Edit 1:
The face's dual spark
Keeps a swift lark.
That flits between us:
To scratch an itch,
To give feelings to affirm
and break our prison walls.
A pupil's dark middle,
Shines a light and a warmth,
And the invisible discourse
Promises a common source.
If we stare into a stare
Or glare into it,
We'll all be laid bare
By the split-second intimate.
Yes eyes swear.
I swear it.
When I look into your eyes
I feel the lark alight.
Original:
The dual spark
A swift lark
Promises the bridge
To itch the itch
Feeling to affirm
Not soft but firm
Crash through the wall
Budge unbudgeable ball
Light so bright
In eye's middle night
Breathes warmth
As home's hot hearth
Uncountable lanterns
Speak loss and returns
Scream envy and yearn
Wink long and take turns
Glare into the stare
Or stare into it.
You'll all be laid bare,
split-second intimate
Invisible discourse
does promise a source.
Yes, eyes swear until hoarse:
Of course there's a source!
Posts: 10
Threads: 3
Joined: Aug 2016
The dual spark (is this an allusion to eyes?)
A swift lark
Promises the bridge (what bridge)
To itch the itch
Feeling to affirm
Not soft but firm (forced rhyme is distracting, this is evident throughout)
Crash through the wall
Budge unbudgeable ball (i would rework this, cliched)
Light so bright
In eye's middle night (unclear imagery)
Breathes warmth
As home's hot hearth (is as necessary here?)
Uncountable lanterns
Speak loss and returns (lanterns speaking loss? returns screaming envy?)
Scream envy and yearn
Wink long and take turns
Glare into the stare
Or stare into it. (consider changing to Stare into it!)
You'll all be laid bare,
split-second intimate
Invisible discourse
does promise a source. (this sentence works well, begins to create a clearer image)
Yes, eyes swear until hoarse:
Of course there's a source! (the rhyme of discourse, source, hoarse and source is not very strong/doesn't add anything to the poem)
A promising poem with conceptual strengths and weaknesses. Immediate thoughts on the first read reading move to revisions in syntax and diction before concerns surrounding message and image are entered into. I would suggest the insertion of at least some end stops or breaths in the first six couplets as at times I felt unsure of the pace and rhythm which hindered my understanding of the picture. The forced rhyme is unhelpful and overly staccato and the attempts at building setting and character are lacking in detail/reliant on adjectives and repetition. I propose you re-read the poem with a clear image of your intention firmly grasped in your mind. Don't overthink the structure or rhyme, instead, aim to find the most natural progression of words.
Regards,
poet-rice
edit* forgot to regard the title (which is good and provide excellent context, also enjoyed the I swear/Eyes Swear play)
Posts: 5,057
Threads: 1,075
Joined: Dec 2009
i'm guessing sex poem but i can't be sure. it feels like it's trying to be clever but it doesn't work for me. i have no idea what an unbudgeable ball is. most of the poem eludes me. a suggestion would be to make it more accessible to the reader, at present it's a struggle.
(08-10-2016, 04:01 PM)gmc Wrote: The dual spark
A swift lark
Promises the bridge
To itch the itch
Feeling to affirm
Not soft but firm
Crash through the wall
Budge unbudgeable ball
Light so bright
In eye's middle night
Breathes warmth
As home's hot hearth
Uncountable lanterns
Speak loss and returns
Scream envy and yearn
Wink long and take turns. it may just be me but this doesn't make a lot of sense.
Glare into the stare
Or stare into it.
You'll all be laid bare,
split-second intimate
Invisible discourse
does promise a source. [promises]
Yes, eyes swear until hoarse: 
Of course there's a source!
Posts: 1,827
Threads: 305
Joined: Dec 2016
First sentence: A run on sentence full of dependent clauses. By its nature inherently nonsensical.
The dual spark a swift lark promises the bridge to itch the itch feeling to affirm not soft but firm crash through the wall budge unbudgeable ball light so bright in eye's middle night breathes warmth as home's hot hearth uncountable lanterns
speak loss and returns scream envy and yearn wink long and take turns glare into the stare or stare into it.
Second sentence:
"Glare into the stare or stare into it."
As glare and stare are similar words, it makes as much sense to say:
Stare into the stare or stare into it.
Third sentence: reversed syntax
You'll all be laid bare, split-second intimate invisible discourse does promise a source.
