[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by Mark McDonnell

Edit: to be fair to Nick, he probably wasn’t saying anything quite as blunt as that. But I don’t think his idea of chopping the poem up would add anything in this case. It would break that meditative sinking through the layers.

Yea, the revision I posted should really be viewed as illustrative, not an actual intentional revision of this poem.

But I do like writing my more prose like poems this way, making the natural breaks sharper and more clear, and sometimes just to give the poem a more interesting form. It's really personal preference.

I also felt the meditative sinking through the layers and can see the appeal of that approach.

[David Callin]

Terrific, John. I really like it, and don't think it's need changing at all. You are right to be pleased with this one.

Confession: I didn't spot that it was an AA meeting until Mark pointed it out. (I am assuming he is right.) I should pay more attention to titles, that would have done the trick, but I first read it as simply a reflection on religion, and a good one.

Cheers

David

[John Riley]

Mark, I wondered if anyone would pick up on the last step. I attend NA meetings, not AA. Here AA pays no attention to the traditions and is essentially another Christian cult. I'm glad you like it and the pace that does come from sitting in a meeting. Maybe I overreacted to the prose stuff.

Nick, thanks. I do think the prose comment is empty of help to the writer. It means nothing except the commenter has their own opinion, which is perfectly valid but not helpful. IMO.

David, glad you like it. As I said to Mark it's NA but the step reference is purposefully there.

[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by John Riley

Mark, I wondered if anyone would pick up on the last step. I attend NA meetings, not AA. Here AA pays no attention to the traditions and is essentially another Christian cult. I'm glad you like it and the pace that does come from sitting in a meeting. Maybe I overreacted to the prose stuff.

Nick, thanks. I do think the prose comment is empty of help to the writer. It means nothing except the commenter has their own opinion, which is perfectly valid but not helpful. IMO.

David, glad you like it. As I said to Mark it's NA but the step reference is purposefully there.

That's fair. I didn't mean to make much of a statement with it, but with the few I've posted myself I have found impressions useful. Basically how the poem is reading, which I've offered in a few members threads.

But in your case it sounds like you've heard it all with regards to the prose angle, so I can see how the comment doesn't tell you much.

[annie nance]

Hi John - and Mark.

Mark, thank you for pointing out what immediately became obvious to me AFTER I read your comment.

And John, I think your poem was just as good when I didn't get it as it. I will concur with omst of the positive things interated here, and come to NIck's defencse a little because it's fun to play around with the form and shape of a poem.

As a longtime churchgoer, I'm familiar with that basement full of crap, and never really thought about it in such a way before. Two little nitpicks with word choice, and please take with a grain of salt because maybe you have your reasons...

"the force of the lie dropping their eyes..." A force is a push or a pull, so I want it to say pulling their eyes or pushing their eyes down to the floor.

"gathered under a too-blue sky... a sky with no stars to triangulate"
You wouldn't expect stars in a blue, daylight, sky. So no fair complaining about no stars.

All in all, a solid poem. much to enjoy.

annie

editing in ... *Maybe I misread. Is the poem saying that the sky SHOULD have been dark, not blue at all?

[John Riley]

Anne, thank you. I’m pleased you like it. What you say about the ending is something to think about. Thanks.