[Hilary Biehl]

The Detour

I.

“This way is scenic,”
he says. There’s certainly
no need to panic,

though she complains,
“You always get us lost.”
He points out pines,

drives fast around
disorienting curves.
She makes a sound,

which serves to let
him know she’s angry. Still,
he can’t stop yet.

Uphill and down,
they blunder toward the sun.
Her deepening frown

cannot compete
with what might be ahead.
He knows she’s right –

they should go home.
She’s silent, and he’s sorry,
but just the same,

“Don’t worry.”


II.

She missed the exit. Now she’s on a somber
stretch of road, hurtling away from what
she knows, toward cloud-plagued mountains and a white
inexorable sky. She dials his number,

breathing in snatches. He answers in a solemn
mumble, and she knows she woke him. Still,
he’s there, he stays with her, mile after mile,
his steady voice the star guiding her home.



In part II, S2 L1-2 was: "He answers, sounding grim. / She probably just woke him up. Oh well –"

S6 L1-2 was "cannot compete / with what might be ahead." Changed it to "does not negate / the pleasures of the road." Have changed it back for now.

[Max Goodman]

I like the way this shows the guy (I realize I'm making an assumption, that it's the same guy in both parts of the poem) who is so unhelpful behind the wheel to be so helpful when she is.

In the first scene, I at first think they have somewhere to be, and that he's making it hard for them to get there. The first line strongly suggests this. "They should go home" jars. I guess they're giving up on getting where they were going, but I haven't gotten the sense that the detour has yet gotten long enough to call their eventual arrival into question.

Similarly, I have some trouble placing "what lies ahead." It's what lies ahead for the relationship (which the second, in a nice twist, shows to be more pleasant than she at this moment thinks likely), but what is it's literal meaning in the scene. I suppose it is the other obstacles he's likely to drive them through before they reach their destination or home--and that I had to work a bit to figure that out may not be a problem, for whatever it's worth I feel drawn to read it as their destination, which jars because it isn't an issue between them; however much they disagree about the route, they both at this moment want to reach the same place.

On the whole, this is working well for me.

[Hilary Biehl]

Thanks for commenting, Max. I'm glad it's working well for you overall.

I had meant them to be coming home from somewhere in the first part when he decides to take the more interesting route. I see the source of the confusion, though.

"what might be ahead" is an area of the poem that I've had difficulty with and I guess it shows. I will keep thinking about ways to make that clearer.

[Alex Pepple]

Hello, Hilary,

Your poem presents a fascinating study in relationship dynamics through two distinct driving scenarios. The structural contrast between parts I and II effectively mirrors the shifting power dynamics between the couple.

In part I, the tercets create a sense of fragmentation that echoes the discord between the couple - his determination to take the "scenic" route despite her protests. The short lines and stanzas effectively convey the tension and stop-start nature of their interaction.

This leads me to deeper questions about what drives these characters. Might we ask if his insistence on continuing despite her objections stems from a self-assured, controlling, and inflexible nature? There's something revealing in how "her deepening frown // cannot compete / with what might be ahead" - suggesting his fixation on possibility overrides her present discomfort.

I notice you mentioned to Max that this "what might be ahead" area has been difficult. I wonder if the ambiguity here is whether "what might be ahead" refers to scenery he hopes to discover, or something more metaphorical about their relationship. This ambiguity might actually enrich the poem, allowing for both literal and figurative readings.

The roles reverse completely in part II, where she's now the one who's lost and he becomes the guide. This reversal prompts another question: is she fundamentally less certain of herself, more willing to rely on him for guidance when disoriented? His voice becomes "the star guiding her home" - a beautiful image that suggests her receptivity to his direction.

These contrasting scenarios raise a fascinating corollary: might his refusal to heed her advice in part I relate directly to this pattern? Perhaps there's an established dynamic where he leads and she follows, making her attempts to redirect him in part I feel like a disruption of their usual roles.

The complexity of their relationship emerges through these moments of discord and harmony, shifting based on who is the "primary operator" in each scenario. The poem suggests neither pattern is wholly negative or positive - each serves different situations.

I'm curious about "he responds, sounding grim" in part II. This description seems at odds with his helpful guidance that follows. Perhaps this initial grimness is meant to show his concern, but it creates a momentary disconnect with his subsequent supportive behavior.

The final lines of each section create a powerful contrast - his dismissive "Don't worry" in part I versus the image of "his steady voice the star guiding her home" in part II - suggesting adaptation in their relationship based on circumstance.

This is a subtly crafted exploration of relationship dynamics, Hilary. I hope these observations spark further reflection on your characters' complex interplay!

Cheers,
...Alex

[Glenn Wright]

Hi, Hilary—

I have an unfortunate tendency to try to find hidden meanings in direct and straightforward poems—occasionally a blessing, more often a curse.

In the first part of this piece, I was struck by how the couple being together in the car seemed to represent marriage (or at least commitment to sharing their lives). I read it as being about how difficult it can be to make shared plans when the individual goals and priorities of each spouse do not align exactly. Also, how having to sacrifice or postpone those goals and priorities to accommodate one’s partner can provoke anger and resentment.

In the second part of this piece, the couple is separated (perhaps divorced? perhaps because of those resentments?) I read it as showing how helpful and self-sacrificing one can be when one’s life is not tightly entangled with another’s.

I have known many couples who are able to be kind and friendly to each other only after having separated. The irony of this is what I focused on in your poem. Nice work!

Glenn

[Hilary Biehl]

Thank you, Alex and Glenn.

Alex, your insightful comments are reassuring me that my intentions are at least mostly coming through. I had changed the "what might be ahead" line but have changed it back for now.

On the "sounding grim," that is another area I've struggled with, for exactly the reason you point out - it might contrast too much with what follows. I've tried out other words there but didn't love any of them. I wanted the suggestion that she has woken him up and he is initially disgruntled or not fully awake. "Grim" isn't quite right ... I will keep thinking about alternatives.

Glenn, it hadn't actually occurred to me that they were separated or divorced in the second scenario, but that is certainly a possible reading. Interesting thought.

[Max Goodman]

Originally Posted by Hilary Biehl

Glenn, it hadn't actually occurred to me that they were separated or divorced in the second scenario, but that is certainly a possible reading. Interesting thought.

That was my impression, too. I've just looked back to figure out why. I think:

"She dials his number," feels less intimate than "she calls [or dials] him."

In "She probably just woke him up." the "probably" suggests a lack of intimacy. If my wife or I woke the other up, we'd know. The dialer would ask and the wakened would say. That's not a value judgment, just an explanation. Another couple might find it more intimate to shield a partner from knowing.

FWIW.

[Hilary Biehl]

That's helpful to know that you also read it that way, Max, and why. While I'm fine with that interpretation even though it isn't what I intended, I take your point and have made some changes to the second part.