[Roger Slater]

I think the turn is in the couplet. I know the cats were introduced in the first line, but they're not spoken of again until the couplet, and by then you almost forget about the cats as the poem becomes a lecture about the infirmities and indignities of old age -- and one can't really know where it's heading or what it has to do with cats. For me, at least, the return of the cats at the end came as a happy surprise, enough to constitute a turn.

I don't think the move to the second person is much of a turn, though, because the switch to "your" may seem, on first reading, to be a general "your," meaning much the same as "one," and it's only when we finish reading that we see that the poet was addressing the children directly. But even if it were clear from the start, I think of a turn as being more a turn in logic and thought, not just a shift in address.

[Christine Whittemore]

As everyone else, I think this is the best so far, it flows well and skillfully. I like the abrupt colloquialism "children don't know beans." The description of aging is good. (Am surprised to hear more than one person saying "crepey" skin seems close to the word "creepy" to them, as crepey is such a well-known--though still effective--adjective for old skin that I'd never have thought about "creepy" at all!)

I too am not sure about the "Before."

But most of all, I feel let down by the last line, which feels to me awkward somehow....

[Mary McLean]

I like the voice here very much. The verse is handled ably, and I agree with Roger about the turn. Strong contender.

[Tracey Gratch]

I think the title is significant - The Hoarder. Animal hoarding is a symptom of mental illness. Of course, the individual who hoards animals doesn't see it as harmful or dangerous. If this were simply a poem about someone who loved cats and had a bunch of them, I don't think the author would have chosen this title.

The poem very effectively offers the hoarder's perspective - both a justification to N's concerned children and a glimpse into why N loves these animals and the comfort they provide at this stage in N's life. Still, if N is truly a hoarder, in the clinical sense, N is not rational.

Though a couple others have mentioned the title and its potential implication, I seem to be alone in my interpretation. I may be going out on a limb, but I think this is a brilliant portrayal of an animal hoarder. Well done!

Animal hoarding is keeping a higher-than-usual number of animals as domestic pets without having the ability to properly house or care for them, while at the same time denying this inability. Compulsive hoarding can be characterized as a symptom of mental disorder rather than deliberate cruelty towards animals. Hoarders are deeply attached to their pets and find it extremely difficult to let the pets go. They typically cannot comprehend that they are harming their pets by failing to provide them with proper care.

[Janice D. Soderling]

I took a deep breath when I read Tracey's comment. How perceptive! And suddenly the poem has two possible interpretations, two perspectives--which, for me, raises it to new heights.

[Tracey Gratch]

Thanks, Janice, and I agree, having more than one interpretation does make the poem more effective.

[Rick Mullin]

I agree with ... Nemo. It is nice.
The lame "bats in the belfry" line...well, it never recovers.

And I agree with Maryann that the existence of a volta is questionable, despite the shift in addessee to "you" at the Hoyle-anointed start of line nine.

Rick

[David Danoff]

FWIW--this poem, more than any of the others, gave me a feeling of trust in the writer. There was an easy authority in the voice, and after just the first line or two, I felt like I could relax and enjoy the ride, without waiting anxiously for some awkwardness of meter or language to throw me.

With several of the poems, that was definitely not the case (clumsiness, foolishness, awkwardness abounding). And even in the other poems I liked, there was a sense of having to pause and adjust my approach at certain points, a need to accommodate myself to the poem. I liked them more as I gradually learned how to read them, but there were stumbles along the way. Whereas this one reached out and took me by the hand, and led me cleanly through on a first reading.

Not something I can really articulate more precisely, but I think "trust" is often a key part of our experience (and enjoyment) of certain poems, and it's something we don't really talk about. If you "trust" an author, for whatever intangible reasons, they can get away with a lot. (While if you don't, they can't.)

[Christy Reno]

I agree with several of the things that have already been said.

Regarding the difference in opinion about the "Children don't know beans," whoever said similar phrasing has been used in the U.S., yes. It gives the narrator a voice, but I don't think we need the forced rhyme to justify it. As far as the "breeding bats" I like the enjambment, especially with the "breed...bats" stressed, but the alliteration doesn't quite work for me given the cliché of what follows. It runs fairly smoothly after that. I feel like the images are appropriate to the audience although slightly exaggerated.

I agree with Tracey's comments about animal hoarding.

Also my vote is that it is a sonnet. I feel like there's a shift in L8 and L13.

I was bothered by the shift to "Before...," but I can get over it.

I can see what Nemo is saying, but I still think this is the strongest contender of the first 5 sonnets (all the ones I've read so far)--Eratosphere Bake-off or not.