[Joe Crocker]

Well that reaction was surprisingly positive. I’m always hopeful when I put poems up here that the things I’ve worked at will come through. It’s a good feeling when they do. Part of me suspects that we may all be on a high after absorbing Mark’s Ulysses and some of that wellbeing has spilled over onto my thread.

Roger. So glad you liked it. Is it metrical? I don’t know. It certainly isn’t strictly metrical. I did feel I wanted to loosen the bindings a little. It doesn’t follow any set structure but my words tend naturally to come out Iambic, and it has plenty of rhymes and half-rhymes. I deliberately mixed them up a little so that they were less predictable. I think some rhymes can be too glaring (eg hisses/misses.) And one way of making them subtler is to put more space between them. I come back to Stallings' manifesto “Rhymes may be so far apart, you cannot hear them, but they can hear each other". I also like her point that “Rhyme can also free a poem from fixed line length. A rhyme lets us hear the end of the line, so lines may be of any metrical length, or even syllabic, and still be heard." So, unusually for me I didn’t deliberately count beats when writing this but relied on reading it aloud to see if it sounded right and could stay. But I know that others won’t always share my sense of rightness. I don’t have a strong opinion under which heading it would more comfortably sit.

Max. It isn’t quite metrical but it does use some words more for their contribution to rhythm than to meaning. So yes “ My hearing aid won’t help. It hisses” could benefit from being cut to “My hearing aid hisses.” Then again, the “won’t help” adds an agency to the inanimate object. Not only does the hearing aid not help, it stubbornly refuses to help. This seems to be a common theme between us grumpy old men, that the technology and crutches we now rely on are secretly ganging up on us.

By “Unsighted” I was meaning the verb where one’s view is being obstructed by some unwanted object (eg the hat of someone in front of you at a concert). I am broadening its definition a little here but not so wide as to mean “blind”. I mean it more in keeping with a curmudgeonly sense that if I can’t see clearly then it is probably someone or something else’s fault (eg my string of rubbish cheap spectacles, that I sit on and bend and which go out of their way to hide themselves from me)

The final stanza does have a different tone. As Carl says, It is a sort of sigh.

Thanks Ralph, I see, like Max that “unsighted” doesn’t work well for you either. So I may need to rethink it. Thanks too for picking up on the "wondering" at he end. I’ll think about the question mark too. I have only recently started to think seriously about old age – its always been something that happens to other people -- realising how often I now defer to my children’s opinions and accept their help and that of strangers.

Carl. Thanks again for your close reading. Always helpful. “Worried after” isn’t a UK idiom. I think it is my own confection. It sounds a little odd, but I hope it makes sense, and manages to capture both meanings -- to be concerned about, and to gnaw at. Nothing is guaranteed to suck the atmosphere out of a happy company than being asked to explain a joke. The joke resents it, and the questioner will regret it.

I had noticed, after the fact,that “nearer now” in the penultimate line could refer to the chatter on the previous line as well as the coming shadow. I decided that I liked that ambiguity.

Anisometric, Mono no aware. ?! Those are new to me. Had a quick google but still not quite sure. But your explanation of a sigh and a kind of acceptance is nice.

Mark. I was worried thar this may be seen as another in a series of sad old git poems, and am glad you picked up on the comic element. Once upon a time I was quite competent in the world. I am (was ?) a scientist, played with computers, wrote code, but never quite got used to smartphones. My (grown) kids still laugh at my mounting frustration using them (“aww look, he’s using his fingers!”). Does the phrase “he’s all thumbs” mean “dextrous” now?

Nemo, John, many thanks too for your support.

Joe

[Joe Crocker]

Hi Jim

Just noticed that we cross-posted. Thanks for your take on it. Yes, I am intending a sadness at getting to that point in life where I need to accept, or at least get used to, failing physical and mental capacities. I certainly get a feeling of isolation in company when I’m not keeping up.

