Chris, thanks for the privilege of reviewing your poem, today. As we both know the thoughts I am about to express are, of course, my own. I do hope and pray, that something I say will encourage you on your journey as a writer.
 Overall Impression: Relationships are very important to you. This is as it should be in my humble opinion. Heartbreak can indeed plunge us down "straight to hell."
 Suggestions: Chris, I have some rather strict ways of approaching rhythm with my own poetry. I try to be more exacting upon myself than I am on others. I hope this is expressed in the suggestions I am about to make. The following ideas are simply suggestions, and they are the ways I approach my poetry, but I do not hold others to the same standard. I hope these will be helpful to you in some way.
"It left my heart with a big rift" You have stated, that you are writing in iambic tetrameter. That's excellent! I love this meter! However, for my own purposes I try to stick with larger words on the emphasized part of each "foot." By larger I mean, I hold my standard of four or more letters to the word as being a near constant in developing the rhythm of my poems. This means I will occasionally use a word of three letters in the emphasis position, but rarely a word or one or two letters, only, such as the word, "a."
That being said, I am sure we could go to my profile and locate a poem in which I violated that standard. However, the point is that, this is my thought process as I create new poems. I try not to have a small word in a position of emphasis.
I hope this helps you to understand me better and I hope it will give you a different perspective for the increased strength of your own poetry.
"What kind of gift misery brings..." In this case the iambic meter is going to require, that we speak the word, "misery" as "mi-SER-y," whereas we typically pronounce it "MI-ser-y." I try to consistently place the emphasis of the word in my poem at the same place where I would emphasize it in prose. (Again, I do not claim perfection, here. I am sure we could find one of my own poems in which I violated this principle. It's just that, this is one aspect of my writing, that was drilled into my head by my dad at an early age and in a manner, that he intended to be a funny joke. He used to tell me, "Son, we need to put the right em-PHA-sis on the right sy-LLA-ble!" We would both burst out into a fit of laughter. I love my dad's laugh. Today's his birthday. He's celebrating in Heaven, I have no doubt.)
"What destroys its receiver's will?" This line is a little difficult to read in the stated cadence. Maybe, we could change it slightly. "For what destroys receiver's will?" This adjustment puts "what" in the position of emphasis, and it removes the word, "its," which is essentially an extra syllable in the cadence of the line. The result is poetic license, which retains the basic meaning of the line of poetry.
"Never to see them come again" Once again, this is where the emphasis is placed on the second syllable of "never," whereas in prose the emphasis is on the first syllable.
"It sees no smile on faces of men." In this line the plural, "faces" creates as extra syllable for the line, which jars the cadence a bit. Personally, "It sees no smile on face of men" retains both the cadence and the meaning through the employment of "poetic license."
 Punctuation/Spelling/Grammar: Just personal preference, but I think every line with the lead word of "What" should end with a question mark. I would end the first line with a comma, since the first two lines create the first question.
 What I Like: Again, I like the fact, that relationships are very important to you as they are to me. That is why a review of this sort in which I have been very specific with corrections and changes is 180 degrees opposite to the social element of my personality. (I care about relationships very much, too!)
My logical side has created strife in my friendships and working relationships at times because as a person with AD/HD and Asperger's Syndrome, I tend to be naturally very blunt, regarding right and wrong, especially in the area of English grammar rules and classical poetry standards.
However, I have learned in the past few years how to "marry" the two sides of my personality with a modicum of success. Maybe if I confess my own imperfections and show what I try to do with my own poetry, then something I write may be personally applied by the internal workings of the person for whom I am writing the review.
If something I have said, therefore, is helpful, then I am thrilled. If, however, if I am totally off-base, then please just chalk-it-up to me doing a little "out-loud processing." Thanks for looking on as I worked out a few things in my own thoughts.
Your point is excellent! WRITE ON!!!! |
|
| (4.0)
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
Overall Impression: This is a great bit of creativity. It tugs at the heartstrings. It certainly turns the old childhood game of "Good Guys & Bad Guys" on its ears. The old assumption is that WE are the "good guys" and THEY are the "bad guys." I have come to understand that Compassion for Others in the Truth is on the side of the "good guys" and Misinformation is on the side of the "bad guys."
Welcome to WDC from me and the "The Newbie Research Center" 
