SECOND EDIT: Sermon on the Destruction of Icons

[heslopian]

Jack,

I see no need to do a line by line as I only have three comments.

Having a fifth line in S1 sets up an expectation that the pattern will continue, especially as it is a very specific type of pattern. In the first four lines you have set up a stanza of ballad meter (which you continue in S2 and S3), iambic tetrameter w/ axax rhyme scheme (quite nice actually). The fifth line breaks that fairly well known pattern for a line that is somewhat awkward. The word paring of "Slid limply" strikes me as odd. for one, I am not even sure if that is possible. I am not sure how one slides limply. Although I guess it technically wouldn't, it seems as though the two should be exclusionary. I just have a hard time visualizing it. I think maybe part of the problem is instead of using 'through' "His mother's arms" you use "in". Saying "in" makes it sound stationary. So then I wonder how can something "slid in arms?" I'm not sure it can. Plus I'm not even sure this happened. I have seen paintings where she held him in her arms and he was limp, but I do not know if this is such a well known icon it warrants breaking from you ballad meter, especially as you do not continue it further on. It is a fairly common usage to add a fifth line to something like ballad meter as it seems to make the stanza end on a sigh, but to only use it once causes a major disruption in the poem. Anyone with any knowledge would immediately recognize the discrepancy and with less informed readers who might not notice at a conscious level, I think it would still have an impact on the way the poem effected them. It is often just such below the radar sorts of things that takes a potentially good poem and turns it into a mediocre one.

I'll get this out of the way before I forget it. I really think you could do away with capping the start of every line, and could probably lose the commas at the ends of those lines, if for no other reason it makes the reading easier.

OK, the third thing and then we are done. This line:

"I speak to thee from place of stone"

Despite that it is in iambs and does have the correct number of feet, this is probably the worst line I have seen you compose. Of course it should say,
"I speak to you from "a" place of stone." That would unfortunately screw up the meter, but your solution for this line cannot be allowed. You write all of these really nice lines of iambic tetrameter that actually come across as having weight (certainly a triumph in this form), but then you throw out this completely off pitch note in the middle of this nice melody. I'm sure you must have been aware of this before I pointed it out. (I don't know if KK mentioned it also. I generally do not read other peoples' critiques before I have written my own as I do not want to be influenced by them.)
Yet there it is, use whatever tired cliche you choose to describe it, "sticks out like a sore thumb," or whatever. It needs to be rectified post haste.

So there are my three comments. Not really a proper critique for "serious" but it's all I have at the moment.
Despite my objections I do like the poem. It is quite amazing that you have such good material with these few horrible things mixed in. Usually it tends to be the other way around. Nice to see you back.

Dale    

       

The line itself seems somewhat clumsy

Thank you so much for your thorough and honest feedback, Erthona This may sound strange, but I only realised I had five lines in the first verse after I'd read the handwritten version again, and couldn't find a way to trim it down to four without losing the cohesion of the last image (which, by the way, was based on Michelangelo's Pieta: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...d_edit.jpg). I'd intended the poem to be three quatrains. 
As for the "place of stone" line, though I completely understand how egregious it is now I've read your critique and re-read the line, alone and in context, I must admit I had no idea how awful it was. I guess I'm a bit of a dunce lately I will rectify it and use your great critique to forge an edited version of this poem. 
However, I simply cannot un-cap each line. Well, I can, but I refuse to, because that's how I like reading metred poetry, with capitals at the beginning of each line. Sorry, I know it's irrational and foolishly antiquated, but then so am I

---

Jack,

Your offering excels as a very effective diatribe from someone opposed to religious depiction. Your first two lines are gorgeous! If your initial stanza refers to iconic artwork, you could readily indicate that in your title by simply changing the word ‘Images’ to ‘Icons’ therein. However, that may not be what you want.