Tercets. I could tidy things up, regularise the stanzas, line-lengths. But I do quite like the unevenness that keeps things slightly unpredictable, a more faithful reflection of the actual thought processes, hopping from one idea to another. (I find I get more ADHDish these days)

“A wind is blowing way above my head”. There are more interesting ways of saying this, but I wanted to use the vernacular because it echoes the title “losing the plot”. When someone is explaining something in very technical language that we find difficult to follow then you might turn to your neighbour saying “well, that went way above my head.”. As I get older, more things go way above my head. Once, when I had more confidence in my intellectual abilities, I might presume the speaker was being pretentious. Or I might think, that with a little more application on my part, I could get the sense of it. These days, I’m more likely to just let it go.

Hey ho

Joe

[Alexandra Baez]

Joe, I seem to be enjoying this new version more than the original one, but without being able to see which parts were changed, and only being sure from memory of some parts that have not, I can’t say how much of my shift in perception is due to changes in the poem and how much, to changes in my consciousness.

Anyway, that’s an interesting choice to place a period after the title—I don’t think I’ve even seen that done before!

I see that apparently “anisometric” is a synonym for “heterometric.” I learned something new!

Initially, I was put off by the poem for the obvious, explaining quality of parts of it. I was feeling like this is one case in which the n actually sounding fully like the person he's depicting himself as—doddering, simple-minded--is not a successful approach. These phrases stand out most blatantly:

I struggle to engage.

Often I am looked at like I’m odd.
I misjudge the tide, marooned or overwhelmed.
Often, yes, I simply smile and nod.

However, there are some passages and phrases that convey the mentality of the n, but in a way that still engages this reader’s imagination and sympathies:

My hearing aid won’t help. It hisses
sibilants that camouflage the shape
of words I thought I knew.

Wayward, they are looking to escape,
homesick for a settled point of view.

And then there are also some parts that, while they have varying degrees of linguistic interest, puzzle me in terms of meaning:

unsighted

Yes, like a couple of others--I just never knew that one of this word’s definitions was “prevented from having a clear view of something”! I guess it should really be on us, your audience, to know or learn this definition, rather than on you to circumscribe your vocabulary to meet ours. It’s a neat word to use here with this meaning—your instinct to present all the n’s deficiencies as if they were largely attributable to something else is funny and rings so true of old curmudgeonly people—or even just curmudgeonly people generally.

My crouching cockeyed glasses see the distance out of true.

“The distance out of true”?

The list of things to do is curt and misses
out the things I used to do.

Do you mean that the list misses, or that it misses out on--or something else?

That spark will not be worried after.

Despite the quaint phrasing, I suppose I did get both of your intended meanings out of this. This “custom confection” would probably be more assimilable by readers if you were to clear up the other points of potential confusion.

And jokes just laugh among themselves.

Similarly to Jim, I was thinking it might be nice to have a more colorful word than “talk” here, one that’s more specifically aligned with jokes. However, till I read his comment, I was blindered by the notion that one generally ought not to repeat a word in a poem, or at least not too soon, and thus had overlooked the possibility that he noted of simply using “laugh.” I think it’s actually a great idea—the effect in this case would not be one of redundancy, but of accumulating power. And yes, the sonics would be nice.

Interesting—in the US, we typically say “over my head” rather than “above my head” to convey something that escapes one’s understanding. So I didn’t pick up on the idiomatic meaning here as much as was intended, although some of it did come through, wispily. Also, for some reason, I hadn’t noticed the little grammatical slubs in this stanza until I read others point them out. I.e., one would expect the elements following the colon to represent possibilities rather than certainties, and thus for there to be at least a question mark at the end, if not one also after “now.” However, if the sentence were not intended as a question/s, there might be an “about” after “wonder.” I see that you like the ambiguousness of “nearer now,” but the comma before and after it do obscure the list structure you seem to intend in this line (the two items in the list being “chatter” and “shadow”). Normally, I’d place a semicolon after “chatter” if “hushing shadow” is the intended referent of “nearer now,” or after “now” if “chatter” is the intended referent. However, this part is not a big stumble for me, and for what it’s worth, I’d tend to consider “chatter” to be the referent of “nearer now,” since the former appears before the latter.

