07-06-2014, 02:22 PM
I must agree with Tom, though it wounds to say he is right 
The form, which only applies to the first stanza and the last two lines of stanza two is iambic tetrameter with rhyming couplets. Such a form nearly always comes across as singsong as Ed noted. Only ballad meter is probably easier to write. That this simple form could not be sustained undermines any credence or even charity the writer could hope to receive from the readers.
"I was not aware of being preachy and didactic"
If one passes judgement on the entire history of the human race, or at least the last four thousand years as being a failure, how could one not be seen as preachy and didactic, not to mention condescending. At stanza two the writer rephrases the overused and inadequate phrase, "Money is the root of all evil." By stanzas three the writer has dropped this specific, and levels broad pot shots at humanity's failure or it's sins.
"do you think the content of this poem is worth working on the shape?"
That is ultimately up to the writer to decide, however I will say this was a well traveled road when the Babylonian empire was newly minted and has been done in a much more logically coherent fashion, and certainly with more elegance. If one has the skill, such well traveled paths can be revisited and infused with originality, however, I see nothing of that in this poem.
If one is going to write formal poetry, one should at least be cognizant of the frame (meter and rhyme scheme) one is going to drape ones words over. The writer should not be discouraged to hear this, everyone must learn the fundamentals of any art, be it poetic, musical, or visual. even were a person endowed with the greatest natural poetic talent, he would still need to learn these things, just as a great thinker must learn to talk and express his thoughts in an intelligible way.
Welcome to the site,
Dale
The form, which only applies to the first stanza and the last two lines of stanza two is iambic tetrameter with rhyming couplets. Such a form nearly always comes across as singsong as Ed noted. Only ballad meter is probably easier to write. That this simple form could not be sustained undermines any credence or even charity the writer could hope to receive from the readers.
"I was not aware of being preachy and didactic"
If one passes judgement on the entire history of the human race, or at least the last four thousand years as being a failure, how could one not be seen as preachy and didactic, not to mention condescending. At stanza two the writer rephrases the overused and inadequate phrase, "Money is the root of all evil." By stanzas three the writer has dropped this specific, and levels broad pot shots at humanity's failure or it's sins.
"do you think the content of this poem is worth working on the shape?"
That is ultimately up to the writer to decide, however I will say this was a well traveled road when the Babylonian empire was newly minted and has been done in a much more logically coherent fashion, and certainly with more elegance. If one has the skill, such well traveled paths can be revisited and infused with originality, however, I see nothing of that in this poem.
If one is going to write formal poetry, one should at least be cognizant of the frame (meter and rhyme scheme) one is going to drape ones words over. The writer should not be discouraged to hear this, everyone must learn the fundamentals of any art, be it poetic, musical, or visual. even were a person endowed with the greatest natural poetic talent, he would still need to learn these things, just as a great thinker must learn to talk and express his thoughts in an intelligible way.
Welcome to the site,
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.