[Jim Ramsey]

[version 3]. s3l3 changed based on Alexandra's suggestion from "...and legs she gives the squirrels not peace or rest." to " ...and legs, she limps but gives the squirrels no rest." Also comma deleted after "laugh" and added after "legs" again at Alexandra's suggestion. Also, "given" which she found weak, was changed to "gobbling"

Rescue [or] Rescue Team

A shelter mutt, adopted out, returned...
I guess because she has a quirk or two…
okay, a couple more than just a few.
Her smiles belie the times when she was spurned.

When gobbling treats her eyes roll like a shark’s.
Her crooked teeth can snap a bone in half,
but nips and nibbles tickle and we laugh
when herded doorward toward her choice of parks.

She looks a cross of bullie and cattle dog—
with thirty shotgun pellets in her chest
and legs, she limps but gives the squirrels no rest.
Her poop attests some part of her is hog.

We fetch it reeking from the leaves and fescue...
oh what good luck she chose us two to rescue!
[or]
sheer luck she chose us quirky two to rescue!

edits of 010524: "partly" and "mostly" chnaged
edits of 010324: S2L4 "favorite" changed to "choice of" and S3L4 "partly" changed to "mostly."


[version 2]newest edit: "gleaming" changed to "reeking" in last couplet

Rescue

A shelter mutt, adopted out, returned...
I guess because she has a quirk or two…
okay, a couple more than just a few.
Her smiles belie the times when she was spurned.

When getting treats her eyes roll like a shark’s.
Her crooked teeth could snap a bone in half—
her nibbles tickle though and make us laugh.
She signals time to go with yips and barks.

She’s partly bullie, partly cattle dog,
has thirty seven B-Bs in her face
and legs. She nips at heels and gives us chase.
Her beefy number twos leave eyes agog.

We fetch them reeking from the leaves and fescue...
oh what good luck she chose us two to rescue!

[version 1]
Rescue

A shelter mutt, adopted out, returned,
assumed, because she had a quirk or two
—okay, a couple more than just a few.
Her smile belies her trials of being spurned.

When getting treats her eyes roll like a shark’s
and though her teeth could snap a bone in half,
her gentle nibbles only tickle, so we laugh.
She signals need to go with yips and barks.

One half’s from bullies, one, from cattle dogs,
has thirty seven B-Bs lodged in her face
and legs. She limps, but gives the squirrels a chase
and yields up number twos the size of logs.

We fetch them gleaming from the leaves and fescue.
It’s purely luck she’s chosen us to rescue.

[Carl Copeland]

Hi, Jim. Tigger is a legend, and I like this tribute. Here are a few thoughts:

I don’t think “assumed” is great. You mean “presumably,” which doesn’t fit, but there must be many alternatives—“no doubt” comes to mind.

I have no problems with S1L4 metrically, but I still think it would read more neatly if you dropped “of.”

I guess it doesn’t matter whether a shark’s eyes actually roll in pleasure, but the image is an odd hybrid of enjoyment and savagery. It may be just what you want. In any event, I’d recommend a comma after “shark’s.”

You could easily cut “gentle” or “only” from S2L3 to shrink it back to pentameter. Nibbles are normally gentle anyway.

No one’s going to misunderstand, but it still bothers me that “has” in S3L2 lacks an explicit subject. Would you consider something like:

She’s half from bullies, half from cattle dogs,
has thirty-seven BBs in her face

I dropped “lodged” to make it regular IP, but an anapestic substitution at the end of the line is fine too.

In the last line, I suppose you mean “It’s our good luck” or something of the sort. “It’s purely luck” sounds like it was random chance.

Thanks for adding “fescue” to my vocabulary!

[Simon Hunt]

Hi Jim--

I'm glad you have Carl's response before mine because this isn't working for me at all. Perhaps it will be helpful or interesting if I try to say why not...

First, it's such a hard subject to write about effectively. That bond with a dog is so intense (I'm more cats, but, you know, same...), but it's mostly non-verbal. And maybe, like Tolstoyesque happy families, we all love our pets the same. So it's really hard to bring the non-verbal creature to individual life in, like, words, without devolving into cliche and sentimentality. Robinson Jeffers gets close, maybe, in "The House Dog's Grave."

As I read this, almost anything here could be said of almost any dog, certainly almost any shelter-rescue. The specific ancestry of Tigger is interesting, but it's just a guess, right?, and doesn't really go anywhere. In a revision, I would wish to know MUCH more about the only thing I find genuinely arresting here: the BBs in the face.

Second, I'm not saying one can't write a poem about dogshit, but the emphasis on turds here doesn't do Tigger or the poem any favors. It's gross, awkwardly funny not cannily funny, and (again) doesn't individualize the dog (they all stink and drop logs...). Fescue/rescue is a clever rhyme ( I thought so when I saw it in another poem around here, too), but I remember picking up your big shits is not a tender tribute.

Third, there are awkward syntactical moments here, like assumed and subject-less has that make the poem feel unfinished.

