Perfect Dusk

[tectak]

Thank you for the feedback!

[quote='RiverNotch' pid='188621' dateline='1428672258']
I have a neat little backlog of poetry here, most of them made since my last two threads here (this is without considering my less serious poem of late, which I don't plan to touch until I'm done with the subject it deals with; education's being a bit of an asshole right now). I've revisited one of those already; I'll revisit the other one sometime soon, with its older, less stringent version as the new edit (I'm a bit stuck with the current one). But for now, I'll go on ahead and present most of my backlog, starting with the ones I'll take the most seriously in revising. 

Sunlight falls all over the world No it doesn't

I'm rather surprised this line is being taken so literally. If you did not mean it to be taken "literally" I am at a loss to understand how else a bald statemental opener could be taken...unless you mean that something written "not literally" is acceptably wrong.

like the honey-water dripping
from the skin of a ripened peach
preserved in a jar of delight. What is a jar of delight and how do you get honey-water "dripping" in to it from an immersed preserved peach. Metaphors should clarify, not obscure

I see your point. I'll need to clarify that the peach was already taken out of the jar -- I could perhaps establish also the glass, the dish of the whole thing, so that the image of the dessert will be more concrete.  If you need to expend considerable mental effort on the clarification of a clarifying metaphor then perhaps it is the metaphor which fails. Falling sunlight dripping eludes me...

It mingles with the soft meringue What is "it"? You do not say...peach or honey-water( whatever that is) or sunlight. "it" is an indefinite article which decouples from any reference  very easily. Clarify.

It's sunlight. It's the only thing that can mingle so, plus I think it already very clearly follows from the subject of the earlier sentence.  Honey-water (whatever that is) cannot "mingle" but sunlight can? Help needed here. I can subjectively accept the mingling of flavours  (honey, water/syrup, dew) as that is a common experience but even poetically sun light mingles not in my meringues...at least, not literally, which I am surprised (it is the ONLY thing) you are implying. Touche

of syrupy dew carefully
folded into the heavy cream
of the chilly evening souffle. Should I know this souffle? You say "the", which is a definite article but I have not been introduced...so really, it is just an evening souffle to me.

Metaphor again, although in retrospect, a fairly bad one. I really have to rework this line, then. Punctuate to clarity. Is it a "chilly evening" souffle or a chilly "evening souffle"? Now  re-examine what you are metaphorically aiming for.

I cough into the syrup-drenched I can imagine but choose not to. Inappropriate contextually.

I lol at that. Perhaps I should change the transitioning device then, from "I cough" to something else?

Yes, please do. Cough and syrupy are not good together...expectorant aside.
horizon broken by the city
silhouette, a mass of greedy stone
hands with fingers and tumors of steel Some good imagery here but you go all Gothic too quickly. I feel your disgust and appreciate the comparison you are trying to make...but it doesn't gel so it ain't aspic, to keep in vogue

Hahaha! That was a big problem I'd had with the whole thing -- this really doesn't gel, but at the moment I can't think of anything appropriate to show the disgust while keeping to the central metaphor.

mingling their dirty, smoke-spewing tips mingle mingling...get a new word.
with the dusk's perfect confection. Hmm. Bit of a rush to the finish line...especially as I am a little queasy, myself.

The rush is a good thing, I think. Something completely disgusting, then a rather off-putting twist back into the beginning. Although if you mean that the grey imagery should be elaborated on some more, I'll look into that. The problem with extended metaphors is elasticity. It takes effort to stretch the thing and one can detect that the writer is tiring of the whole piece and just wants to reach the finish line. A good way to prevent this is to write the last stanza first. Oh, howls of dissent from the "words just flow from my pen" pretenders. If you have a great idea you will find the exercise quite easy. Ipso facto, if you find it difficult you have not got a clear idea of your great idea. Note that this is an exercise in writing uniform poetry...it is a discipline. Once you feel good about the "way it is going" by all means tinker away. Of course, the other option is to fashion the stanzas, one a day/week/ month(if billy) until you are happy or dead...but things get in the way of continuity unless you have a very sharp focus. Circle squared...think it, write it, right it.
Best,
tectak
PS. If you do not like what you have written, the chances are the reader won't, either. Perniciously, vice-versa does not follow

Hi,
Where to begin. This is the serious forum where it is unusual to find work relying for form on a simplistic syllable count without any regard for emphases. I think you need to develop at least some sophistication to avoid this piece sounding like a mathematician writing prose. If you write ANY text string and then count the syllables, divide by the  number of lines you would like then split each line into the given quotient syllables you get...well...this. Any odd syllables left over you can just chop out a modifier here and you have it; but do you want it? I do not.

There is a show of the emphasis, I think, but it is soft. I don't intend to keep it that way, of course, but I have to note that some of the already existing emphases are, at least in my opinion, strong enough to be kept -- "meringue", "carefully", and "cream", though soft in terms of emphasis, did make those positions to keep to the recipe, and "city", "stone", and "steel" were meant to be very urban. Cleaving to the syllabic verse I think reinforces the lyric quality of the first part -- the second part, perhaps, can do away with it, but the issue doesn't seem to exist there. I'll continue following this meter until it really isn't feasible anymore, and so far, it doesn't feel so.

The whole thing reads a children's recipe book metaphorically and amateurishly linked to a jokingly metaphysical emetic.

Frankly, even as a gooey diabetic dream it shows no knowledge a priori of the creation or understanding of what makes a good pud.Syrupy  meringues may work for me once but syrupy horizons just say lack of vocabuary.

You need to pare this back to a lean core metaphor and hang on some well thought through descriptive treats. The idea which you are trying to express is completely buried in hyperbole of the worst kind...that is, deliberate...to the extent that even you, the writer, cannot decide what to call it although I bet Burl Ives could sing it.

I see your point. As I noted before, I'll clarify the metaphor of the first part to be more cohesive (and, alright, less wordy -- more dependent on actual dabs of paint than crayon), and reword the second part to gel better with the rest, as well as not be so unintentionally cloying. I'll still try to hang on to the syllabic verse, though, with the deliberate aura of sweetness still alluded to somewhat, and with the key metaphor being maintained. I do hope my next edit works better, although I am glad the basis of the work already shines a fair deal. Thanks again for the feedback!

I am glad that you are glad that the "basis of the work already shines a fair deal". That kind of optimism is surely a precursor to a massive application of editorial  polish. I wait with anticipation and sunglasses.
As milo has already pre-emptively plagiarised my closing comment I can only repeat...good egg.
Best,
tectak