[Glenn Wright]

White Orchids

White is the color of lies,
of innocent-seeming snow
shrouding the fall’s corruption.

          Colorless, scentless,
          the sterile petals are
          like blank pages ready to receive
          whatever fiction
          we press onto them.

Promiscuous brides
carried white orchids
like shields of purity
as they paraded to the altar.

          Men with secrets,
          pretending to be rich,
          sent white orchids,
          which promised no passion
          but impressed with their costliness.

Purchasing protection from painful truth,
I give you this pot of white orchids
and this poem as a proposal.

————————————
Edits:
L7: whatever fiction we prepare > whatever fiction
L8: to press into the, > we press into them > we press onto them
L10: carry > carried
L11: protectors > shields
L12: parade > paraded
L14: insecure, pretending to be rich, > pretending to be rich,
L15: send > sent
L16: promise > promised
L17: but impress with their price. > but impressed with their costliness.
L18: Praying for protection from perfect truth > Purchasing protection from perfect truth > Purchasing protection from painful truth
L19: I present you with a pot of white orchids > I give you this pot of white orchids
L20: and this poem instead of a promise. > and this poem as a proposal.

[Carl Copeland]

Hi, Glenn. I’ll get this started, though I feel almost as exposed critiquing non-met as I would writing it. Here are my random and unselfconfident thoughts:

I like the way “fall” does double duty.

“Prepare to” seems an irrelevant extra step.

“Pretending to be rich” and “but impress with their price” seem to be doing the same job. You could dismiss the latter without any loss of meaning (and only a minor loss of “p” alliterations).

Why do white orchids “promise no passion”? Because they’re not red roses? Because insecure men putting on airs aren’t passionate? Just wondering.

The poem’s paradoxical message seems to be: orchids (and words) lie, and mine too are less than truthful, and that’s the truth. I think I like that.

[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by Glenn Wright

White Orchids

White is the color of lies,
of innocent-seeming snow
shrouding the fall’s corruption.

          Colorless, scentless,
          the sterile petals are
          like blank pages ready to receive
          whatever fiction we prepare
          to press into them.

Promiscuous brides
carry white orchids
like protectors of purity
as they parade to the altar.

          Men with secrets,
          insecure, pretending to be rich,
          send white orchids,
          which promise no passion
          but impress with their price.

Praying for protection from perfect truth,
I present you with a pot of white orchids
and this poem instead of a promise.

The first thing that stood out to me was the form of the poem. I like the approach, but I don't know if bleeding the strophes into each other adds, rather than detracts. I'd prefer spacing, and more embellishment on the strophes that are right justified.

Also, syntax wise I've highlighted a few things you could consider changing.

The word 'seeming' could be replaced with another, stronger and more emotive/visceral adjective. 'Seeming' is fine, but it's taking up space that could be used with something stronger.

At the bottom where I highlighted 'a', you could omit this from the line and it would give it slightly more of a poetic flourish. There are a few other locations where you could do similar, but I'm on the fence about those ones.

The periods. My feeling is that they're only needed when you absolutely need to indicate the end of a sentence, but IMO the spacing does it better here.

[Glenn Wright]

Hi, Carl and Nick—
Thank you both for your helpful critiques.
I had in mind something like the relationship portrayed in Shakespeare’s “Sonnet 138,” based on pretense and lies, but undertaken by both parties with full knowledge and consent. The gift of white orchids—expensive but colorless and scentless—represents the financial basis and emotional emptiness of the arrangement.

Carl, you hit pretty close to my intent. I took your advice about “prepare” being superfluous. I intended the /p/ alliteration to suggest “pooh-poohing’ of any objection to the arrangement, or passionless “air kisses.” I think I might have overdone it. It occurred to me that “purchasing” was a much more apt verb than “praying” in line 18.

Nick, I took your advice on adding space between strophes. I kept the periods, I suppose because, as a former English teacher, I just couldn’t not do so. I also kept “seeming” because I wanted to make a parallel with the lovers, who seem to love each other, but are both really complicit in deception, as the pure-seeming snow is complicit in the coverup of corruption. I kept the “a” in the last line because I meant a specific vow rather than a general hopeful sense of promise.

I appreciate both of you sharing your reactions and well-considered advice.
Glenn

[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by Glenn Wright

Hi, Carl and Nick—
Thank you both for your helpful critiques.
I had in mind something like the relationship portrayed in Shakespeare’s “Sonnet 138,” based on pretense and lies, but undertaken by both parties with full knowledge and consent. The gift of white orchids—expensive but colorless and scentless—represents the financial basis and emotional emptiness of the arrangement.

Carl, you hit pretty close to my intent. I took your advice about “prepare” being superfluous. I intended the /p/ alliteration to suggest “pooh-poohing’ of any objection to the arrangement, or passionless “air kisses.” I think I might have overdone it. It occurred to me that “purchasing” was a much more apt verb than “praying” in line 18.

Nick, I took your advice on adding space between strophes. I kept the periods, I suppose because, as a former English teacher, I just couldn’t not do so. I also kept “seeming” because I wanted to make a parallel with the lovers, who seem to love each other, but are both really complicit in deception, as the pure-seeming snow is complicit in the coverup of corruption. I kept the “a” in the last line because I meant a specific vow rather than a general hopeful sense of promise.