I feel like a cad saying this. Nothing here means I don't empathize with the experience of loving and losing an animal companion. I certainly do. If this poem is about a recent loss, I wish you all the best in coming to terms with it

[Carl Copeland]

Originally Posted by Simon Hunt

I'm not saying one can't write a poem about dogshit, but the emphasis on turds here doesn't do Tigger or the poem any favors … picking up your big shits is not a tender tribute.

I’ll admit to being squeamish about the poopiness too, but people and families are so different in how they talk about such things that I just figure I’m an old prude and recuse myself.

[Marshall Begel]

Hi, Jim. Thanks for sharing this fun poem!

"Trials of being spurned" doesn't flow right for me. Maybe pains instead of trials?

I agree with Carl's "nibbles tickle" and that "It's purely luck..." is kind of ambiguous. To make sure the reader knows you're ending on a positive note, maybe end with "And thank our luck..."

I'm also not following the BBs - did bullies shoot some, and cattle dogs the rest? Maybe just "37 scars upon her face"?

[RCL]

Jim,

As I read other responses to your sonnet, it seems I could be off since no nits I have are made like mine. But this was my first response:

This flows smoothly top to couplet. It might be even more successful with S3 as S2? S3 seems to be a reason she’s been spurned. Reversal shouldn’t be a problem since you’re using the Italian rhyme scheme in all 12 lines. I’d be interested in what you and others think of that.

Line 9 isn’t clear to me: are there 2 dogs? If not, do you mean, “She’s bred from bullies and from cattle dogs”? So, “them” in the couplet could be “her”?

Good sounds throughout, my first grin was at “nibbles only tickle” and its echo in the next line with “signals.” Sharp delivery of the couplet amplifying the “good feeling” tone throughout.

Happy Know Year!

[Jim Ramsey]

Hi Carl,

I am always glad when you stop by to get my brain and words back on the grammar track. Your tips and other ideas have been implemented. I wasn't sure anyone would remember Tigger from last December except maybe those who were complaining i was ruining the sphere with his presence. I admire your memory. I decided to be ornery and post another dog poem this December. I decided to keep it short though out of politeness to those who may be tired of my dogged devotion to animal poems. Thanks for the comments.

Hi Simon,

You make some good points. I've tried to give the dog in this a little more personality, although the form is short and I can't get too detailed. I've also tried to fix some of the awkward wording that you and other commenters pointed out. The poem of course is more about the Ns though and their can't-help-themselves trope of loving the new dog. And yes, like the saying about sex, there's almost no such thing as a bad dog, so they (dogs) automatically add sentiment, as do cats. Tigger (Corky) was a past friend for whom poems were posted last year. This poem is about Corky's replacement. She came from a foster home that took her in after she stayed a long while in a shelter and had experienced a couple trial adoptions that failed. She was undergoing long term heart worm treatment. The "B-Bs" are actually apparently shotgun pellets. We don't know their story. The foster mom said there were thirty seven scattered over her front half based on X-rays. We had one leg looked at due to a pronounced limp and the X-ray showed five in that one leg. We can feel several others lodged elsewhere under her skin. She is terrified of thunder and fireworks and gun shots, I guess for good reason. And yes, there's some guess work in pinning down her heritage, but it's fairly easy to see. Thanks for the help.

Hi Marshall,

Thanks for your suggestions. I'm glad you found the poem worth reading and commenting on. I liked your good suggestions but for now have mainly used them as inspiration to make other changes along the same lines as you propose. As info, "bullies" is a common name used for pit bulls, which are often a mistreated breed in need of rescue. Some people fight them and chain them in yards.

Hi Ralph,

Thanks much for the feedback. I've made some changes. I'm going to keep examining my opportunities for improvement. Your idea for switching the stanzas around is interesting and I will ponder it. "Them" in the couplet is , sniff, sniff, what she leaves behind for bagging up and taking home. Smells are not as common as visual images in poems and I thought I would do the world of poetry a favor by incorporating one—I probably need to sub some odorous word for "gleaming" though.

[Alexandra Baez]

Jim, I like some of the changes you’ve made in your revision. I like the new ellipses in S1. Its last line is much better, more natural-sounding. I like the colloquial feel and gentle humor of this stanza. In S2, the breaking-up of it into three sentences gives me more time to process, which is good. The phrasing is clearer here, too, as it is in the first two lines of S3. However, there should be a comma after “tickle” and another after “though.” And I personally prefer the last two lines of S3’s original version—“limps” is a more distinctive detail, and the bisyllabic break of “squirrels” is nice.

I’m of a mixed mind as far as the “number twos” reference. I have to admit your original version of this made me laugh, it was so vivid. But your current version is less direct and feels rhyme-driven. (I see you’re trying to accommodate the now-singular “dog.”) I, too, am a fan of the couplet and its unusual rhyme. I like the blunt and evocative directness of “reeking,” and the more personal tone of the last line is nice, too. I also like the humor of praising your good luck in getting the dog, following on the heels of evoking her stinking excrement!

