03-03-2015, 06:22 AM
I have little problem with the first stanza.
Wearing glasses
coated in the shimmering sheen of ignorance, ("tinted in ignorance")
we spoke in black and white,
and robed ourselves ("and clothed ourselves" robed often seems problematic for the reader. It is a complaint I have heard often in the past)
in creeds, in piety, in dogma, in
certainty. ("in creeds, piety, dogma and certainty.")
Together we disintegrated in centrifugal rays (I fail to see how this can apply unless you are trying to imply that the "rays" are all the youths. Still it seems poorly handled.)
impelled forth as the remnants of an expiring star,
colliding with both the achievable and insurmountable,
concurrently luminous and lackluster,
drinking apocryphal water from the wells of truth
as life
evolved into lives. (In other words "we" live provincial lives, then go into the wider world and get smacked by realities of life. This needs to be shown not told, especially as this idea is well covered ground.)
Constrained by reality and grasping
for a humanity not yet ours, (Seems like you are just throwing words together to get to the Cicero quote.)
echoing the words of Cicero,
“Esse quam videri.”*
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Although there are some technical things wrong with the poem, I do not think that is it's failing. This seems to be that the poem runs out of steam, so to speak, in the latter half and becomes unnecessarily wordy, but says little, as opposed to the first half which was a pertinent and concise extended metaphor. The line of demarcation seemed to be between talking about youth and talking about facing the realities of life. I am uncertain if this occurs because the writer is simply unable to come up with a similar metaphor as was in the first stanza, if the inspiration simply ran out, or if the author is simply lacking in the necessary experience to be able to follow through. Of course the first two are not easy to resolve as both involve the creative process, so it is not something one can think their way out of. The third involves needing more experience which could take years. Hopefully it is none of these and just an inaccuracy in word usage. Regardless, the trouble starts with "Together we disintegrated in centrifugal rays". Firstly why use such a metaphor, and secondly, light (rays) would not be effected by centrifugal forces any more than it is effected by gravity. The only reason light might appear to be effected by gravity is that massive objects bends space and light follows the straightest route, i.e., the curved space. I did do a search on "centrifugal rays" and the first thing that came up was this poem, "De amicitia”. Beyond that were a few pictures of "centrifugal rays". I do not think this is a very well known idea and "radial rays" better describes what you are talking about, at least it doesn't involve a contradiction. The point is the idea that is trying to be made, that is rays extending outward from a common center in straight lines, did not come across with the wording of "centrifugal rays". The thing is a substitute could easily be had that does not confuse and is more appropriate to the topic. Something like:
We spread out like the rays of the sun, full of energy, yet having no idea where we were heading.
Of course a better metaphor could hardly help what follows:
"...colliding with both the achievable and insurmountable, concurrently luminous and lackluster, drinking apocryphal water from the wells of truth as life evolved into lives."
Aside from this being seemingly endless, there are several problematic parts. "apocryphal" = false; spurious. i.e.,
"drinking false water from the wells of truth" -this seems somewhat contradictory-
"as life evolved into lives" This does not seem to refer to anything in this poem, nor even if it did, would it be a pertinent statement? Anything living has a life, so life and lives are pretty much inseparable. If it was written correctly as "lives evolved from life" does that make sense? The response would probably be, "Yeah, and...?"
For the purpose of the poem, a different translation of the Cicero quote might work better: "To be, rather than to pretend."
Although the idea of a single "humanity" seems very much from a position of being on the outside and looking in, as this is some idealization that does not exists. It is possible that the writer is confusing humanity with empathy. The speaker already has humanity if he/she is human, regardless of age. Humanity does not mean we are more truthful to ourselves or others, in fact lying is a very human trait. In the future I would suggest looking up any word of which there is uncertainty, as several words in this poem are used incorrectly, and some are used in disregard to the definition of the word.
Dale
Wearing glasses
coated in the shimmering sheen of ignorance, ("tinted in ignorance")
we spoke in black and white,
and robed ourselves ("and clothed ourselves" robed often seems problematic for the reader. It is a complaint I have heard often in the past)
in creeds, in piety, in dogma, in
certainty. ("in creeds, piety, dogma and certainty.")
Together we disintegrated in centrifugal rays (I fail to see how this can apply unless you are trying to imply that the "rays" are all the youths. Still it seems poorly handled.)
impelled forth as the remnants of an expiring star,
colliding with both the achievable and insurmountable,
concurrently luminous and lackluster,
drinking apocryphal water from the wells of truth
as life
evolved into lives. (In other words "we" live provincial lives, then go into the wider world and get smacked by realities of life. This needs to be shown not told, especially as this idea is well covered ground.)
Constrained by reality and grasping
for a humanity not yet ours, (Seems like you are just throwing words together to get to the Cicero quote.)
echoing the words of Cicero,
“Esse quam videri.”*
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Although there are some technical things wrong with the poem, I do not think that is it's failing. This seems to be that the poem runs out of steam, so to speak, in the latter half and becomes unnecessarily wordy, but says little, as opposed to the first half which was a pertinent and concise extended metaphor. The line of demarcation seemed to be between talking about youth and talking about facing the realities of life. I am uncertain if this occurs because the writer is simply unable to come up with a similar metaphor as was in the first stanza, if the inspiration simply ran out, or if the author is simply lacking in the necessary experience to be able to follow through. Of course the first two are not easy to resolve as both involve the creative process, so it is not something one can think their way out of. The third involves needing more experience which could take years. Hopefully it is none of these and just an inaccuracy in word usage. Regardless, the trouble starts with "Together we disintegrated in centrifugal rays". Firstly why use such a metaphor, and secondly, light (rays) would not be effected by centrifugal forces any more than it is effected by gravity. The only reason light might appear to be effected by gravity is that massive objects bends space and light follows the straightest route, i.e., the curved space. I did do a search on "centrifugal rays" and the first thing that came up was this poem, "De amicitia”. Beyond that were a few pictures of "centrifugal rays". I do not think this is a very well known idea and "radial rays" better describes what you are talking about, at least it doesn't involve a contradiction. The point is the idea that is trying to be made, that is rays extending outward from a common center in straight lines, did not come across with the wording of "centrifugal rays". The thing is a substitute could easily be had that does not confuse and is more appropriate to the topic. Something like:
We spread out like the rays of the sun, full of energy, yet having no idea where we were heading.
Of course a better metaphor could hardly help what follows:
"...colliding with both the achievable and insurmountable, concurrently luminous and lackluster, drinking apocryphal water from the wells of truth as life evolved into lives."
Aside from this being seemingly endless, there are several problematic parts. "apocryphal" = false; spurious. i.e.,
"drinking false water from the wells of truth" -this seems somewhat contradictory-
"as life evolved into lives" This does not seem to refer to anything in this poem, nor even if it did, would it be a pertinent statement? Anything living has a life, so life and lives are pretty much inseparable. If it was written correctly as "lives evolved from life" does that make sense? The response would probably be, "Yeah, and...?"
For the purpose of the poem, a different translation of the Cicero quote might work better: "To be, rather than to pretend."
Although the idea of a single "humanity" seems very much from a position of being on the outside and looking in, as this is some idealization that does not exists. It is possible that the writer is confusing humanity with empathy. The speaker already has humanity if he/she is human, regardless of age. Humanity does not mean we are more truthful to ourselves or others, in fact lying is a very human trait. In the future I would suggest looking up any word of which there is uncertainty, as several words in this poem are used incorrectly, and some are used in disregard to the definition of the word.
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.