03-23-2018, 03:25 AM
The writer has a clever use of rhyme, yet the logic in poem's language needs to be tighter. Readers follow the poet's lead. For example:
‘Tis known to one that’s seen an apple fallen from a tree
That he with great intentions, at best brings a fate to be
At first, those lines threw me.My immediate thought was about Issac Newton, but the next two lines brought the notion around to family. If the first lines refer to parents, why not. "Those with great intentions," instead of "he" ? The third line refers to two people, so why not a plural referent in the previous line.
So learned the gentle John and Jane, accurséd ones of light
The moment when the apple of their eye escaped their sight
Why are they cursed? To have oversight? The reference to "light" implies their knowledge. Sadly, the second stanza leaves the reader in a lurch. The reference to the "girl like Aphrodite," which is a bit cliche, pulls readers into a series of lines that make the poem leave the contemporary family and with a lot of vaulted language enter what seems some kind of fantasy.
“Jean, my John”, said Jane, with passion pouring from her pores
“Finally, my love, there’ll be a thing that’s mine and yours”
And so was born a girl like Aphrodite from the sea
And with a stroke, a heart, a mind and soul were made to be
A flower that gave color to the canvas of the earth
Seemed holier than all before, this god-forsaken birth
Behind green eyes a vision of a vague and cryptic truth
The sadness of a happy song, the fleeting flight of youth
The emptiness of promises, the falling of the tide
Were painted on the cherub’s face as she naively cried
Since the writer mentions those lines are prelude to longer piece, I am content to see where the story goes. One caution - throwing around rhyme can tangle readers in abstraction.
‘Tis known to one that’s seen an apple fallen from a tree
That he with great intentions, at best brings a fate to be
At first, those lines threw me.My immediate thought was about Issac Newton, but the next two lines brought the notion around to family. If the first lines refer to parents, why not. "Those with great intentions," instead of "he" ? The third line refers to two people, so why not a plural referent in the previous line.
So learned the gentle John and Jane, accurséd ones of light
The moment when the apple of their eye escaped their sight
Why are they cursed? To have oversight? The reference to "light" implies their knowledge. Sadly, the second stanza leaves the reader in a lurch. The reference to the "girl like Aphrodite," which is a bit cliche, pulls readers into a series of lines that make the poem leave the contemporary family and with a lot of vaulted language enter what seems some kind of fantasy.
“Jean, my John”, said Jane, with passion pouring from her pores
“Finally, my love, there’ll be a thing that’s mine and yours”
And so was born a girl like Aphrodite from the sea
And with a stroke, a heart, a mind and soul were made to be
A flower that gave color to the canvas of the earth
Seemed holier than all before, this god-forsaken birth
Behind green eyes a vision of a vague and cryptic truth
The sadness of a happy song, the fleeting flight of youth
The emptiness of promises, the falling of the tide
Were painted on the cherub’s face as she naively cried
Since the writer mentions those lines are prelude to longer piece, I am content to see where the story goes. One caution - throwing around rhyme can tangle readers in abstraction.