I see Ralph’s point about the stanza ordering, and I'd tend to agree, although of course, a problem would arise in switching Ss 2 and 3 because the current 3 leads into the couplet. But maybe you can figure something out.

I do agree with Simon that some of the details you’ve provided about the dog are less distinctive than others, and that this brings a bit of distance between the poem and the reader. I can feel the distance ebbing and flowing in line with the relative distinctiveness of each element, including how it’s represented—for example, in S2, I rather enjoy the vivid image of the dog’s eyes rolling like a shark’s—while a lot of dogs may do this, I’ve never heard it expressed this way (and I didn’t even know that sharks’ eyes roll!). Similarly, “nibbles tickle” may describe a lot of dogs, but at least the language is fun and makes me remember similar experiences. But L4 in this stanza stands out as giving the most generic information, and delivered in the most generic way. So here, I feel more pulled away from the poem.

Looking forward to seeing any additional ideas you may bring to this.

[Jim Ramsey]

Hi Alexandra,

Thanks for your usual careful attention to a sphere poem. I can see how you have thoughtfully compared the first two versions of this one. A few things in regards to your comments.... I say in this that a shark's eyes roll, but actually I think they have an inner eyelid that closes to protect their eyes when they attack. It looks like the eyes roll and i thought that description was close enough but I have wondered if I should be more accurate. I've thought of switching s2 and s3 but as you realize shown by your comment, the ending couplet depends on its proxomity to s3. Also, I see my turn as being the somber reality of the shotgum pellets surfacing in the beginning of s3 where turns usually arrive, though my turn may really be in the last couplet with the switch there on who is rescuing whom. I've posted a new version trying to make the details about the dog a little more quirky and interesting like Simon and you have suggested. I don't know if I am getting there yet. There are so many things that I could say but my brain gets constrained by the form! Free-versers like I primarily see myself as being are so wrong when they think rhyming verse is easy!

[Alexandra Baez]

Jim, ah, I hadn’t perceived this as a sonnet before. Of course, definitions of the form have expanded tremendously in recent times, but to me, the focus of the poem is more on generalized description than an argument/shift. (I agree that the couplet is more of a shift than the octave, because you’ve foreshadowed the octave’s details, albeit gently, in S1’s “more than a few quirks.” That being said, the rescuer/rescued flip has become a common conceit in general parlance, so even it is not much of a surprise.) But there’s nothing wrong in bringing in a few sonnetty elements like octave and couplet turns into a poem that doesn’t really aspire to be a sonnet. This poem holds together well, and that’s the important thing.

There are so many things that I could say but my brain gets constrained by the form! Free-versers like I primarily see myself as being are so wrong when they think rhyming verse is easy!

Well, formal verse folks like me find counterbalancing pluses about the constraints. They can keep one focused on what one is trying to accomplish while stimulating the imagination into finding new, creative things to say and ways of saying them that one would never have thought of otherwise. And, when done well, one gets a natural big boost in impact through the magic of the rhythm and sounds. To me, it’s totally worth it—I’ve almost never produced a free verse poem that’s worth a bean, and it’s not for lack of trying, although some people do much better sans constraints than I. But it’s also important not to violently shove a particular subject into a set form that doesn’t suit it. There’s flexibility in formal verse for creating one’s own forms. You’re entirely right, in any case, that rhyming (and metered) verse is far from easy. It’s often downright maddening!

Okay, you could have pulled the wool over my eyes about the sharks’. I’m thinking that since the poem is whimsical anyway, that a little bending of the truth here would not be amiss, even for readers who know the details about sharks’ eyes. (Those may be few.) I'm wondering about "given treats," though. "Given" is a bit prosaic, and isn't it really right before the treats are given that dogs spaz out with the eye rolling and such? How about "offered"?

I like the way you’ve tightened this poem up generally. Great changes in S2 Ls 3-4. I really feel the “herded doorward” part, and it’s so much richer than what you had before, expanding the imagination into the parks in waiting! Nice assonance and consonance in that phrase, too, which adds a bit of gentle humor. It’s amazing how much more naturally these two lines flow now that you have one sentence bridging them. I’d just remove the comma after “laugh.”

I like the changes in S3, too. I’d just add a comma after “legs.” (You can use the one removed after “laugh.” Lol.) Again, I like the smoother flow. Ending the first sentence later on while reinstating the explicit contrast between the pellets with the dog’s vigor, helps. And bringing the squirrels back returns more concrete variety—it’s more fun than just revisiting the owners again, and of course, you’ve moved that bit about herding them, which had an internal redundancy before, up to S2, while, yay, losing the redundancy. Just one thing, though—how about

and legs; she limps, but gives the squirrels no rest

? I did like the detail of your initial “limps,” and “no peace or rest” is a tad redundant. L4 is now funny in a new way, and I suspect that its more oblique reference to the poops’ enormity may palliate the aversion that some readers felt toward this passage’s prior versions.

So, Jim, I think this has become quite a solid, self-assured, and charming poem. It’s been fun to watch this progress!