West
#1
West


1. The Birth of Capitalism


A giant from the northern coasts of France
struck with a club the giant sat on the shining
cliffs of Dover, stomped on his slumping back,

and shouted "Now I'm lord of all this land!"
Wiping away the brains about the knot
of wood he used for a weapon, he drew a knife

and started to skin and butcher the corpse beneath him,
passing the ribs for braising and loins for frying
to gluttons he called peers---to himself leaving,

beside the nutritious offal, the foremost right
to settle any disputes that should arise
between his peers and the corpse's former dependents

kept somewhat free as labor-selling tenants.
Thus started a vicious cycle: with all this work
vended for mere subsistence and laws too rigid

to license overt exploitation, the emphasis shifted
to making the land more productive, to feeding the city
where workshops and factories sprang, to birthing a world
where markets could supplant both laws and lords.


2. The Fountain of Youth


This gift of God was found in Florida's tip
first by the peoples to whom the land was given
then by the peoples who through war and sickness

stole it: a drink which all those later founders
esteemed to grant them vigor, making them young
at heart and body, if not at mind and soul.

Rather, it proved the reverse. A single sip
and the vessel stays its course, gathering worms
while the crew is all replaced by mewling babes,

but how could the conqueror have learned all this
without experiment? Why should they trust
the word of beggared ghosts or beaten dogs?

And should a slave be risked to reach a state
for which the free repine? So thought the men
who first imbibed the fountain's blessed waters,

making immortal imbeciles of themselves:
a gloomy circle of gaunt and grey-haired figures
huddled around a pair of upturned gargoyles
that drool forever with divine revenge.


3. Acapulco


Here was another giant: a cruel frame
of bulging forehead, crooked eyes, and lips
perennially drooling, yet housing a tender soul.

Often he sat on the shore, dreaming of boats
that came in from the ocean laden with riches
his vision could only sketch, could only shape

and color as fuzzy forms, as mere abstractions,
for which he would offer the singular treasure he thought 
he had in his hoard: silver and precious stones.

Often was monthly turned weekly turned daily turned hourly
turned every waking minute he'd rather spend
by the sea---he no longer slept---he was the shore,

his friends found moss and ferns and grass on his back
give way to shrubs and trees, the bones exposed
as an incoherent scaffold of white sand,
until all that was left of himself was his mad dream.


4. Guam


Their Empire's western border is the eastern
edge of the sea named after us: those islands
we once considered sisters, yet they never

fought for their freedom when we fought for ours.
Perhaps they believed that when our latest common
masters allowed us to leave, they would become

more than a stopping point for treasure-hunting
galleons turned into steamships on their westward
courses, that their lonely little boulders

floating like lost coconuts near the center
of the Pacific would instantly be considered
destinations in and of themselves, exchanging
the beggarly commonwealth for the one more brutal---


5. Pearl


Pearl of the Orient Seas: what does this mean?
What sort of pearl are we? Formed by a clam---
gigantic, oft mistaken for its shell

by lacking the usual luster---or by an oyster?
How are we built? A perfect sphere, a teardrop,
perhaps a malformed button or even something

completely uneven---again, more like the shell
of our molluscan mother---whence our color:
are we the white of noon? the pink of dusk?

the black of a moonless night? the golden spears
thrust by the sun across the sky at dawn?
or even some kind of rainbow, our nacre skin

burnished beyond recognition to something born
of earth and flame and not of flesh and water?
Were we dredged up or farmed? What sort of use

became of us: a bead in an endless string,
one half a pair of earrings, or the chief
draw to some tall crown or weighty locket?

Whose hands have held us? Who continues to hold?
And will we be passed down again or sold
or, as the parable goes, cast off to pigs
and crushed at last between their greedy teeth?




5 NaPM pieces strung together. One of them I've already posted before, under Mild Critique.
Reply
#2
(08-02-2026, 04:16 PM)RiverNotch Wrote:  West


1. The Birth of Capitalism


A giant from the northern coasts of France
struck with a club the giant sat on the shining
cliffs of Dover, stomped on his slumping back,

and shouted "Now I'm lord of all this land!"
Wiping away the brains about the knot
of wood he used for a weapon, he drew a knife

and started to skin and butcher the corpse beneath him,
passing the ribs for braising and loins for frying
to gluttons he called peers---to himself leaving,

beside the nutritious offal, the foremost right
to settle any disputes that should arise
between his peers and the corpse's former dependents

kept somewhat free as labor-selling tenants.
Thus started a vicious cycle: with all this work
vended for mere subsistence and laws too rigid

to license overt exploitation, the emphasis shifted
to making the land more productive, to feeding the city
where workshops and factories sprang, to birthing a world
where markets could supplant both laws and lords.


