[Rick Mullin]

The King of Suicides
After Death on a Pale Horse by J.M.W. Turner

Azrael comes charging through the lime
and kiln smoke. Glorious in red he rides,
a gladiator in a Roman pantomime.

Miasma bleeds quinacridone and grime,
the battlefield exhales triglycerides.
Azrael comes charging through the lime,

an echo of the dying Gaul in slime
and agony whose tortured frame elides
the gladiator in a Roman pantomime,

our claustrophobic nightmares, and a crime
against humanity. He writhes and slides.
Azrael comes charging through the lime,

a rack of venison at Christmastime.
He gestures in the air of Ironsides,
a gladiator in a Roman pantomime.

Struck-dumb soliloquy in perfect rhyme,
the death rasp of The King of Suicides.
Azrael comes charging through the lime,
a gladiator in Roman a pantomime.


___

Line 13: cut "glowing" from glowing venison.

.

[Jan Iwaszkiewicz]

Hi Rick

I dips me lid! It is a tiny canon but giants fashioned them. I have yet summon enough courage or desire. BTW I am an avid fan of Turner’s work.

A few thoughts :

Islamic Angel of Death? Why?

lime AND kiln I have some old lime kilns not far from me but cannot construe lime AND kiln.

Turner would not have access to quinacridones and miasma bleeds?

You have lost me with the battlefield and triglycerides although I have battled them myself.

Eliding frane?

The leap from Roundhead gladiator in a panto seems one hell of a stretch.

Who is the King of Suicides?

As you can see from the above I am lost and floundering

It left me questioning

Jan

[Susan McLean]

The content is not grabbing me, Rick. The mix of modern chemical terms and Roman pantomimes does not come together in a way that makes any sense to me. Metrically, one of your repetends has six beats: "a gladiator in a Roman pantomime." I'd suggest omitting "Roman," since gladiators are connected to Rome already. You also have six beats in "a rack of glowing venison at Christmastime." You could omit "glowing" or change "venison" to "beef." But I would mainly suggest that you try a little harder to find images that work with one another in a way that readers can pick up.

Susan

[Rick Mullin]

Thanks Jan and Susan,

I understand the concern about mixing references to cultures and epochs, but I intend to do so, treating death as a common denominator.

Jan,

Those are good questions. I'll bat around answers.

Why Azrael? The name for the angel of death has a startling quality to it. As far as it being an Islamic name, well, you have to start somewhere. and I like the religious specificity.

Lime is the product, the kiln is the factory. I think it makes sense to describe lime and kiln smoke filling the air.

My approach doesn't tie me to the artist's materials or to the artist himself. I see the color and I identify quinacridone. By miasma I mean the air and sky in the picture.


I don't get you eliding question. Are you saying it's difficult to get the three things mentioned to combine in a reaction to the image and its subject?


As mentioned above, I'm stretching all over the place intentionally. Gladiator, Ironside. Roman, Cromwellian. Etc. Death contains multitudes.

I'm calling death the king of suicides. The thing most shocking to me in the picture is that death looks murdered and flayed.

I hope these answers don't seem to facile. Even for a reader not looking for metaphorical integrity, I hope the poem raises questions rather than answering them. I hope it offers a picture.


Susan,

On your metrical observations, you're right in both cases, especially on the Christmastime line. ....But: My initial line three was "a gladiator in a pantomime." It looked ridiculously short. The line as I have it identifies a Roman pantomime, not a Roman gladiator. Splitting hairs, perhaps, but

a GLAD i A tor in a RO man PAN to MIME

is a natural way to read the line with five major stresses. Maybe. It's a better line. And it doesn't look like a mistake on page ~,:^)

My response to the six count in line 13 is maybe even more unacceptable, if not even obnoxious: I refuse to surrender the image of a glowing deer carcass at Christmas.

So, I've batted everything away for now in an effort to explain myself. I'll likely be back with revisions. I'm glad to get your reactions, especially to the multitudes I'm trying to contain.

Rick


NB: I'm dropping glowing in line 13.

[Alex Pepple]

Hello Rick,

I appreciate the ambition of this piece and your effort to contain "multitudes" within the imagery. The villanelle's repeating lines create an effective sense of inevitability that suits Turner's apocalyptic vision, and your insight about Death appearing "murdered and flayed" offers a powerful reading of the figure.
However, I think the mixture of modern and historical references risks creating jarring effects rather than cohesive atmosphere. A few specific areas where this occurs:

1. The Pigment and Process Disparity – The mention of quinacridone stands out as anachronistic in a poem otherwise steeped in historical imagery. Turner's own palette offers rich alternatives: vermillion, carmine, or dragon's blood could provide the same vivid red while maintaining period authenticity. Similarly, triglycerides feels overly clinical against the dramatic tone – perhaps "vapors" or "miasma" (which you already use effectively elsewhere) would better serve the poem's atmosphere.
   
