[Alex Pepple]

Night Fog


There is a man in the woods
searching still, in haze, for signs
of me.

His kerosene lamp guttering,
he tramples twigs, seedpods,
remnants of moth-wings
in the damp.

My name slips his tongue.
He walks to our swollen river,
plunges his hand,
cleanses his face,

then peers through mist
for what flood-born flotsam
survived the night he witnessed
everything of me drift away.

Each fragment wrapped in fog,
each shadow once
a shape he knew.

------------------------------------------------------


~~~First revision ~~~

Night Fog


There is a man in the woods
searching still, in haze, for signs
of me.

His kerosene lamp guttering,
he tramples twigs, seedpods,
remnants of wings—
moth-silk dissolving
in the damp.

My name slips his tongue.
He walks to our swollen
river, plunges a hand,
cups the chill of currents,
asperges his face,

now peers through mist
for what flood-born flotsam
remains from the night
he witnessed everything
of me drift away.

Each fragment wrapped in fog,
each shadow once
a shape he knew.

------------------------------------------------------


~~~Original version ~~~

Night Fog


There is a man in the woods
searching in haze for signs
of me.

His kerosene lamp swinging,
he tramples twigs, seedpods,
remnants of wings.

My name slips his tongue.
He walks to the familiar
river, plunges his hand,
splashes his face,

then peers through mist for what flotsam
survived the night
he watched everything
of me drift away.

[Harry Nicolas]

Hey alex, here is my interpretation
Night fog - gives ominous/eerie image in my head
4stanzas

Stanza 1 - a man in the woods searching for the N. haze is metaphor for something
Stanza2 - lamp is light to guide is way. Remnants of wings is ambiguous so wings of what -a bird, butterfly, angel, something that flies. Also remnants implies the pssage of time so the wings are archaic and have been decaying for a long time.
Stanza3 - so the N does know the man in the woods.what type of relationship do they have?
Stanza4 - there is a figurative shipwreck. The man watches the n that is a metaphorical shipwreck drift away.

The passage of time seems to be a theme here. Shipwrecks and remnants of wings are things you come upon and I think of what was the ship carrying where was it going, what type of wings/where was the bird (if it is one) going
The haze/mist is a metaphor for something I’m not sure what, maybe something that was clouding/fogging the relationship between the N and the man in the woods.
For me- unless I’m missing something which I probably am, I think I would want to see more stanzas developing the narrative, but that’s just my personal opinion

[Max Goodman]

A strong extended image that has prompted a lot of thought.

The speaker seems to be imagining how he will be remembered after death, an intriguing topic.

It feels intentionally hazy, appropriate for the topic.

Flotsam suggests a flood, a strong choice. A disaster, partially unpredictable, but a particularly natural eventually-inevitable one.

There is nothing here (unless I'm missing it) to suggest the speaker's relationship to the man, suggesting the possibility that this is just someone who happened to be there at the moment of the speaker's death. That this is the man the speaker would think about when imagining death (a man yet unknown to the speaker except theoretically) feels lonely.

FWIW.

[Trevor Conway]

Hi Alex,

You set up an interesting scene here, one that feels very allegorical, but it seems to me like you haven't done much with it after that. The end comes quite suddenly. I'd love to see a lot more development before we get to the end.

I hope this feedback helps in some way.

All the best,

Trev

Originally Posted by Alex Pepple

Night Fog


There is a man in the woods
searching in haze for signs
of me.

His kerosene lamp swinging,
he tramples twigs, seedpods,
remnants of wings.

My name slips his tongue.
He walks to the familiar
river, plunges his hand,
splashes his face,

then peers through mist for what flotsam
survived the night
he watched everything
of me drift away.

[Alex Pepple]

Thank you, Harry, Max, and Trev for your thoughtful engagement with the poem—much appreciated. I’ve now posted a revised version, which I hope better communicates the emotional and imagistic textures while still preserving its core messages.

Harry, I found your interpretation especially helpful. Your comments about the “remnants of wings” and your questions about the relationship between the narrator and the man in the woods helped me see how readers might seek more anchoring details. You also rightly noted the recurring theme of time—something I’ve aimed to highlight more explicitly in the revision. While I’ve retained some of the intentional haziness (in keeping with the fog imagery), I’ve also added more specificity to the imagery of wings and the river, which I hope provides firmer narrative footholds.

