[Ed Shacklee]

Probably because I don't pronounce 'Russians' properly, I'd have preferred a slight modification of one line, 'The Russians, father says, have leapt ahead:' -- and maybe another tweak or two here and there. But I like the start and the end of this, the story told afresh from a child's perspective, and the zones of faith and unbelief. All in all, well done.

Ed

[Duncan Gillies MacLaurin]

I’ve been quite impressed with the sonnets so far, but this one seems very weak by comparison. It's what I would call a McPoem in sonnet form. It claims awesomeness without earning it. It’s like: “Wow, you’re standing beneath the stars and you’re only five years old! And you saw Sputnik soon after its launch. Well wow!” The poem never rises above this level. It deals in cheap nostalgia and nothing more. We’re being told to feel the power of the word “Sputnik” just because the narrator was young when he/she saw it and because it means a lot to the narrator. I wouldn't dream of suggesting that it doesn't mean a lot to the narrator, but poetry has to be more than this, surely? In short, this poem does nothing more than milk a world event. A McPoem.

The supposed drama of a celestial object that moves is underlined by a repetition: “That moves”. Well, if something isn’t working once, why repeat it? There’s a really yukky, childish, “Wow” thing that is being milked here, and I’m running for serious cover.

If N could somehow relate this event to something personal in his/her own life, then I might be drawn to the poem, but there's absolutely zilch beyond the cliché of father/child memory.

Duncan

PS I see Lance claims a deeper philosophical symbolism for L6-10. Well, if we're really looking, then yes, maybe. But it's like you have to be told this is a good poem first in order to go looking. On a first couple of readings this jumped well off my radar.

[Chris O'Carroll]

I took "building missiles instead of baking bread" to be a righteous American's denunciation of the Commies who couldn't even feed their own people decently, but poured money into military technology. (Wasn't that how we thought of space exploration back then, as essentially a military venture?)

[Jan D. Hodge]

> I took "building missiles instead of baking bread" to be a righteous
> American's denunciation of the Commies who couldn't even feed their
> own people decently, but poured money into military technology.

Of course. The political cliche of the time was "guns or butter," and LBJ's claim that we could have both. I remember my father's bitter response to our exporting wheat to the USSR then while raising the price of bread at home. Compare North Korea today, or certain budget proposals to increase military spending (for programs the Pentagon doesn't even want) while cutting food stamps?

[David Anthony]

Originally Posted by Chris O'Carroll

I took "building missiles instead of baking bread" to be a righteous American's denunciation of the Commies who couldn't even feed their own people decently, but poured money into military technology. (Wasn't that how we thought of space exploration back then, as essentially a military venture?)

Yes, exactly.

I'd be tempted to change:
My father says the Russians have leapt ahead
to:
My father says the Russkies leapt ahead
for the sake of the terminology of the time and the metre.

Enjoyed

David

[Janice D. Soderling]

Oh I like this so much but I think the metrics could be improved here:

My father says the Russians have leapt ahead.
By building missiles instead of baking bread,

I like David's idea of using Russkies.

This next is a superb line
the godless souls have marred the face of heaven.
coupled with
a vision of the new star, far and high,

I'd like to see Sputnik in italics rather than quotes.

I find this line so appealing
that moves. That moves. It's 1957.
because I want to pause there and take in the wonder of what is happening. This keeps the poem from the danger of monotony.

[Jean L. Kreiling]

I like this one a lot.

I do think it earns its claim of awe (yes, the “heart-deep shiver,” which is partly fear), as it combines the spectacle in the sky (as perceived by the youngster, so stunned that he tells us twice that the star moves), the father-son relationship, and the question of faith.

I have a few nits, but I’ll mention only one that I don’t think has been mentioned already: the very first line made me stumble a little, grammatically.

This needs a few tweaks, but for me, it’s mostly clear, well-crafted, and spellbinding.

Best,
Jean

[Susan McLean]

I think this one has interesting resonances. I don't really see the point of the L12 tetrameter, but the anapestic substitutions bothered me less than they have bothered some. I like the way "fellow traveler" picks up the allusion to Communism, as the "cold" alludes to the cold war, as well as the literal cold. I enjoyed the repetition of "That moves," which really captures the astonishment of the child. And I like that the child is both impressed by the father's statements and (as an adult) predicting a later drift away from the father's opinions. In short, I see a lot more than just a slice of life here.

Susan

[Chris Wilson]

I find L5 memorable as well. Being only just young enough for this to be history rather than personal experience, it is L5 that conveys to me the feeling of a shift in the order of the universe. Speaking of shifts, the perspective moves from child to adult a bit too suddenly for me in "Although I'll come to question...always brings." I would find it smoother to move the whole sentence into the adult perspective: "Although I've come to question...always brings."

[Vernon Sims]

This has an honestyabout it, built as it is on a generational experiences, shared by many of us, There are a few points, but others have dealt with them.