I appreciate both of you sharing your reactions and well-considered advice.
Glenn

That's fair. On the second point I personally like the 'deviation' device (I just learned it's name recently). I see your point now, although I think you could deviate and use the word promise as a plural, noun (plural of vows). But given the rest of the poem I think most people would read it literally as a sense of promise.

I just enjoy borrowing out of Leonard Cohen's playbook and tearing up language a bit. IMO, it can add some character when you don't keep the language completely straight-laced.

[John Riley]

"Promiscuous brides" is odd and judgemental. I'm not saying that from some political pov. We live in a world now where it's weird/inaccurate to call a woman promiscuous. Women have sex. Men have sex. The word dates the poem.

Overall, there are too many words. "White is the color of lies" pretty well sums up the S1. I guess S2 is calling her unfaithful? If so the first two lines do that fine. S3 doesn't need the second line or the last line. S4 doesn't need the first line.

I assume there will be arguments that you need those lines but they're full of abstrations. When you use so many abstractions they become more of the poet's opinion. There is a finger-wagging vibration.

My half-penny. Hope it helps.

[W T Clark]

Glen, as with a few other poems I read through to understand this one better, I generally find your responses more interesting than the poem. For me, the idea of a relationship founded upon lies, but with each partner willingly going along into the painful insanity is one of the essential fascinations of people: Shakespeare knew this. Your explanation sustains my interest. The poem, on the other hand, is a rather abstract treatise on a slightly dated courtship ritual: it does not evoke what you say you wish it to evoke. It is abstract, vague, and a little didactic. I would keep the first line, then the three final lines, and write about an ACTUAL relationship (that is not one that IS real, per sé, but rather one that SEEMS to me real). Kill your symbols. Kill your didacticism. Write about the actual thing: pierce to its heart. Also, kill the horrible amount of plosive alliteration.

Hope this helps.

[Glenn Wright]

Hi, John and Cameron—

Thank you for your critiques. I changed the last word from “promise” to “proposal” to clarify that the speaker is proposing a kind of business deal rather than a truly committed, romantic relationship. The white petals of the orchid are like the pages of the contract. Each party is required to lie to the other. He pretends to believe her ego-stroking compliments and vows of faithfulness. She pretends to find him powerful and irresistible and is free to be promiscuous. (I find it interesting and a little amusing, John, that this word provokes so much pearl-clutching and accusations of being judgmental. If referencing the frequency of people’s sexual activities is to be condemned as judgmental, why does the antonym, “monogamous” not produce equally strong reactions? I guess Aldous Huxley already explored that in Brave New World. I pass no judgment. I merely state the terms of the contract.).

In deference to your observation that the domestic situation I describe seems dated, Cameron, I changed the verbs in the description of “promiscuous brides” and “men with secrets” to the past tense. I would point out, however, that domestic partners do still cheat on each other and keep secrets from each other about their finances, sexual orientation, and criminal histories. The internet has simply made keeping such secrets harder. I’m not trying to write about a relationship. There is no relationship to write about. I’m writing about the lack of a relationship. Your point about the /p/ alliteration is fair and well-taken. I made some adjustments to tone it down a notch.

I appreciate both of you taking time to weigh in. It is very helpful to know how readers react to my work.

[Nick McRae]

Originally Posted by John Riley

"Promiscuous brides" is odd and judgemental. I'm not saying that from some political pov. We live in a world now where it's weird/inaccurate to call a woman promiscuous. Women have sex. Men have sex. The word dates the poem.

I didn't see this initially, but it's a good point. To me it's not the word that's the issue, it's that it's associated with women and not men. I think you're generally ok if you associate it with both.

I passed over the line without thinking about it, but you are going to get alarm bells from feminists. And your poetry should be on the right side of feminist thought.

Overall, there are too many words. "White is the color of lies" pretty well sums up the S1. I guess S2 is calling her unfaithful? If so the first two lines do that fine. S3 doesn't need the second line or the last line. S4 doesn't need the first line.

I assume there will be arguments that you need those lines but they're full of abstrations. When you use so many abstractions they become more of the poet's opinion. There is a finger-wagging vibration.

I think John's pretty much right in summing up what most readers of poetry are looking for in a poem. Imagery and sonics, and without these you'd likely have a hard time being published.

But to offer a counterpoint, my personal opinion is that there is such a focus on imagery in poetry that it's starting to become too common. Imagery and invocation makes for a beautiful poem, but when almost all poets are focused on imagery, then eventually what everyone's writing has a kind of 'samey' feel. Good poetry that's like all the other good poetry.

If you want to be published and write for others it's absolutely the way you need to go, as it's what readers expect, but if you're writing for yourself I'd encourage you to work loosely with the rules. It's more fun and freeing that way.

[Glenn Wright]

Quote:
I didn't see this initially, but it's a good point. To me it's not the word that's the issue, it's that it's associated with women and not men. I think you're generally ok if you associate it with both.

I passed over the line without thinking about it, but you are going to get alarm bells from feminists. And your poetry should be on the right side of feminist thought. —Nick McRae
—————————————————————————————————————————-

Hmm. Don’t alarm bells go off in your head when you aren’t allowed to write anything for publication without an imprimatur from some panel of feminists? (or bishops? or MAGA school board members?). Just asking.

I’m not saying all brides are promiscuous. I don’t think a reasonable feminist would find grounds for objection. Women certainly do not have a monopoly on promiscuity. Nor do men have a monopoly on secrets. But men don’t carry white orchid bridal bouquets as emblems of virginity.