[Jim Moonan]

.

Originally Posted by A. Baez

To be clear, my idea was that Jim's paraphrased poem could read as an effective sardonic jab at those who "accept on faith the superiority of rhyme." Yes, egregiously absurd--in a (post hoc) intentional and funny way.

I agree.
I also thought, Jim, your paraphrased non-metrical, non rhyming poem about rhyme and meter being superior to all other forms of poetry to be ironic enough/satirical enough/sardonic enough to gain some traction. But what's really absurd, almost comical, is that by doing that you achieved to discount your claim of rhyme poetry being superior by writing a paraphrased version in free verse. There's something there in doing that. Something dysmorphic... But there is no easy escape from what many have said is (I'm paraphrasing): taut with hubris and tangled in its own harangue. Perhaps it would be more palpable as a single quatrain. Or a limerick.

It’s like someone declaring sonnets to be the best poetic form. Or Shakespeare to be the best poet. To each their own. And best of luck in translating what the imagination gushes so inarticulately. Any way you can is the best way.

But the part of the poem that I dislike the most is the title. I don’t want to dampen your enthusiasm for writing poetry. Just let you know (remind you) that serious poetry is a reverent thing that deserves humility and discipline (I should know) both in its composition and in its reading. If you are intending it to be satirical, ironic, etc., then that only ups the ante for making it work.

.

[Jim Ramsey]

Hi again,

This is all I am going to say further on this piece. I am disappointed by the many knee jerk reactions to my ambiguity. Three things that I insist to be true are: one, that far and away rhyming poetry has been much more belittled and subject to aspersions for decades now than has been free verse. Free versers are not some poor beleaguered minority who need to react with snide smug superiority. You already own the current world of poetry. Why can’t you be happy with that? I am relatively certain that day by day the poets of the past are being shoved farther out of sight. Why are current poets so easily insulted? Perhaps the issue raised strikes a particularly vulnerable nerve??? And two, does anyone know what “accept on faith,” means? That is what my N tells poets who have been fearful of rhyming to do. If you need help understanding the phrase, it means to believe something without evidence, without logic. Anyone calling for me to prove what my N says has no reading comprehension skills and their comments are not worth me further addressing. Oh, I also appear to have offended some who believe they have perfect rhyming skills. I can only say that I am happy for you. And three, no critique here has any legitimate business in trying to stifle subject matter. If you want to do more than help the poets here say better what they want to say, you should go find a chat room or a discussion board. Now, anyone that wants to sling more insults and have the last word, please do, because I am out of here.

[Roger Slater]

Jim, it is best to seethe quietly in private when the critics don't tell you what you want to hear. We all know what it's like to post our latest masterpiece, only to find that no one seems to appreciate our genius. But isn't that the risk we're supposed to be willingly taking when we post? Scolding your critics for having poor "reading comprehension skills", rather than thanking them for their time, seems a bad idea.

[John Riley]

Jim, the problem with the poem is it's much too abstract. I said that earlier then someone decided they liked it and I gave up. It's frustrating.

If you read any good or great poem it will be much more concrete regardless if it's met or nonmet. The met is better blah is a dead end. Write what works best for you. "The Four Quartets" would be no better in meter. Go read Frost or Heaney or any of the other memorable metrical poets. They turn the idea, the theme, into images and reflections that are grounded in what is seen and heard in the poem. Right now my favorite Frost poem is "Come In." There is death and eternity and acceptance of the unanswerable here without a single abstraction. If you want your poem to succeed work to make it graspable and not-graspable at the same time through sounds and images. That is the hard part of writing poetry.

One more thing, you learn from your bad poems not from the good ones. Praise is nice but that is it. When you post a mess and get feedback that is what helps if you can open your mind and control your feelings. Everything said isn't useful but some is and getting pissed-off blinds you to the good stuff.


Come In

As I came to the edge of the woods,
Thrush music — hark!
Now if it was dusk outside,
Inside it was dark.

Too dark in the woods for a bird
By sleight of wing
To better its perch for the night,
Though it still could sing.

The last of the light of the sun
That had died in the west
Still lived for one song more
In a thrush's breast.

Far in the pillared dark
Thrush music went —
Almost like a call to come in
To the dark and lament.

But no, I was out for stars;
I would not come in.
I meant not even if asked;
And I hadn't been.

[Jayne Osborn]

Originally Posted by John Riley

Jim, the problem with the poem is it's much too abstract. I said that earlier then someone decided they liked it and I gave up. It's frustrating.

John,
I seem to be the only person who likes the poem, and I told Jim. We all have our own thoughts, likes and dislikes (as I also said in my post) so I just don't understand why you "gave up" at that point. There's really nothing to be frustrated about. I like it and you don't. So what?

The Sphere wouldn't need to exist if we all felt the same way about everything!

Jayne