesting that there may be something masculine linking them. (I know there must be female engineers and architects doing similarly audacious work, so masculine may be the wrong word). But, you’re right, in that I don’t do much more than suggest it.

I also doubt that the planners, engineers had much sense of the feminine shape they were taking liberties with. And yet there seems to me to be some single-minded, narrow focus that is shared between the situations. I’m likely to tangle myself up here, but the way in which the male gaze can objectify features of women and can be excited by them independently of personhood, might also connect with the ability of civil engineers to focus on particular problems, to compartmentalise and not worry too much about the bigger picture. A difficulty here, is that the Chiltern hillside is not a woman, it is an object and therefore can’t really suffer from objectification. Hmmm. I am out of my depth now and almost certainly talking BS. But thanks for forcing me to think more deeply about it.

Thanks again all

Joe