poetry critical

online poetry workshop

fast clouds moving in an aquamarine night

I had some half-thought situation in my head
where all I got was an image of her
talking, I think,
and I think she was talking to me--
it was such a fragment
and hardly anything
but it wound my mind somehow and I'd like to hang around
clouds passing by fast in an aquamarine sky
moon illuminates fills out
blue-green quick motion
without sounds
I'm not going to say her eyes are beautiful or anything.
but she has such a look in them which is so real it's
almost unarming.

20 Nov 02

Rated 9 (7.9) by 1 users.
Active (1):
Inactive (19): 5, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 10, 10

(define the words in this poem)
(27 more poems by this author)

(6 users consider this poem a favorite)

Add A Comment:
Enter the following text to post as unknown: captcha


i liked the title, but the poem was disappointing. there's nothing special about it that makes me say wow.
 — username

alright... I disagree with you, but I can accept that.
I think it's a great love poem, myself, in that, it's not focused on the floofy sorts of things about the girl in question, but more focused on the way the idea of her works on the narrator. line 12 is hilarious; I laugh every time I read it. that line constantly reminds me of leonard cohen's 'for annie' as well. the whole way this works reminds me of 'for annie', actually, with a little bit of mockery of all the floofiness often found in love poems. it's not about the girl, really, it's about love.

if it helps, I think the song 'we will fall' by the stooges is possibly the most accurate depiction of love I've heard in a song.

I think this is one of the best poems I've ever written.
 — semaj

i love all the poems i right. they are funny and grate.
 — unknown

haw haw.
I wouldn't have posted it, anyway, if I didn't think it was good. I didn't say username was wrong; everyone's entitled to their own opinion. it's just that it was given a low rating, and I was just explaining why I don't think it deserves a low rating. I think it's better than the other poems I've posted, though they are all rated higher than this, at the moment.

I definitely didn't say anything like 'this is the best poem EVER WRITTEN! it deserves only 10s!' I said 'I disagree with you, but I can accept that.' and then I explained why I disagreed. being as impartial as I can, by the way, which is actually a hell of a lot better than a lot of people may do.

I definitely didn't insult username. I like some of his poems quite a bit.
and it's not like I'm writing complete obvious claptrap and then trying to justify that as fabulous. plus, I would have the balls to not post anonymously about comments I make. and even if you had said who you are, I wouldn't really care. I'd rate your stuff just the same anyway.

I can justify my poem if I want, and hell, I gave good reasons for why I was justifying it. I realise that some people may have a problem with that on a very simplistic level, but authors often provide comments on their own work. just about every dvd now comes with eight tracks of commentary audio whether we need it or not; if it's a problem to have the commentary, well, read the poem, rate it, and then read the comments. with any poem. because the comments are just that; it doesn't matter whether the author says them or if they're from outside viewers. I attach myself to my poems; so what. if we attack people for attaching themselves to their poems, we'll have more and more people refusing to do that for fear of who they are being taken into account with their work. I know one prominent person here has done that, and I know another who is considering it. people at the top of the lists. attacking people shouldn't be what this place is about; it should be constructively critical. picking on commenting is just childish.

interestingly enough, you didn't decide to rate this, unknown poster. I'm curious as to what you would have given this piece, and I request that you do so impartially. I'm not attacking you here; I am once again justifying myself. if it wasn't you I'm sure it would have been someone else.

in short, the comments open themselves up for a dialogue, which is what they should be. comments should be constructive, which is why I put my explanation of why I like the piece. if you disagree with my analysis, say why you disagree with it. I'm allowed just as much to talk about my work as other people are. and I did it as impartially as I could. I do find line 12 funny, and I do laugh every time I read it. I like the imagery I used. it reminds me of 'for annie', which, if you don't know that piece, isn't necessarily saying that this is a great piece. I do think my poem is very good, however. so if you have a decent rebuttal to make, feel free to make it. but make it worthwhile, and don't just behave immaturely.
 — semaj

wow, i do not know how this drawn-out debate came about, but i assure you that i was not the unknown poster.

regardless, i do feel that i need to elaborate more, since you generally do in your comments on everyone's poem, which i find helpful and appreciate. also, bear in mind that i don't really know "poetry", so these are just really rudimentary intuition-oriented comments.

that being said, i understand that you think one of the strengths of his poem is its simplicity and its "realistic" way of portraying love. the idea may make sense to you, but it didn't jump out at me. maybe flowery is unnecessary, but i definitely expected the color imageries to serve as a metaphor or something (or maybe i just don't get it). as a whole, i feel you could develop this more and make it stronger, but you may think this is perfect the way it is. i didn't get the reference.

 — username

thanks for your comments username; I appreciate them.
the colour imagery was not really intended as metaphor, actually; it was more to illuminate the mood in the narrator's mind. the association between this girl and certain atmospheres, staring up at the sky in the night and getting kind of lost in it. I tend not to use metaphor so much, and instead like to play with the musicality of the words to create atmosphere and mood. that was the purpose of that imagery, really.
 — semaj

The last 2 lines are good, but the rest, I agree with username, is a bit piffpaff. It sounds nice-ish, but doesn't do a lot for me.
 — Moose

mm... I keep reading through it. and I suspect that no one else is going to ever like it as much as I do, because no one else is ever going to have my experience and logic to bring into it.