2. The Fountain of Youth


This gift of God was found in Florida's tip
first by the peoples to whom the land was given
then by the peoples who through war and sickness

stole it: a drink which all those later founders
esteemed to grant them vigor, making them young
at heart and body, if not at mind and soul.

Rather, it proved the reverse. A single sip
and the vessel stays its course, gathering worms
while the crew is all replaced by mewling babes,

but how could the conqueror have learned all this
without experiment? Why should they trust
the word of beggared ghosts or beaten dogs?

And should a slave be risked to reach a state
for which the free repine? So thought the men
who first imbibed the fountain's blessed waters,

making immortal imbeciles of themselves:
a gloomy circle of gaunt and grey-haired figures
huddled around a pair of upturned gargoyles
that drool forever with divine revenge.


3. Acapulco


Here was another giant: a cruel frame
of bulging forehead, crooked eyes, and lips
perennially drooling, yet housing a tender soul.

Often he sat on the shore, dreaming of boats
that came in from the ocean laden with riches
his vision could only sketch, could only shape

and color as fuzzy forms, as mere abstractions,
for which he would offer the singular treasure he thought 
he had in his hoard: silver and precious stones.

Often was monthly turned weekly turned daily turned hourly
turned every waking minute he'd rather spend
by the sea---he no longer slept---he was the shore,

his friends found moss and ferns and grass on his back
give way to shrubs and trees, the bones exposed
as an incoherent scaffold of white sand,
until all that was left of himself was his mad dream.


4. Guam


Their Empire's western border is the eastern
edge of the sea named after us: those islands
we once considered sisters, yet they never

fought for their freedom when we fought for ours.
Perhaps they believed that when our latest common
masters allowed us to leave, they would become

more than a stopping point for treasure-hunting
galleons turned into steamships on their westward
courses, that their lonely little boulders

floating like lost coconuts near the center
of the Pacific would instantly be considered
destinations in and of themselves, exchanging
the beggarly commonwealth for the one more brutal---


5. Pearl


Pearl of the Orient Seas: what does this mean?
What sort of pearl are we? Formed by a clam---
gigantic, oft mistaken for its shell

by lacking the usual luster---or by an oyster?
How are we built? A perfect sphere, a teardrop,
perhaps a malformed button or even something

completely uneven---again, more like the shell
of our molluscan mother---whence our color:
are we the white of noon? the pink of dusk?

the black of a moonless night? the golden spears
thrust by the sun across the sky at dawn?
or even some kind of rainbow, our nacre skin

burnished beyond recognition to something born
of earth and flame and not of flesh and water?
Were we dredged up or farmed? What sort of use

became of us: a bead in an endless string,
one half a pair of earrings, or the chief
draw to some tall crown or weighty locket?

Whose hands have held us? Who continues to hold?
And will we be passed down again or sold
or, as the parable goes, cast off to pigs
and crushed at last between their greedy teeth?




5 NaPM pieces strung together. One of them I've already posted before, under Mild Critique.


"Pearl" was much more interesting than the rest. I still didn't like it but at least there's something there I can convince myself to take an interest in. There's rhetorical tension and some compelling figuration there.

Otherwise, much of this is pretty tiresome. Again with the costume vernacular; I really don't know why people insist on still doing this in 2026. Presumably you do not go to a car dealership and say stuff like, "Extended is my line of credit, so says the bank," so why put on a voice when writing poetry? "To himself leaving, beside the nutritious offal..." "To which the free repine..." lines like this just make me want to completely check out and stop reading. To me it signals that the poem is interested in doing Renaissance Faire stuff, and I've no interest in that. In the wild I would not make it past S4 in "Birth." 

Content wise it's mostly equally unmotivating, it feels like a lot of "Tell me something I don't know." This is a long poem so it has to be rewarding and constantly make the case for continued engagement. But by the second verse, we're evidently using cliches like "Fountain of Youth" unironically. More fussy, overwrought diction evidently for its own sake: "So thought the men who first imbibed..."

I really encourage you to drop this voice and syntax. I don't think your poetry can succeed as long as this is the project.
Reply
#3
Thanks for the feedback. I might have to step in here, not so much to defend the work, as to ask for elaboration.

Re costume vernacular. You say you'd get tired by St4 of Se1. Putting those stanzas into prose:

A giant from the northern coasts of France struck with a club the giant sat on the shining cliffs of Dover, stomped on his slumping back, and shouted "Now I'm lord of all this land!" Wiping away the brains about the knot of wood he used for a weapon, he drew a knife and started to skin and butcher the corpse beneath him, passing the ribs for braising and loins for frying to gluttons he called peers---to himself leaving, beside the nutritious offal, the foremost right to settle any disputes that should arise between his peers and the corpse's former dependents kept somewhat free as labor-selling tenants.