Fourth sentence: "eyes" cannot swear, unless this is Popeye speaking and "B" does not follow "A", i.e., " of course there's a source!" does not follow from "Yes, eyes swear until hoarse". Nor does "A" lead to, or create "B".
Yes, eyes swear until hoarse: of course there's a source!
Overall, this poem seems more about making rhymes and possibly word play, than having any inherent meaning. This is certainly something I find fun to do, although I don't think it provides much for the reader.
Best,
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.
Thanks so much for the feedback guys. The poem is *supposed* to be about the magical effect of eye contact, but I obviously did not convey this at all haha.
Posts: 7
Threads: 1
Joined: Aug 2016
"The face's dual spark
Keeps a swift lark."
Good. Nice imagery of the nature of transience; however, the rest of the poems structure doesn't really follow this rhyming pattern--which can sound strange. This is especially obvious when it jump to the second verse:
"That flits between us:
To scratch an itch,"
It tries to keep the momentum, but comes off awkward. Then it transitions to...
"To give feelings to affirm
and break our prison walls."
It feels like it want to rhyme, or the reader expects it too, but the structure is too unsure of itself to be a coherent idea.
Edit 1:
"The face's dual spark"
So it is one face that is providing a singular spark? The spark itself consisting of two different parts?
I'm not sure if it should be, 'face's' or 'faces' But that conclusion may just be because I suck at rules of grammar and need to go back to school!
"Keeps a swift lark."
But if I analyzed this correctly, Then the dual spark is the only thing keeping the swift lark between the two?
The lark being a symbol of merriment and happiness of spirit, I'm assuming only comes around when both are together, as they seem to be happiest that way.
I can appreciate this sentiment.
"That flits between us:"
Yet the lark is swift, so the two people must only be together for a fleeting moment, or maybe they are knowingly rushing the intimate moment simply to scratch the itch and be done with it? If so, I think that was very clever. I can conjure up an image of the lark flittering between the two faces as sparks fly haphazardly in the air. Don't know if that's cliche, but it just says more about me than it does about you. I envisioned blue sparks, by the way.
"To scratch an itch,"
Honestly, I don't like the scratch an itch, bit. maybe because the rhyme only barely touched, Their connection forced, which works against what I believe you're trying to achieve, Because The beginning tone of the piece seemed to give off a lightness, and a feeling of being in flight. Adding the itch part, suddenly rips me out of the air and grounds me. It just seems misplaced, or simply unneeded. not sure if you just liked the way it sounded, But it fell a bit flat for me.
Also
["That flits between us:
To scratch an itch,
To give feelings to affirm
and break our prison walls."]
This portion together, has the word 'To' in it far more than I personally would like.
It just reads clunky in my case. Maybe revise that part? It makes the flow become choppy.
Now a note on the meaning of the words
"To give feelings to affirm
and break our prison walls."
I get lost around this point. Is the lark giving affirmation? or is it the feeling of some sort of unity giving affirmation that happens when both people are together as one, making them complete and without doubt of self? What is breaking the prison walls? The lark? the feeling of affirmation or is it because the two people are intimately invading each other in a good way, In a trusting way?
I am asking all these questions because this part is extremely lacking in clarity.
"A pupil's dark middle,
Shines a light and a warmth,"
This comes across like you're really trying very hard to evade using the word
'eyes'. Maybe in an attempt not to sound overdone like the many, many love poems already in existence. But sometimes, the simplicity of a stripped down and naked word is what translates best.
However, I do like the second line.
"Shines a light and a warmth," it gives a feeling of being by a warm hearth, the comfort and assurance of its heat, lulls the gazer into a smooth moment of almost perfect contentment.
"And the invisible discourse
Promises a common source."
I don't understand discourse being invisible. Usually discourse is an open struggle of communications, two differing parties that express their misunderstandings in a frank, matter of fact way. Discourse is not invisible at all. at least not to me. Even if the discourse seems passive, or possibly unspoken, It still manifests itself through body language, It can fill a room and become an entity of flawed movement using us as vessels no matter how small the discord, It always has a face.
The second line read to me to be a filler line, only existing for the sake of rhyme.
Something that sounded nice in thought and tone, but added nothing to the poem
Actually both lines by themselves, Are very jarring and are disruptors that snuck inside this poem as if you had a break in thought, Somehow the two lines have become examples of discourse for the entire piece. Had they not been there, this poem would be more cohesive and make more sense, Especially in regards to how you decided to end the poem.
