[David Callin]

Now that the larches
have sickened too,
the machines move in

to tear them out
with orange clankings,
brutal and direct.

A swathe of pale
interiors advances
across the hillside

like those black and white
photographs of
houses in the blitz

with half a living room
indecently exposed.

[Glenn Wright]

Two very effective uses of language. First, “orange clankings” vividly evokes the bulldozers and earth moving equipment mowing down the dying larches, using onomatopoeia paired with the unnatural color. Second, “indecently exposed” as a closing line effectively makes looking into the living rooms of bombed houses seem like a violation perpetrated by a peeping Tom.

I am having some difficulty understanding the “interiors” that are advancing in a “swathe” across the hillside. I assume builders are putting a new subdivision in, but the only reason I can think of that we would see the “interiors” would be if the new buildings were modern, with lots of glass walls. It could also refer to the structures in an early stage of construction, although there wouldn’t be any personal belongings in them to make their interiors private or looking at them “indecent.” Could you help me to get a clearer image of the scene as you envision it?

I also like how one kind of blight gives way to another kind of blight.

[David Callin]

Thanks Glenn. I have led you astray, I think. There's no building or rebuilding going on here. It's just that we're looking into the newly revealed depths of the plantation, that we really shouldn't be seeing.

Cheers

David

[Glenn Wright]

I think the word “interiors” threw me. I supposed it meant the interiors of houses. How did you intend it?

[John Riley]

I may be wrong but what I read is an intense look at destruction. The larches and the trees and the house(s) are being destroyed. Perhaps for new buildings?

I always been of two minds about poems that state the theme in the title. Without the title this would mostly be well-done description of bulldozing and destruction.

Maybe a personal issue. Enjoyed.

[David Callin]

Originally Posted by Glenn Wright

I think the word “interiors” threw me. I supposed it meant the interiors of houses. How did you intend it?

I meant the exposed interiors - the interior, I suppose - of the wood. Does that work? Perhaps not.

Thanks John. Glad you enjoyed it.

Cheers both

David

[Matt Q]

Hi David,

I enjoyed this, and I read it as you intended. That these are interior views of the wood, that the poem compares to views of house interiors. Though I had to stop and think about it (not that I'm objecting to having to think!).

Having thought even more, though, I think there's something about "interiors", plural, that has the potential to confuse. After all, a wood has one interior. You're not seeing lots of interiors, so much as getting different views of the wood's interior as the machines move through. Maybe "interior views" would work? Or maybe some word other than "interiors" would work -- after all, the remainder of the poem makes the comparison clear.

Hmm, or just the singular: "a swathe of pale interior advances"?

One other thought, given "larches", maybe the machines could "march in", for the internal rhyme -- and you'd keep the 'm' alliteration. Marching seems apposite, maybe, for destructive machines.

best,

Matt

[David Callin]

Thanks Matt, Those are good thoughts.

I think that I might argue that there are interiors in a wood - it's not all the same, in every place (even in a plantation) - and different things might live in different parts of it - but I am thinking about that. I'll give it some more thought.

Cheers

David

David

[Matt Q]

Hi David,

I'm sure you can make a case for woods having multiple interiors, but that's not a conventional use of "interiors".

I think readers have been tripped up by your unconventional use of the plural here, and whether or not you can make a case using it in this way, it's the reason why readers haven't understood that part of the poem.

best,

Matt

[David Callin]

Thanks Matt. You're probably right (as I often end up saying).

I'll have a serious look at it again.

Cheers

David