The first sentence is pretty darn straightforward. I don't detect anything archaic about it at all, syntactically speaking. The second sentence is mostly straightforward---it's literally the one inversion you critique that's the issue (put there more to slant rhyme with the previous line and to echo the start of its own line), plus how if it's taken as prose it would be rather long. I have to wonder if it's the "vernacular" that would leave you tired by that point, or if it's something else.

The next example you give is equally questionable. Again putting the line into prose:

And should a slave be risked to reach a state for which the free repine? 

Syntactically, it's nothing you'd not find in, say, a college-level essay. Is the issue there with the word choice, 'repine'? Is the issue in general with the word choice, where the author seems to be using more difficult words than the average conversationalist would use? Where the author's diction seems less in line with lyric poetry as it is today, and more with epic poetry, or rather with the novel? In which case, I'm not sure why poetry should be so eager to limit itself as a genre....

But perhaps the most useful clarification for me, considering this is in Intensive, is what specifically you find to be archaic in this piece. As in, which parts exactly do you find to be archaic-sounding---every one of them, without necessarily elaborating on how (though that would be welcome)---since, to me, it would seem that there is a deliberate movement here. The critic says they'd be most engaged with Se5: is it not so much the theme, since there might be the same sort of tension in the earlier sections as in that last one, as the more straightforward style? Is the piece actually, deliberately 'archaic' or 'haute' at the start, only moving towards plainness as it progresses? And does that shift of style actually work---does it play towards the piece's supposed intentions, or does it detract from them?

Re content wise. Se2 has been critiqued individually before. At this point, half the critiques of it detect there's something more to it just bubbling under the surface, while the other half---in being quite defeated by the section---just declare it to be cliche. I find it fascinating, if somewhat disappointing, considering that the piece now contains a much broader variety of allegorical levels: I had hoped my readers would be a bit more careful. 

So now I have to ask, with the other sections, what exactly do you find cliche, what exactly do you 'already know'. Se1---is it cliche because it says capitalism is vicious, like giants that butcher each other for meat? But then what about Se3, where another giant is involved---what's cliche about that giant's journey? And could that giant being involved in something simultaneously subtler (no sudden intimations of violence, no thematically blunt title) and more explicit (the title, while not thematically blunt, I imagined would have encouraged some further reading, since it refers to an actual place, to an actual history) hint that the message behind the giants of Se1 is far less 'capitalism is vicious' and far more something very, very, very specific? ....Or is that message actually, readily apparent, and it just so happens that I've never read a single poem about, say, the 1999 work of Ellen Meiksins Wood? And this suite of questions also applies to Se2, where a particular point or allegory is being made, with one of the earlier critiques coming pretty darn close to it.
Reply
#4
"A giant struck with a club the giant sat on the cliffs" is certainly convoluted syntax; it almost sounds like a deliberate attempt at a "garden path" sentence

"Passing the ribs for braising and loins for frying to gluttons he called peers" similar feeling. The language is recognizably not modern vernacular. I read plenty of literature that sounds like this in school; it was all from before 1900, or at least before 1960. 

"And should a slave be risked" is already somewhat arch. People just do not talk like this anymore, and have not for some time. "for which the free repine" ditto. There's inverted syntax all over this piece, which yeah, native English speakers no longer use inverted syntax hardly ever. So despite your claiming otherwise, I maintain that the voice is objectively not operating in the contemporary vernacular. It is hard to receive it as anything other than an affectation. This puts me off the whole work from the jump. 

You ask "why poetry should be so eager to limit itself as a genre" but I think the project here is what's limiting. The approach to language doesn't feel new to me; it feels like a misguided attempt to put on the language of old, presumably because that is "appropriate to an epic" but I think what would be much more interesting is to write an epic, formally, in a voice that springs from a modern syntax and lexicon. Though to be fair, I am not super sold on the idea of a modern epic in the first place. I tend to think poetry "in this age" functions best when it's relatively short. 

Anyway here are all the other moments where the diction feels strained or the voice feels affected:

the brains about the knot - unsure if this use of "about" to mean "around" is more common in, say, British English, to be fair
to himself leaving - inversion
the foremost right - modern only in the most formal of settings
any disputes that should arise - again, either mildly archaic or legalese

which all those later founders esteemed to grant them vigor - I swear I'm not tryna be difficult I just don't know what to say about a line like this other than "this is clearly not modern vernacular" 

Rather, it proved the reverse - maybe some of the distance between our readings on tone is down to semantics; sure, sometimes "archaic" may be less strictly precise a description than "needlessly formal." For me, the two have similar effects, neither of which I enjoy. 

the vessel stays its course - cliche

of beggared ghosts... and should a slave... so thought the men who first imbibed - People don't talk like this today

I was going to fulfill your request to do the whole poem but I am sorry, I don't really want to Smile it feels unnecessary anyway; hopefully what I'm pointing to is clearer now
Reply
#5
Thanks nevertheless for the details <3
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!