[Carl Copeland]

Matt’s an ace, isn’t he? The translation is really looking good, with two reservations:

I’m glad you recovered the “shipwreck,” which you blamed me for losing, but now there’s a wreck too many in that line. Can’t we find something to replace “wreckage”?

I’m afraid I may have misled you. Do I understand you to be saying that the tears of blood paint the lyre and the torch? If so, forget everything I said yesterday and make it: “the lyre unplucked, the torch profane.” Without the parallelism, it’s unclear grammatically what “the torch, profane,” especially with a comma, is doing. Sorry for the confusion.

[Matt Q]

Hi Glenn,

I like the switching of "grey" from landscape to ocean, a clever solution that keeps the image, and I'd say even improves it. It's still clear that the landscape is grey.

Very happy my thoughts were helpful. In which case, I'm encouraged to double down on them a bit. I notice that your second stanza is still made of fully formed sentences, whereas Lorca's continues the fragments of the previous S. So, my suggestion would be that since you can follow Lorca on this, you should.

Here's your second stanza as fragments, with none of your word choices changed, just the occasional "that" added.

These tears of blood that obscenely paint
the unplucked lyre, the torch profane.
This crush of waves that inflicts such pain.
My heart that's filled with scorpian's taint.

It's all still loose iambic tetrameter, though you have the option of tightening that in places if you like.

In relation to this, I'll throw out a suggestion for L4. Because the scorpion has made its home in the N's heart, you could use "hosts", which also adds alliteration, and is a little less expected than "fills", since we often say hearts are "full" of something. So:

My heart that hosts the scorpion’s taint.
(or "a scorpian's")

L1: Should you wish, you now have the option of replacing "obscenely" with a two-syllable word. "darkly", "crudely", "quickly"? ("splatter-paints" would accurate, given that these are tears dropping, but too comical I think!). Trouble here is you're having to invent an adjective, as you do with "obscenely", because "paint" already fully covers "decorate". I wonder if there's a way to keep "decorate"? For example:

My heart that hosts a scorpion’s hate.
(or "that's filled with a scorpian's hate)

Though that maybe overlays the image with interpretation, or:

My heart that holds [bears] a scorpian's weight

Though maybe that's a little off, sense-wise.

Any just throwing out some thoughts. I also looked for rhymes with "nest" and "lair", but can find anything that would work as a subsitute for "decorate".

I hope to get to that sestet eventually!

best,

Matt

[Glenn Wright]

More great ideas! I like returning to “decorate” and the original sentence fragments. I’m not thrilled with “scorpion’s hate” because in the next line the speaker is declaring his love, but it will do until I can find something better. Thanks so much for your help, Matt.

P.S. I changed “hosts” in S2L4 yo “bears.” That way the speaker is the victim rather than the perpetrator of the hate.

[Carl Copeland]

This is now reading so well! Two thoughts:

This landscape, a gray, encircling ocean.

Without “like,” this is going to be read as two things: landscape and ocean. A colon would clarify it.

How about replacing the fillerish “such” with “me”?

[Matt Q]

Originally Posted by Glenn Wright

I changed “hosts” in S2L4 yo “bears.” That way the speaker is the victim rather than the perpetrator of the hate.

At first I wasn't sure that being a host to the scorpion's hate means that that it's the N's hate, but thinking more about it, I think I do see what you mean. I guess it can be read that he hates with the hate of a scorpion.

I wonder about "bears", though, because it also means "endures", and then sentence means something like, "the scorpion hates me and I endure that hate". And then there's no sense of the scorpions nest being located in the heart.

Do you mean "bears" in the sense of "to hold / to carry" that intend here? In which case, maybe use "holds"? It alliterates nicely with "hate".

My heart that holds the scorpions hate

Then again, I guess "holds" (or to "bears" in the sense of holding) also be read as it being the N's hate?

Hmm.

Matt

[Glenn Wright]

I put “sleepless” back, Carl, since that’s the literal meaning of sin sueño.

I changed “bears” to “houses” in S2L4, Matt. This clarifies whose hate we are discussing (the scorpion’s), and picks up the alliteration.

Thanks, fellows!

[Carl Copeland]

Hi, Glenn. I can’t get this translation out of my head. The one thing that still bugs me is “hate”—too specific for a scorpion that could represent so many emotions. How about something like this?

These tears of blood embellishing
the unplucked lyre, the torch impure.
This crush of waves I must endure.
This scorpion in my breast—its sting.

“Sting” extends the metaphor without adding anything consequential, and it allows you to recover the parallelism of “This scorpion.”

Best I could come up with.

[Matt Q]

Hi Glenn,

Finally back for the sestet. I think my main issue is this line:

They’re wreaths of love, for the hurt, a cot,

it strikes me as awkwardly phrased. Why not just reverse it:

They’re wreaths of love, a bed for the hurt,

which seems more natural to me, and rhyme-wise, I'd say you're still fine. You get hurt/heart/fraught, which seems to work just as well as cot/heart/fraught -- better, even.

A possible downside of "hurt" is that it can mean both "wound" and "wounded". So, the hurt as "the pain", and the hurt as "the wounded", and the original has only the latter sense (or the crib does anyway). But I don't know that is that much of a problem. And reordered as above, I think the latter sense maybe comes across stronger.

best,

Matt