A Perilous Liaison

[tectak]

Hi tek (may I call you 'tek?) yes- again thank you for your frank and constructive critique. This response is going to ask for more of your opinons. I have struggled with the opening since starting to write the piece... (it started life as 'slave/mistress but it was a historical piece then; Black / white didn't work and neither does African/European and you've just added more reasons as to why! As the piece changed I focused on the story of a relationship characterized by many differences, colour, age and background (culture) being the three I want to portray. However 'Old / young' wouldn't work and trying to encapsulate cultural differences in two words doesn't strike me as easy either. So I'm still looking for that killer, convincing curtain raiser.
Re the rest of S1 - thanks I've already changed my original in line with your comments.Two worlds,together, knelt
beneath the common cross
L1 of S2 needs to be changed - I'm not after homogonousness (sic) so I hope my edit will clarify.I felt that dangerous homogeneity (is that a word?) was exactly what you were aiming for. The complete mixing of two souls,cultures, personnas?
S3 I've already worked on because the cliches were poking out all over. I'll look at this S again.
You ask why 'viaducts'? Well everything I know about the spanning of great open distances (notalot) involves supporting a bridge with a series of linked arches, ie. a viaduct. Can you make alcantara fit? See Stalker below.I prefer the viaduct image, perhaps each arch represents a solution to one of the problem areas, ie. either colour, age or culture. That image hasn't made it into the poem yet but the word 'viaduct' stayed! It also shares a vowel sound with 'dust'.
I wonder if the line 'Neither bravura nor chutzpah' (direct link with a prior statement) would be better as 'Neither chutzpah nor bravura' -Nei/ther chutz/pah nor/bra vu/rah: definitely better than "nei/ther bra/vu rah/nor chutz/pah is there a guiding principle I can refer to here? (Wondering if no. of syllables in the two prime words should dictate anything?) Or is it simply folly to try and integrate two such unusual words into the same poem twice?
I wonder if my defence of the final line will hold any water with you... I'm of course aware how the line clunks - I didn't intend that but when I read my first attempt I thought, well this last line needs to depict the complete breakdown of a relationship that started so sweetly (nb the 'sweetness' of their breath in S1) so as well as using an inversion of S1's content (sweet breathe - halitosis) I thought the hopelessly stumbling form of the final line would reinforce that image.
If it doesn't work so be it, but I'd appreciate your opinion on both the idea and (if you didn't see it before) whether you're opinion might be tempered a little and/or can it be done more effectively?Leaving a "bad taste" in one's mouth I could metaphorically accept but though (and because) you make a point of mentioning their sweet breath earlier the contra-point is lost as it does not seem to be a natural follow-on. There are medical terms for "bad taste" and if you can find the one that suits( a kiss deterrent, for example), this would, I think be far more moot......halitosis stinks

Best,
TECtak