I still really like it, and I still think it's great, but I can definitely understand why other people just think it's too, 'blah, whatever.' I suspect, however, that at some point, someone else will read it and be in the right mindset and just say, 'wow.' I really can't change it at all, because it's perfect for this particular approach. very 'whatever, nothing special' for most other approaches, though. my comment on 'we will fall' by the stooges remains an important part of understanding what I mean by this particular approach.
 — semaj

I like what lines 12 and 13 have to say. It's just something about the way they're presented that doesn't sit well with me. The beginning is just lovely, though; lines 1-4 are deliciously simple. I don't like the ... but that it just one of my little 'things', I feel it weakens the image. Try breaking into a new stanza, maybe, if you want a pause or things to slow down.

I've waited on commenting and rating this, because I wanted to make sure I had the general feeling it gave me sorted out. And I have, and I like it much much more after some time away and then further contemplation than I did on the first read. It's lovely, nice work, as usual. Dinosaur noise.
 — allie

how about this?

 — semaj

Yeah, that reads better.
 — allie

Wow. I love this so much. The title -- the casual voice; line 12 is PERFECT. so is the 3-4 combo, and 7-8 had such a brilliant rhythm (I don't know if you meant for the by/sky rhyme or not, but it was perfect)... and of course the conclusion makes the poem. I wish more people would write simple, beautiful, and REAL like this... if I want to be bored there is more than enough out there. One of my favorites on the site. Each time I glance back up at it, it gets better.
 — unknown

I could do without the ... in line 4 though; much better a single period, I say.
 — unknown

More comments, from the same unknown: Line 7 is incredible. I love 9 and 10 -- 11 is decent. but it all works so well together. "almost unarming." oh god, it's beautiful.
 — unknown

actually, I'm going to take out that ellipsis on line 4 entirely.
not putting a period, though; a period is too definite a break for how I want it.
 — semaj

oh, wait, wait, it's a systematic attack of ones on me!
go cool guy!

don't forget, I've got a few other poems as well!
 — semaj

It was me earlier today, getting the all over uncommented ones. If it keeps up we'll all be anonymously posting, all of the time.
 — allie

hmm? I gave your poem a 9. (I was that trio of comments earlier). and allie, as much as there is to be said about the nice communitystuff that comes from non-anonymous banter, the nature of the site (the internet!) is anonymous. I could have posted under any user name I could think up, but what would that tell you about me?
 — unknown

I was just talking about people blanketing one author's poems with consistently low scores. Posting without a name fixes that. That is all I was saying. Dear lord.
 — allie

I agree, this is a great love poem.
 — heatherS

the poem doen't do into enough depth about the author's feelings. in the way the author put it.... well... the sky really doen't have too much to do with the girl they're talking about. There is no smooth transition between the girl and the sky... it doent make sense
 — unknown

Two comments in one. To the last commenter first -

The whole poem is NOT about the girl - this is a person reflecting on feelings. The poem starts with "some half-thought situation..." So your comment is, in fact, non-sensical.

J -
You have a way of dropping someone slap-dash in the middle of your moods. Fastastic. I wasn't crazy about 'moon illuminates fills out' only in that it catches me up and seems like a self-conscious word when the mood here is sort of dreamy. Maybe "moon ignites fills out" ?

Love how you poke your own love poem in line 12 *wink*

-- k
 — ka


am I sensing a pattern here? what with you, and writing good poetry.  

lines 12 to 14 are beyond brilliantly construed written anticipated delivered.  You make me loop on them and I catch myself reading and rereading this piece.

golf claps.  be proud of this poem.
 — beatbitch

i liked the title in this poem. and the flow in lines 12-14.
 — mrkhoo

I like the title and lines 12-14, mostly, but it is all a great poem.
 — Rixes

funny how i read all the comments without really finding common ground.  before i read them, this is what i was thinking-

you said, "I really can't change it at all, because it's perfect for this particular approach."

but if you could, in the interest of communicating more clearly what is definately difficult beyond nuance-

dont see why the title and l8 differ.
13-14, to me, sound like an embarrassed apology for the whole thing.  "so" following "such" sounds too conversational and teen-y.
"almost unarming" sounds nice but means nothing to us (me?).  we dont walk about particularly armed (within the this poems context) so "almost" does not sound threatening.  i love the word combo but it's distracting and meaninglesss here.  (it's hard to crit this!  you are so decided about it!)
i dont like it ending on 12, but dont know what else to put.

i think the heart of the poem is 9-11, and the subject the verb-image it tries to describe.  (the rest of the piece is toying with the drunken pleasure of that image.)  if that's so, then you would have to get that heart perfect.  and it's amazingly close by my judgement, but youre the only judge of the description of a thought-texture only you experienced.  if "quickmotion" is an improvement on "quick motion", then i think you can somehow take that wrinkle out completely.

i think my battery is dy
 — gnormal

Gnormal, those are awfully good suggestions and observations. The "I don't think I can change this at all" was written long ago when I was still rather in love with the piece and more naive with regards to poetry criticism. I am going to look at those suggestions and may revisit this to think of how they will affect it.
 — semaj

ive read this a couple times, but held off commenting, mostly because i dont really know what to say. i suspect you're right, no ones really going to get this the way you do. like the others, i like 12 to 14 best, the ending couplet is easily one of the best ive read in a while. yeah..i dont know. i guess i just cant feel this the way you do.
 — wendz

a poem with many points of entry
love how it comes together
im still sitting in my seet, but im clapping my hands
 — LucyMidnight

Few cliche's, but over all I thought it was very nice. Your wording is raw, which doesn't always work, mind you. But I liked it
 — CantTell

nice title, fits the poem in such a ... well, daresay poetic way but it is true. the images are startling, that last line closes it up nicely, in a neat ribbon i suppose.

anyway ... have always liked this.
 — listen