[Susan McLean]

"Gotten" is the preferred form of the past participle, though "got" is common in speech and most people accept both forms. As for the other aspects of usage Maggie objected to, I assume she is just unfamiliar with them or doesn't care for them herself. My only objections to the piece are that I find myself pausing at the end of lines more than I like, in blank verse, and that I think the lines could use a bit more substitution, to sound more conversational. Other than that, I think it is an effective narrative, and that the reticence works well as characterization.

Susan

[Maggie Porter]

After, I wished I’d watched you out of sight
or even run behind you, called your name
so I could picture you without this blur,
but all I can recall of saying goodbye
is mumbled words "I love you" and "take care"

Ok already. Maybe it is just me. But in general, incomplete thoughts are not the same as incomplete sentences. We have an "implied" thought here contained in an incomplete sentence.

After (,) X or Y, Z (,) BUT all I can recall...an so on and so forth. This is an incomplete sentence which can and should be remedied by the addition/subtraction of the numerous conjunctions contained within. SINCE this "blank verse" if that is what you want to call it, contains several complete sentences complete with commas, periods and subject/predicate structures, it is necessary that ALL of them must follow this dictate. In this case I am still confounded as to why this is missed. I'm not even that good with stuff like that!

Here's another way of illuminating:

After, I wished I’d watched you out of sight or even run behind you, called your name so I could picture you without this blur, but all I can recall of saying goodbye
is mumbled words "I love you" and "take care"

This is really bothering me. Writing it out like this is showing me the key here:

After I wished I had watched you (WALK) "out of sight" or even (RAN)behind you, called your name so I could picture you without this blur, but all I can recall of saying goodbye is mumbled words "I love you" and "take care".

I'm afraid there are no rules for this kind of transgression that I know of. I am trying very hard to illuminate the very definite problem I see here. Using "out of sight" in this sense as a ? (not really sure what that thing is working as...an adverb clause? very not clear to me). Additionally, substituting the infinitive form of RUN instead of using the congruent past tense RAN adds to this dizzying stumbling block. There is so much switching of tenses and ommisions inside modifiers i.e. watched you out of sight..that I am left tongue tangled on a close read (and perhaps it would not be a problem if it weren't for the fact that this is a poem and not a prose sentence). For me (here in my aloneness on this one and fully ready to apologize completely with a photo of me with my foot in my mouth when and if required)...

So please people, give me a break already and do try to see past your own noses for a change will ya?

All my best to the poet and afterall, this advice is meant for that person and they are welcome to take it or leave it.



[This message has been edited by Maggie Porter (edited December 07, 2004).]

[Carol Taylor]

Maggie, after you wrote the sentence out without the comma after "after" I finally figured out where your confusion was coming from. If there were no comma, you'd be correct in thinking that it wasn't a sentence because there'd be no verb, just an adverbial clause beginning with "after." But there is. So it must be read like this:

After (adverb), I (subject) wished (verb) I'd watched, run, called... (compound object of the verb wished, tells what I wished)

In other words, it doesn't say "after I wished," it says I wished, afterward, that: I had watched you out of sight or (that I had) even run behind you, (and that I had) called your name, so I could picture you without this blur, but (since I didn't do any of those things) all I can recall of saying goodbye is...

If you substitute another adverb or adverb phrase like "later," or "afterward" or "forever after" or "after you'd gone" or "in retrospect" or "when it was too late" for "after" I think the rest of the construction and the verb tenses will come clear to you.

Hope that helps.


Carol

[Carol Taylor]

Rhina, you are the ideal reader every poet writes for. You reason from the effect back to the cause, giving an anonymous poet credit for having intended the meaning that comes across and for having chosen his words for a particular effect. I think in the workshop we mostly tend to look for exceptions, like CPA's, assuming that anything unexpected is a mistake rather than a key. At least we do unless we know the writer and he has built credibility with us.

The beauty of submitting a poem anonymously for critique is that the poem has to speak for itself and succeed or fail on its own. The critic has to take the poem on face value and either believe the poet or not. He can't say, "Well, I know Carol Taylor's background and style, so I understand this poem."

Nothing wrong with that, of course. I got to know Agatha Christie's style so well when I was a girl that I could solve her mysteries by psyching out the author: what kind of clues she left, what kind of characters committed murder in her books, even the sneaky way she worded passages to try to pull the wool over your eyes. But could someone less familiar with her style have solved the mysteries based on the clues alone? An exceptionally close reader might, but not always. Sometimes there were brand new characters pulled out of the hat at the end of the book, somebody's long lost brother or step-son or first husband who'd never appeared before and had been mentioned only in passing, or not at all. Or you were told that Hercule had to go somewhere and confirm something, but you weren't told what he had to check or where he went to do it. Or that Miss Marple found something familiar about one of the characters because she'd once known a murderer with the same color hair. I don't think a poem needs to tell everything, and as you say, it often tells much by what it chooses to omit. But if it needs an owner's manual to explain it, then the poem has missed its chance.

I'm delighted with your reading of my poem, Rhina, and doubly delighted that you didn't know who wrote it, yet understood it exactly as intended. Thank you for the close and perceptive read and for your encouraging comments on the voice and style. And thank you for commenting so intuitively on all 18 poems, making such a positive experience of this annual event.

My thanks also to those who commented on my poem: Rose, Margaret, Roger, Janet, Tim, Clay, Simon, Susan, Wendy, and Maggie. Your feedback lets me know what's working and not working for you, the readers.

Carol