02-18-2016, 01:43 PM
I'll get into the fray when I have a bit more juice back in my system. A few notes:
Achebe, not sure how to remedy that. Maybe I don't have to? Be a good deal of fun to leave that abusive image in....
dale,
She knew he could, but Biblically speaking (I think for this sort of thing, barring, say, the presentation of Mary at the temple, you have to ignore all those other tales of Christ's childhood and go Biblical, since they're not, to the best of my knowledge, as commonly accepted), Cana is his first miracle. I'm not sure how public the actual wedding was, so I used my imagination (and a very slight correspondence with one of His parables) for it -- but yeah, curb probably doesn't work.
The dichotomy is there, but it's not necessarily there for a reason (at least not yet) -- those first three stanzas are stuff I've really been struggling with. (or maybe you're talking about something else -- I'm referring to the inclusion of the rhyme scheme, which also notes a subtler change in density)
I might not remove the "west-breast". It wasn't forced to me, and it got the job done.
I agree with the confusion on the long sentence of that middle section, I tried to include too much into one nice go.
Mark,
Lilies are? That's.....convenient, I guess. I remember the clear association with Mary (apparently, her tears became, are, lilies) but -- well, it works, anyway.
Curb....I wasn't thinking of a double meaning. Dammit, I'll clean that up.
Have to turn all those "the's" into "her's", then, except maybe for "tears".
They were complaining specifically about the wine. Again, that sentence needs a good overhaul.
I don't think I need to specify "river": for this incarnation, the correspondence between two rivers in one stanza, and (more importantly) the coming-out-of-Egypt and the whole Cana thing, should make it obvious enough.
I only knew of Saint Michael as the archangel -- he's called different outside of the Catholic Church, but he's still recognized so among the Jews, the Muslims, most of the Protestants, the Orthodox, and even those weird esoteric societies, becoming only someone different with some end-y thing like "of Syria" or something. Apparently, though, the Jehovah's Witnesses, Adventists, and LDS peeps see him as God or Jesus or something, but I do think that's too much the minority to even merit acknowledging, at least for this. Anyway, the archangel reference was a very Roman Catholic (but I'm not that, hehe) reference to him being the angel of death, and that's the level of ambiguity I'll accept as being a bit weird, since to the best of my knowledge, he has a much more limited role in the other, er, mainstream traditions -- I'll think of something.
It's less a metaphor, and more -- well, I'll just call it a symbol. I was in essence uniting past, present, and future in that one line, and since its ambiguity doesn't seem to be a specific issue, I'll neither change nor explain.
I'm sure the tools you'll need are less to be found in other books, and more in the unopened channels of this writer's mind (as dale so pointedly notes) -- but again, I'll need to recharge my creative testicles before getting back to this, so for now, there is only waiting. Massive thanks to all three of you for the comments!
Achebe, not sure how to remedy that. Maybe I don't have to? Be a good deal of fun to leave that abusive image in....
dale,
She knew he could, but Biblically speaking (I think for this sort of thing, barring, say, the presentation of Mary at the temple, you have to ignore all those other tales of Christ's childhood and go Biblical, since they're not, to the best of my knowledge, as commonly accepted), Cana is his first miracle. I'm not sure how public the actual wedding was, so I used my imagination (and a very slight correspondence with one of His parables) for it -- but yeah, curb probably doesn't work.
The dichotomy is there, but it's not necessarily there for a reason (at least not yet) -- those first three stanzas are stuff I've really been struggling with. (or maybe you're talking about something else -- I'm referring to the inclusion of the rhyme scheme, which also notes a subtler change in density)
I might not remove the "west-breast". It wasn't forced to me, and it got the job done.
I agree with the confusion on the long sentence of that middle section, I tried to include too much into one nice go.
Mark,
Lilies are? That's.....convenient, I guess. I remember the clear association with Mary (apparently, her tears became, are, lilies) but -- well, it works, anyway.
Curb....I wasn't thinking of a double meaning. Dammit, I'll clean that up.
Have to turn all those "the's" into "her's", then, except maybe for "tears".
They were complaining specifically about the wine. Again, that sentence needs a good overhaul.
I don't think I need to specify "river": for this incarnation, the correspondence between two rivers in one stanza, and (more importantly) the coming-out-of-Egypt and the whole Cana thing, should make it obvious enough.
I only knew of Saint Michael as the archangel -- he's called different outside of the Catholic Church, but he's still recognized so among the Jews, the Muslims, most of the Protestants, the Orthodox, and even those weird esoteric societies, becoming only someone different with some end-y thing like "of Syria" or something. Apparently, though, the Jehovah's Witnesses, Adventists, and LDS peeps see him as God or Jesus or something, but I do think that's too much the minority to even merit acknowledging, at least for this. Anyway, the archangel reference was a very Roman Catholic (but I'm not that, hehe) reference to him being the angel of death, and that's the level of ambiguity I'll accept as being a bit weird, since to the best of my knowledge, he has a much more limited role in the other, er, mainstream traditions -- I'll think of something.
It's less a metaphor, and more -- well, I'll just call it a symbol. I was in essence uniting past, present, and future in that one line, and since its ambiguity doesn't seem to be a specific issue, I'll neither change nor explain.
I'm sure the tools you'll need are less to be found in other books, and more in the unopened channels of this writer's mind (as dale so pointedly notes) -- but again, I'll need to recharge my creative testicles before getting back to this, so for now, there is only waiting. Massive thanks to all three of you for the comments!