I just don't think that you are intentionally setting out to show a representation of discourse in way of subtext? That's just how I perceived it as a reader
"If we stare into a stare
Or glare into it,
We'll all be laid bare
By the split-second intimate."
This section shows me just how important your theme of connection is, The eyes always taking lead role. And why not? Eyes are brilliant communicators. They provide a connect with people on a 'deeper level'. Everyone knows this. That is why it can be easily cliche. It's something I still do all the time.
But I did very much enjoy this small bit of severe abstraction that holds a place in this poem. It is actually my favorite part. It may feel too overworked for some, but I like the inception you have going on. It gives the feeling of falling deeper and deeper into the gaze of a lover, perhaps. This is the part of the poem where I don't mind falling, Because it works wonderfully with the overall theme and feel of the piece. It ties in perfectly with the beginning.
"By the split-second intimate."
Is where I think the poem should have ended. It does well in referring back to that dual spark, And validates its importance. I do wonder, If in doing so, This poem may end too abruptly? If you feel the same, I would try to rework, or even throw away:
"Yes eyes swear.
I swear it.
When I look into your eyes
I feel the lark alight."
With this last bit, I'm very aware that you may have felt the need to bring the lark back around in an attempt to give this poem a sense of completion. The lark, In my opinion, already did its part. I don't feel it should make a second appearance, Especially with the lines speaking of discourse. It no longer belongs until you show a reconciliation in the poem, And I don't think you did that.
If you did, I wouldn't have that concern. It would even be interesting to explore
further how the lark, Not being the driving device which serves to move this poem,
(Made evident by he title and eyes/stares being a recurring theme.) could play an equal role.
I think you have some good ideas here. But many of them don't flow well when
attached to each other. I would experiment a bit more.
Sorry If this critique was more than you wanted or needed. Still not sure if it's considered an appropriate critique for this section of the forum.
The face's dual spark
Keeps a swift lark.
That flits between us:
To scratch an itch, This line about the itch seems a little confusing. What is the itch? What is it about staring into someone's eyes that brings a sense of relief?
To give feelings to affirm Is this the scratch, and is the itch the need to feel affirmed?
and break our prison walls. The prison walls reference seems a little vague.
A pupil's dark middle,
Shines a light and a warmth,
And the invisible discourse
Promises a common source.
If we stare into a stare
Or glare into it,
We'll all be laid bare
By the split-second intimate. The flow seems a little off on this part and choppy.
Yes eyes swear.
I swear it.
When I look into your eyes
I feel the lark alight.
This poem immediately reminds me of that moment one makes eye contact with a stranger. In that moment you come face to face with another conscious piece of flesh and blood. It invokes how surreal it can feel to look into someone's eyes and how it makes one feel vulnerable.
Posts: 27
Threads: 5
Joined: Jun 2016
Your edits helped convey the meaning of your poem much better. Couple of notes below:
(08-10-2016, 04:01 PM)gmc Wrote: Edit 1:
The face's dual spark
Keeps a swift lark. - could be just me, but I read "lark" as a "joke" first, then I caught on it was the bird.
That flits between us:
To scratch an itch, - got a little lost visualizing the lark scratching an itch - The lark metaphor is cool - and I like that you bookend it in the poem, but maybe think about using words that reflect its actions (the larks). Flits was nice. Also, it is strange to read a poem that starts with a rhyme and then abandons it.
To give feelings to affirm
and break our prison walls. Is it that the affirmed feelings break prison walls, or is it that the lark gives affirmation and also breaks walls?
A pupil's dark middle, Here you leave your metaphor - it weakens your poem
Shines a light and a warmth,
And the invisible discourse - I like the way "invisible discourse" sounds
Promises a common source. - back to the rhyme, but I don't understand why.
If we stare into a stare
Or glare into it,
We'll all be laid bare
By the split-second intimate. It feels like this is its own standalone poem. Makes me think this is actually what you are trying to say. Do you need all the other words to make this point? I know it is hard sometimes to just cut stuff out, but that is what a good edit calls for sometimes.
Yes eyes swear.
I swear it.
When I look into your eyes
I feel the lark alight. This is kind of cute, and it bookends the lark at the beginning of the poem, The eyes swear bit is one of those little darlings we write sometimes and fall in love with, because we think they prop up the poem somehow. As a reader, I don't think it adds much. Another thought is to lake the last two lines of this poem, and make them the first two lines of your new poem. Just keep the metaphor - write about the lark. You can bring eyes back in at the end. Anyway, cool ideas if this poem - keep at it!
|