2. Alchemy as a Unifying Motif – Given that Turner's era had more in common with alchemical notions than modern chemistry, consider recasting some references in terms of old-world alchemy. Instead of clinical terms, metaphors of sanguine elixirs, sulfuric vapors, or philosopher's fire might help unify the poem's aesthetic. The Romantics were particularly drawn to such mystical transformative imagery – think of Blake's visions or Fuseli's nightmare creatures.
   
3. Cultural and Temporal Bridges – While I understand your intent to layer disparate elements, some juxtapositions feel more like collisions than harmonies. The gladiator and Ironsides create a particularly stark contrast. If you're drawing parallels between militaristic or sacrificial figures across ages, consider imagery more native to Romantic apocalyptic visions: "pale rider," "spectral horse," or "storm-wracked steed." The Romantics saw death as both terrible and transformative – think of Shelley's "leaves dead" or Keats's "easeful Death."
   
4. The King of Suicides as an Anchor – The concept of death as the king of suicides is powerful but currently feels somewhat buried among the layered imagery. Consider bringing this central insight into sharper relief, perhaps by echoing it through the repetitions or reinforcing it with imagery that ties more directly to self-inflicted death rather than war or slaughter. This paradox of Death as both destroyer and destroyed feels very much in the Romantic tradition and might be worth developing further within the period's own symbolic language.

There's compelling energy in the vision you're crafting here, and with some refinements to smooth out the temporal seams while drawing more deeply from the Romantic period's rich vocabulary of death and apocalypse, it could resonate even more powerfully.

Good luck with this, Rick!

Cheers,
...Alex

[Rick Mullin]

Alex,

Thanks for the detailed response. All I can tell you is that I want jarring effects. I'm not sure that is antithetical to a cohesive atmosphere.

It's important to me that Turner, his day and age, the pigments he had available to him, etc, are of no concern to me. This is an ekphrastic poem. Not to be tamed by something like "the Romantic period's rich vocabulary of death and apocalypse," all of which is outside the frame, so to speak. Note also that my Romantic period ended in the 1980s.

An ekphrastic poem is its own thing, a visceral response. It must connect in an unstudied manner, pulling in what shows up. Working in form is a godsend in this regard.

I'm glad you're picking up on something here. I'm still hoping there are readers that will go with it.

Again, I appreciate deep dive.

Rick

[Alex Pepple]

Hello, Rick,

Thanks for your clarification about the intentionally jarring effects. Your point about jarring effects not being antithetical to cohesion is well taken—I can see how, in the right hands, they can create tension rather than discord.

Your take on ekphrasis is refreshing—untamed, instinctive, and visceral. I appreciate how you've explained it as its own thing, pulling in whatever imagery presents itself regardless of historical bounds. And you're right—the formal constraints of the villanelle can serve as a perfect structural anchor for such spontaneity.

Your comment about your Romantic period ending in the 1980s made me smile and helped me better understand your approach. Perhaps I was too prescriptive in suggesting period-specific vocabulary when your aim is precisely to transcend such boundaries.

I'm intrigued by your vision here and will be interested to see how it continues to evolve—or, knowing your style now, maybe just how it holds its ground!

Looking forward to seeing how this develops!

Cheers,
...Alex

[Nick McRae]

FWIW I had no problem with any of it. I wish I had more to add, but most (all?) of your poems come out pretty cleanly to me.

I'm not sure which of the last two I enjoyed more, but I don't have anything negative to say about either.

[Jan Iwaszkiewicz]

Back again Rick my thoughts more together.

I approach my Turner with the adulation of a perennially young Ruskin denying any adverse criticism. The ambition of conflating Turner and Death in a villanelle to me, is more than a touch hubristic. Death on a Pale Horse being unfinished is a fertile ekphrastic opportunity. Is the message pounding of a villanelle the right vehicle? I think not. I show my bias.

Have you seen some of Ruskin’s imitative work? It is interesting, to me though it did not have that ineffable spark.

Have you dipped into Frazer’s Golden Bough? It is a fantastic cultural repository.

The disparate elements do not cohere Rick, I like the conceit but again to me, the vehicle is wrong.

Jan

[Nick McRae]

The disparate elements are what raise this above the mundane, in my view. They're maybe not for everyone but it's an interesting poem. I'll take interesting over coherence.