Max, your interpretation—that the speaker may be imagining how he’ll be remembered after death is especially resonant. I have now tried to sharpen that aspect for improved insight for the reader. Your point about the flood being “partially unpredictable, but a particularly natural eventually-inevitable one” helped sharpen my own understanding of how to sharpen the disaster motif and flotsam imagery for the reader. I’ve also tried to preserve the subtle emotional distance and sense of loneliness you identified—an undercurrent integral to the poem's atmosphere.

Trev, I appreciate your observation about the poem’s allegorical quality and your desire for more development before the conclusion. In my revision, this is addressed by the added, new final stanza that extends the emotional and symbolic implications of the searching man and the objects he finds. I’ve also enriched some of the middle imagery (particularly around the river scene) to create more narrative texture while still maintaining the poem’s compressed form. While I’ve chosen to keep the piece relatively brief, I hope these additions give the allegorical elements more room to resonate.

Thanks again to both of you. I hope the revision now provides better insight and appreciation of the poem!

Cheers,
…Alex

[Max Goodman]

Originally Posted by Alex Pepple

Max, ...I have now tried to sharpen that aspect for improved insight for the reader.

In case it's helpful to hear how the changes change my reading: It's now clear that this is no stranger but someone who had known the speaker. They share "their" river. "Asperges" (an intentionally ungrammatical use of that noun? I'm not sure; the word is new to me) gives the search an importance to the man, as does the ending's suggestion that the speaker's disappearance has changed things for the man.

[Joe Crocker]

I like the original version better. The language is spare and intriguing. But I do like the last verse of the new version, which you could add to the original.

Joe

[Trevor Conway]

Hi Alex,

I like the new version a lot more. It has depth and feels like you have considered/developed the allegory more. It's richer, for sure.

While I have to applaud "asperges", I can't say I understand the intended meaning. That might not matter too much. It depends what other alternatives there are.

I'd remove "now" before "takes". No big deal if it's kept, though.

Nice to see how this developed into a fuller, more enjoyable read.

Well done.

T

[Glenn Wright]

Hi, Alex—

Sorry to be tardy in responding to this piece.

I’m inclined to agree with Joe that I like the more compact first version better. There is really a lot of foggy, misty haziness to contend with in the revision, and the word “asperges” in S3L5 suggests both the old Catholic antiphon used with the rite of sprinkling and “Asperger’s syndrome.” Neither of these seems in any way relevant to your poem.

In my reading the N is the ghost of a person murdered by the man in the woods carrying a kerosene lamp—possibly his lover or his child. I think this is more effectively communicated in the first version.
In the revision, introducing the flood opens the possibility that the N’s grave has been washed away in a flood and the man with the kerosene lamp is surveying the damage to his beloved’s burial place.

Hope this is helpful.

Glenn

[Alex Pepple]

Thank you all for, gentlemen, for your thoughtful feedback on both versions of "Night Fog." The mixed responses on the revision have been incredibly valuable in helping me consider what's most essential to this poem.

Max - I appreciate your observation about how the revision clarified the relationship between the speaker and the man. You're right about "asperges" - it's actually a verb form referring to the ritual sprinkling, such as with holy water, but I can see how it created confusion rather than clarity.

Joe and Glenn - Your preference for the original's spare language resonates with me. There's power in compression, and I think I may have overelaborated in places. I'm glad you appreciated the final stanza, Joe.

Trevor - I'm pleased the revision offered the depth and development you were looking for. Your point about removing "now" is well-taken, and your uncertainty about "asperges" aligns with other feedback.

Glenn - Your reading of the narrator as possibly murdered by the man with the lamp is fascinating and not one I had consciously intended, but I can now see how that interpretation comes about. I pleased at how the poem's layers of meaning allows for such interpretations.

After reflecting on all your comments, I've created a version that aims to find middle ground—maintaining the original's compression while keeping elements that add clarity and depth. I've replaced "asperges" with "cleanses" and streamlined several passages while preserving the additional final stanza that received positive feedback.

I hope the revision maintains the poem's essential mystery while providing enough clarity to guide the reader. As always, I welcome your thoughts.

Cheers,
…Alex