The ‘from’ and ‘too’ that you employ in stanza 1 calls for some sort of conclusion in my mind, but there is none. It seemed to need a subject/verb preamble or postscript during my read, for example:

‘…from sea to shiny sea and across continents in between…, ‘ sounds like an incomplete sentence without placing something like ‘we surged’ fore or aft. I wonder if swapping the period after arms for a colon would settle that, so that 'these are the idols' serves the purpose.

A ‘sack of rice’ implies a heavy and inert object to me. ‘Slumped weighty/heavy’ or something in that vein might be more apropos.

I’m ambiguous about the ‘ye old speak’ and first word capping methinks,’ but it does fit your theme. Nonetheless, in your close, are both ‘thee’s needed for repetition? The same goes for the ‘stone’s and the ‘will’s. If you want to avoid word duplication, you could substitute an ‘all,’ ‘rock’ and ‘shall’ for one of each, respectively.

‘Papist’ capitalized is an intriguing choice, since it is usually employed as a derogatory term for Catholics loyal to the Pope over the Church. It adds a poignant note to that last line!

See if anything in this critique aids you in your next edit. Cheers/Chris

Thank you for this awesome critique, Christopher Sea I actually prefer "Icons" to "Images" in the title, now you mention it, so I will change that. I also see what you mean about the incomplete sentence, and will see if a semi-colon can help. Finally, I see what you mean about the "thee"s and may just replace them with "you"s. Thanks again!

---

"... for five hundred years, during which religion was in a more prosperous condition, and a purer doctrine flourished, Christian churches were completely free from visible representations" - John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion

From Eve in vines about her legs,
Like fetters forged in Paradise, Truly excellent rennaisance imagery. I can see the whole picture in glowing oils
To Saintly men in grief reposed,
And God Himself a sack of rice,
Slid limply in His mother's arms. The from/to is there. End that journey. The problem is the contact adhesion brought about by the "and". The link to from/to, a single ticket, should not be made as a chronological continuation so  bring the  extra destination out of  the itinery. So: when God himself, a sack of rice, slid limply in His mother's arms. It is rather like saying I want go from Aberdeen to London and WHEN Dover.  

These are the idols John told us Watch your meter. Pesky anapest ends up stumbling in.
Would bring to folly naive hearts. Hmmm. Not sure what this inversion purpose serves, especially re. the last line of this stanza
If hammers be the rage of Christ, No comma
Let men destroy these morbid arts. This would be an unforced error in tennis. I cannot get the "morbid arts" to ring with anything but the plangent peal of the lonesome rhyme. Not being sure,yet, who the narrator is I am a little unhappy with the pontificating preachiness here.Does it matter...probably not if Moses, but quite a lot if Hes. By the by, I see no reason for splitting couplets in to ?A?A instead of AA. Your poem

I speak to thee from place of stone,
A pulpit fit for cloistered sheep,
And this dark stone will teach thee well: Stone me. Twice. Getting a bit "andy" overall. Though only two instances it is a much shorter piece than it seems due to the  line splitting. I don't think "teach" is the mot juste (are you la, dale? ), surely "tell" would do?
That Papist hearts will find no sleep.

First off, Hes,  nice work.
This is commitment verse with a strong sense of unyielding purpose. I cannot say it is enhanced by the crazy capitalising of every line...Slid almost becomes a comedic character " Hi, Slid, how's it goin'".
There are some grammatical issues which seem inconsequential, and are, but this is serious so see in-text.
Can I also make clear to those who would crit the crit, I would  normally have a hissy fit over the language thou hast lapsed in to occasionally but you COULD put this whole piece in to quotes...unless that final stanza is from an alternative narrator?
Again,
nicely fashioned,
tectak

Thank you for your thorough and insightful critique, tectak! The narrator throughout is a Protestant preacher during the English Reformation, not an atheist arrested-adolescent like me I will try to use your thoughtful and helpful criticisms well, my friend, and thank you again, for your kindness and honesty.