[James Brancheau]

Each line should be able to stand on its own, within the context of the poem. An ideal, but one I unfortunately agree with (drives me mad). I don't believe in those pauses anymore. Though if it works out, not exactly against them. Liked this one and Postcard best.

JB

[Roger Slater]

Originally Posted by Mary Meriam

I understand Ross's point (not sure if I can explain it but I'll try). Some of the lines seem to break for the sake of the rhyme scheme alone. There's an awkwardness in the lines Ross quotes. Hearing the poem read aloud, you probably wouldn't notice.

This is an example of effective lineation:

Calmly, you walk the deck while down below
clocks tick toward their appointed time.

This is not so effective:

clocks tick toward their appointed time. You go
about your business, unaware of bold

I agree with that. But I think the issue has less to do with enjambment and more to do with the choice of which words to rhyme on. Letting a word be a rhyme word tends to draw more attention to that word and suggests a rhetorical emphasis is called for, but the word "go" here arguably doesn't deserve that extra attention and emphasis, so arguably it's a weak rhyme. But weak rhymes can happen even when there's no enjambment.

On the other hand, come to think of it, I suppose there's a greater danger of weak rhymes when there's enjambment, and I suppose enjambment is most successful when the choice of rhyme word seems rhetorically apt even though the phrase or clause continues to the next line.

[William A. Baurle]

Brilliant.

[Charlie Southerland]

How does one "let" a word be a rhyme word?

[Roger Slater]

I'm not sure I understand your question, Charlie. You let it be a rhyme word by using it as one of your rhyme words. I'm not sure what's unclear about that.

[Wells Burgess]

A marvelous sonnet to be sure. I do think some knowledge of the precise history is helpful, if not necessary. "Bold decisions, grand designs" works less well for me, or puts a different meaning into the poem, if the Axis blew up the ship. Wells Burgess

[ross hamilton hill]

Forget Fred, that was a joke to get your attention, pause being the common device in plays/scripts to signal a break in thought, my point is the sextet is a compostion as a whole, the rhythm is unceasing from the first line to the last and when said as a whole and particualrly when said aloud the metre breaks down on ATLAST, this is because if you ignore the meter and run on the enjambments, you eventually subvert the meter which is the melodic structure of the sextet. This has to do with meaning, to say the poem and impart the meaning, the emotional content, in particular, the effect is to create in the reader an emotional response. The lines must be said as they are felt, as they would be said in reality. Try it, the rhythm breaks down on the word 'atlast' because the author has ignored the natural rhythm of the sentences when he enjambed them, Shakespeare did not,; 'admit impediments' is a phrase that can be said within the rhythm of that sonnet, an 'ah' sound always signals a pause because it is allied with taking a breath, , 'you go about you're business' cannot be broken up into 'you go…about your business' and make sense as there is no emotional reason to pause after 'go'. It is not alright to run it on because the meter is there for a purpose, it maintains the structural integrity of the sextet, sooner or later you catch up with it and over run it. read it aloud, it's the only way you'll 'hear' what I'm saying. It may be just me, I maybe wrong but when I read this poem aloud I always stumble on 'atlast' and the above analysis is why I think that happens, I think the metre can't be just run on, willy nilly, but maybe i'm emphasising the spoken qualities of the poem, the sonnet as song. It's how i read sonnets, as much a musical experience, not simply an intellectual one, admiring the intricacy. I should have just agreed with Juster and said it's 'contrived' but I would like to see more sonnets be more emotionally powerful in the context of the spoken word.

[Rick Mullin]

Little things… The first line is dull and plodding IP. Ending line four on an adjective….not very strong. Also, the clocks tick toward one appointed time—multiple clocks suggest each has its own appointed time.

I like the sestet, other than the word “resplendent”. I like the repetition of the moon, and beauty of the moon doesn’t seem stale to me. Still… “resplendent”…

I like how the two stanzas end.. within the hold/held in store. But the first line could create a more effective entrée, I think.

[Ed Granger]

Originally Posted by Rick Mullin

Ending line four on an adjective….not very strong. Also, the clocks tick toward one appointed time—multiple clocks suggest each has its own appointed time.

I noticed the adjective line ending, too. There should, I think, be a good reason for its employment, and I'm not sure I see it here.
As to the clocks - I took it that they were part of a bomb or multiple bombs, and would therefore have been synced to the time the vessel in the poem was blown up.

[Elise Hempel]

This may sound naive -- and I'm not challenging it (I think my tone has previously been mistaken) -- but what's wrong with ending a line on an adjective? Is there an unspoken (or spoken) rule about it? I don't think I ever pay attention to that in my own writing. Are we only talking about ending with an adjective in a line with enjambment? Interested in the answer.