I do like the feeling of this last stanza best of all--how it wisps off into vastness--and especially that perfect last line. This stanza seems to have better competition now from other areas of the poem (due to your revisions) than it did initially, though--which, of course, is a good thing.

[David Callin]

I like it too, Joe. As a fellow hearing aid wearer, I can empathise strongly. And I now have two pairs of glasses, used for different things, so I'm with you there too.

So I think it works very well.

Cheers (I said CHEERS!)

David

[Joe Crocker]

Alexandra, thanks again for the work you have put in on this. Really helpful to know what you like and like less.

I seem to be enjoying this new version more than the original one, but without being able to see which parts were changed, and only being sure from memory of some parts that have not

I think I have revised this much less than you think. In fact the only thing I remember changing is the full stop after “head”, which Carl suggested.(It seemed such a small thing that I didn’t reference it underneath). But it’s good to know you saw more in it the second time around.

that’s an interesting choice to place a period after the title

That was just a typo. Oops

Initially, I was put off by the poem for the obvious, explaining quality of parts of it. I was feeling like this is one case in which the n actually sounding fully like the person he's depicting himself as—doddering, simple-minded--is not a successful approach.

That's interesting to know. And I get what you mean. You are less fond of the flatter, balder statements.

And another question mark next to "unsighted". For me, when someone is described as "unsighted", I wonder what they have been unsighted by. But I can see that next to "deaf" and "forgetful" it may be easier to understand it as "blind".

“The distance out of true”?

By "out of true" I'm thinking of what builders and woodworkers say when they think something is not properly square. Askew.

Do you mean that the list misses, or that it misses out on--or something else?

I just mean that the list these days contains fewer of the things that I have been used to doing in the past.

Similarly to Jim, I was thinking it might be nice to have a more colorful word than “talk” here, one that’s more specifically aligned with jokes. However, till I read his comment, I was blindered by the notion that one generally ought not to repeat a word in a poem, or at least not too soon, and thus had overlooked the possibility that he noted of simply using “laugh.” I think it’s actually a great idea—the effect in this case would not be one of redundancy, but of accumulating power. And yes, the sonics would be nice.

Thanks for making me take a second look at Jim's suggestion. I agree. It is a good idea. I guess I dismissed it first time for the same reasons as you. Apologies Jim.

in the US, we typically say “over my head” rather than “above my head”

Come to think of it, that construction is probably more common over here too. I may replace "above" with "over". It would disrupt the iambic meter a little, but I did say I wanted to loose the bindings didn't I?

And should "nearer now" refer to the far-off chatter or to the looming shadows? I had thought that the version written added an interesting ambiguity but can also see that it may just be irritatingly unclear.

Thanks for your help Alexandra

[Joe Crocker]

Cheers (I said CHEERS!)

Thanks David. (No need to shout )

[Alexandra Baez]

Joe, oh, that’s interesting that you hadn’t changed much since the original. More evidence for me that rereading is vital!

You are less fond of the flatter, balder statements.

Ah, yes! That’s a much better way of putting it than I did. I admit I was surprised that so many people gave these a pass when usually such effects are not tolerated—perhaps it is the context in this case, who the n is.

But I can see that next to "deaf" and "forgetful" it may be easier to understand it as "blind".

Ah, yes, excellent point.

By "out of true" I'm thinking of what builders and woodworkers say when they think something is not properly square. Askew.

Oh! That’s a term that’s new to me, then. It’s another neat usage.

?

I just mean that the list these days contains fewer of the things that I have been used to doing in the past.

Is this a British usage of “misses out”? The only context in which I’ve ever heard this expression is, for example, “Those who don’t attend Friday’s gala are going to miss out on the chance to win a new BMW.” I.e., I’ve only ever heard “miss out” followed by “on” in a phrase that indicates others have or will be enjoying the experience in question.