[Jean L. Kreiling]

This one left mixed impressions for me. I like the theme, and the list approach, and some of the dark details work really well (“ditch-digger’s drops of sweat”). But some details seem over the top to me (snails AND butchered peasants in one image?), and L4 doesn’t seem to fit (too broad, and more editorial than the rest). I thought the final couplet could be punchier, and in L13, don’t we usually “marvel AT” something, rather than “marvel” something?

A skillful sonnet that still needs some tweaking?

[Latorial Faison]

Totally reads like a true old fashioned sonnet . . . because it lost me through and through (LOL), but that's a good thing because it made me go back and read it several times and again and again to internalize what it really all means.

I give this one an A for simply mirroring what used to be in what sounds like an older English. Bravo!

[Scott Miller]

What I loved about this poem was the crackle of the language. Someone mentioned sotto voce in an earlier post, and that has its place, but lyric intensity done right is amazing.

For me, the epigraph serves to pardon some of the archaic language in this sonnet. Without it, I'd be confused by "butchered peasants" and the general medieval atmosphere. In fact, it pushes up against that risk even with the epigraph, but at least that prepares us.

The couplet kind of kills it for me. It's such a tidy and moralizing end. I also have problems with the stress count in L13. But mostly it's just the let down after the toxic brew of the third quatrain that really irks me.

[kate peachtea]

This is my favorite of the three I've read so far. I like the refrain, especially in the first line, a great beginning after the ponderous epitaph. i agree with Danoff re 'where a queen has lain' and other comments. Poem could be smoother, less gory, a cool tone would work better and i think the poem already aspires to that. the last line - I'd leave out 'the', to end this poem with reference to 'flesh so innocent' is kind of devilish and delectable. 'the flesh' is clunky language. i don't know about meter. maybe add syllable later in line. the line itself could be more stunning, & I agree with Slater, the reference to 'man' in penultimate line is a throwaway. instead of some general imagery - ditchdiggers, peasants, even queen, a few specifics might be fun & would be easy to find. Poem's a bit general, before letting it swirl into a mass, let the specifics gleam for a second, like stars in their own right. might work better (for me). Again, good discussion!

[Chris Childers]

I like this one a lot. To take some slight issue with Maryann, I do find the final couplet a bit "forced." Alliteration is not itself a sign of "forcedness" (though one could question the identity rhyme hidden in "marvel / mars"), but the metrical roughness, combined with the omission of "at" ("marvel at") may indeed communicate a bit of an impression of forcedness. The line has seven strong stresses (HERE'S a NEW-WASHed BABE: MARvel what MAN MARS), laid out in a fairly irregular pattern. I'm no stickler for "correct" meter, and have probably written lines like this myself in the past, but I am not sure those variations are working for me here. I would prefer something more like,

Here, take this new-washed babe. Look what man mars--
The flesh so innocent it gleams like stars.

I was going to say that I think the simile not 100% apt, but having re-written it thus, I think maybe it's just the rhythm of L13 that overups the applecart for me.

C

[Roger Slater]

What concerns me more about the couplet is whether and in what sense gleaming like a star is a sign of innocence, whether a single baby's skin would gleam like plural stars, whether a baby's beautiful skin gleams in a starlike way (does it twinkle?), whether the word "babe" fits the diction, and the aptness in today's dictions of using "man" the way it's been used.

[Michael Cantor]

This one really didn't appeal to me. There's something Goth about it - faux-Medieval - and it seems more constructed than flowing naturally from within. I don't get much of a turn - it's like a film that's all special effects but not enough plot.

I don't think the epigraph is needed - it just seems to get in the way, and the title by itself says enough. As a matter of fact, I think the poem is more effective without the epigraph.

[Paul Connolly]

The couplet brings to mind a foundling destined to do great things that will form the basis of a "fabulous account."

[Jennifer Gordon]

While L1 begins less than iambic, the fascinating array of scenes and fabulous imagery take the reader through the depths of those foul corners where only the damned venture, deliciously tendering one hair-raising vision after another, chilling the plebian blood while haunting with enough to rouse Macbeth's less than savoury aids. Frankly I do love Gail's allusion to Macbeth since this is too richly fitting, also rousing memories of Scot's Ivanhoe and other similar tales.

What thrills the most is the rich injunction of the final couplet, turning the macabre discussion onto reality's plate, hinting none to subtly, leaving me scrambling as the dastardly activities come home to remind us afresh what we do with those charming little new beginnings, hardly aware of our responsibilities.

As a metaphor I can barely begin scoping the possibilities, but it likewise plays out too beautifully as we are wont to pervert novices sans a second thought, or perhaps it is more that they are too readily the prey of ill's heinous claws.

A Shakespearean which begs placement in the ring for its fabulous dark visions sweetly sketched, while if I may dare to nit-pick, I think a bit larger difference in the end-rhyming between quatrains and even the couplet, or is this another half Spenserian prize?

Not the greatest sonnet, since L's 1, 8, 9, and 13 are all too trochaic, or correct me, and the end-rhyming leaves a tad to be desired, but having seen the judges said something different was afoot at this contest's inception and the call for permutations too loudly clear, I am sufficiently thankful this is a fair sonnet in its own right, those invocations its most charming feature.

Thanks for sharing, I enjoyed it!

ttfn,
Jenny

[Siham Karami]

Though I enjoyed this poem for its unusual subject matter and treatment, and I rather like the dark quasi-medieval language in contrast to the baby, but I would throw out the epigraph. It's somewhat interesting, but detracts from the poem, and seems to overly instruct or direct our reading.

Siham