[Carol Taylor]

David and Lo, you're letting the ex off too light, but the narrator isn't. She's nailed him to the wall. He has hangups (whatever the source of them) that make him avoid looking at her during sex or even when she's naked. He may not acknowledge his fantasies or understand where they're coming from, so he's still in heterosexual relationships. But the fact is her feminity emasculates him, and the only way he can get off is to hide it.

In the sestet N's saying "maybe I'm wrong and you don't really have a problem with women, you just don't like women who talk. But I doubt it's that--in fact I'd bet my butt on it."

Anne, she had the sense to lose him; she certainly wasn't going to change him by explaining that she'd prefer to do it the other way sometimes.

It's a great poem, nothing but net.

Carol

[Elle Bruno]

I've really enjoyed thinking about this poem and reading the interpretations of others.
My initial impression of this piece was that it was like some woman who plops herself down next to me at a party and, instead of chatting about the dip or the view, talks in an offhand way about the strange curve of her boyfriend's dick or the fact that she can't have an orgasm since switching antidepressants. The piece seems both outrageous and intriguing. The tone is know-it-all been-there-done-that jaded but there is more going on. It is a poem where we are forced to think about the situation more than N is. N cannot be trusted. She isn't telling us the whole story. In spite of all her openness, she can only give us one picture -her picture. It's up to us to figure out what's missing.
This seems to me to be the genius of the piece -
N is saying Trust me, I know what I'm talking about.
The poet is saying Don't trust this chick for a minute.

What hits me as amazing about this piece is that it can be interpreted on so many levels. Funny, of course. But there's more -an undercurrent of bitterness about men that somehow negates the humor on subsequent readings. But there's more -an underlying comment on women and their present jadedness that somehow negates the bitterness towards men part and deepens our understanding of women's bitterness towards life. I can see why Rose has different takes on this with each reading. And I can understand those who see all the misogyny in the piece- yes, the world is filled with men who hate women.
Marybeth's comments come closest to my interpretation- the poem reveals much more about N than she imagines.
Yet, I'd like to take that further also. The reason N does not ask for explanation or demand equality is that she does not care. This man is as interchangeable to her as she is to him. A bit quirky maybe. But who isn't? The next one will be quirkier, or not. They are in relationships that are post-communication, post-emotion. Although the relationships may start differently,giving the illusion of depth, they all end up the same. The universal 'You' is used brilliantly -it is written to all men, all people.
It is one hell of a post-modern poem. Who wrote this anyway?

Are I reading too much into it? Maybe.
Thanks, Dee

[Cally Conan-Davies]

On the sex-o-meter scale, this sonnet is scrotum-shrivelling. I read the doggy-style stuff as a great metaphor for the end of the relationship, the back-side, the rear view, helping the N put the whole thing to bed. The poem actually ‘flips’ the reader over between old and new, beginnings and ends, in its attempt to find conclusion. In fact, I love the way it creates the feeling of being flipped over as N flips through the different ways of reading his behaviour, trying to draw a conclusion. It’s not just the style of sex; it’s her sense that he does not see her, his indifference, his lack of commitment, his absence in the relationship. N is saying ‘you are a shallow, predictable arse-hole’. It’s her way of getting some power back. The controlled, vindictive violence implicit in the couplet is hilarious.

It’s a postcoital postmortem, and a delicious slice of subjectivity. The N is angry and hurt, betrayed, and coping by getting her own back. This is how it often feels, in the end.(!) The sonnet, however, is funny and clever. That’s the genius of this one – you get both these readings at once. It’s complicated, layered, a sardonic sonnet – love it!

[R. S. Gwynn]

I don't want to speak for Our Distinguished Guest, but personally I'd be a little hesitant about offering this one up to him as the best that eratosphere has to offer. And I'm no bluestocking, god knows. I hope that the stewed zucchini sonnet won't go to Cummington either.

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by R. S. Gwynn:
I don't want to speak for Our Distinguished Guest, but personally I'd be a little hesitant about offering this one up to him as the best that eratosphere has to offer. And I'm no bluestocking, god knows. I hope that the stewed zucchini sonnet won't go to Cummington either.

I can't speak for Rose, but my common sense tells me that any poem with the name "Richard Wilbur" in the user-name column would be the poems being directed to Richard Wilbur and that any poem with the name "Rose Kelleher" in the user-name column would be the ones being commented on by Rose Kelleher.

Both the "stewed zucchini" sonnet and this one are in the later category.

And personally, I do think this could quite easily fall into the "best Eratosphere has to offer" pile.

Butt that's just me - backwards as I am.

[Jim Hayes]

If this fall into the "best that Eratosphere has to offer" category then we're way beyond help or educating, and I'm no bluestocking either.

Jim

[Alexander Grace]

I'm not sure I would interpret the boyfriend as being gay. Seems more like he has intimacy issues. I guess N sees this when she realises it's not her breasts he's covering but her mouth.

I don't think it's that well written though... or revealing. My first reaction is that I've stumbled upon a lover's row that I'm best to stay out of. As a parting shot at the end of a relationship, it works, kinda.

As poetry? Hmmm. Not terrible but I'd agree it's not the best this place has to offer.

Anne:

Somehow there was enmity sown between the sexes from the beginning of Adam's race. Division always causes war, but apparently it was necessary.

I have no right but... please don't think that.

Dee: You are reading far too much into it. But I know what you mean.

[This message has been edited by Alexander Grace (edited May 08, 2008).]

[Tim Murphy]

Sam, Jim, Wiley, I too cringe at the thought that this or the zucchini might have made its way to Cummington. From Rose's description of posting two letters I cannot tell.

The differing reactions reveal a deep generational divide. Well, two of 14X14's editors are senior to me and they liked Finale. But Richard is another generation back, a poet of profound reticence and decorum, and I hope he didn't see these two poems.

[RCrawford]

If Rose is the initial judge, Rose IS the judge. I think it's unfair to start worrying about what we think Richard Wilbur will or will not be offended by. Let's just see what happens.

I've been in Rose's position as judge/editor (as have many of us) and I know that you make one friend and a hundred enemies/critics A thankless task.

[Roger Slater]

Whether or not it's his cup of tea, I don't really think that Richard Wilbur needs to be treated like a child and protected from reading this or any other sonnet. Perhaps someone ought to hurry over to his house and set the parental controls on his cable box?

Wilbur writes in an essay that the burden of writing a sonnet these days is that sonnets have such a long history that an educated reader cannot help but judge it against what has come before, and it becomes extra difficult to use the form in a way that is fresh or original. It could be that he would approve of the ingenious solution to the "been there done that" sonnet phenomenon employed by "Finale."