<table background="http://www.fischerpassmoredesign.com/images/ftile14.jpg" width=550 border=6 bordercolor=gold>
<tr><td>
<table background="http://www.fischerpassmoredesign.com/images/fab.gif" width=500 cellpadding=10 border=4 bordercolor=gold>
<tr><td>
This ekphrastic poem is so good at what it does that I have the illusion of having seen the painting on which it's based, although I haven't yet. The details focused on are described in crisp, clear terms, in verse so deft and graceful it's a pleasure to follow, as when "the pearls cascade/below her waist," and that appearance of modesty is revealed to be a glance into the hand-held mirror.
The form is beautifully used, and the final line tellingly separated, like the thought of the viewer who remembers, outside the painting, her private life and the comments of her lover. That final line opens up the poem to the reader: we're back in the world of the real now, beyond the frame, and the "silly vice" turns out to be one of those little fishhooks that enliven, tighten and embitter relationships. The first line acquires a new context--new meaning--when it's reread. And it remains ambiguous: is this "she" the model who posed for the painting, or the image of "Vanity" itself?
One question: does the metrical risk taken with "stiffened" in line 5 pay off? I know the word really "stiffens" the line with that concentrated clump of consonants that wants to be a spondee, but would it be better softened to "made stiff"? That's less interesting, but draws less attention to that spot. Good thing or not?
</td></tr></table>
</td></tr></table>