navwin » Archives » Critical Analysis #2 » I Love My Lord.
Critical Analysis #2
Post A Reply Post New Topic I Love My Lord. Go to Previous / Newer Topic Back to Topic List Go to Next / Older Topic
bgryan
Junior Member
since 2003-06-16
Posts 30
North Ireland

0 posted 2003-11-29 06:09 PM




I fear no man,no evil deed
I shall not weaken.
I cry no tears for the wicked heart
I seek not for what I wish I had.

I love my lord

I fear not the darkness
in the dead of night
though the curtain may be drawn,
before the morning light.

I love my lord

I waste no dreams
on the fortune of wealth
no growing desire,
for perfection.

I fear not the passage of time
I have travelled
the road of faith
and rediscovered everlasting grace.

I love my lord

The light shone and glowed within
lifting my soul,beyond sorrows reach
placing me in the hands
of my keeper.

© Copyright 2003 B.G.Ryan - All Rights Reserved
Tim
Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794

1 posted 2003-11-29 06:24 PM


Just my opinions here, but I would change the end of the first stanza.  Is the "I had" even needed.  It could be deleted and want even switched with covet or some similar word.

Second stanza is fine to me although sometimes, and this may not be intellectually or poetically correct, but to invert to get a more poetic feel, such as before the light of morn.

Third stanza, last line seems to me to need another word. (mortal or a similar word maybe?)

Next stanza sounds just fine to me.

On the last stanza, same problem with the last line, possibly needs another word?  Some adjective of keeper, would seem to be pretty limitless as to possiblities.

Liked your poem muchly.  It is fine the way it is, but I thought I would throw in my two cents worth which is about what my advice is worth.  Take care.

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
2 posted 2003-11-29 09:33 PM



I’m sure this would sound fine as an inspirational chorus or testimony, but sacred themes don’t automatically equal creativity. As poetry, this fails because it has not one fresh idea, and each line is clichéd…with the exception of “fortune of wealth,” which is redundant.

Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com
www.primerhymeetc.com

Tim
Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794

3 posted 2003-11-30 12:34 PM


as I have indicated in another response, the cliche response is pretty much a cliche in internet critique forums.  Some folks have different ideas about what constitutes a cliche.  To say what you feel and expressing oneself honestly is not a cliche, it is an honest expression.  Good poetry is not dependent on metaphors and similies which require folk to sit around and guess their meanings.  A lot of different literary devices are used in poetry and have their value, but none can top writing from the heart.  Again, I like your poem and sure, it can use some work, but keep at it.
P.S. I also don't see fortune of wealth as redundant.

Severn
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-17
Posts 7704

4 posted 2003-11-30 01:14 AM


'A lot of different literary devices are used in poetry and have their value, but none can top writing from the heart.'

And that, Tim, is where critique can come in useful...critique, ultimately, is opinion. Not fact. What is a fact is that I disagree with your opinion, though I respect it. But not necessarily how you've said it.

Writing from the heart is over-rated. Yes, another opinion.

For myself I like to grow, to study, to learn, to accept I'm not the world's greatest poet (though surely I'm close heh). A question - you don't feel faintly arrogant do you, suggesting that someone's valid critique is just a cliche? In fact, Tim, you've undermined Sid's critique and suggested that it lacks value.

I mean, to me, it looks like you've found a poem that you correspond to on an emotional level and can't really appreciate the critique that's been given - which is, of course, someone's opinion.

The cliche response does occur a lot in 'internet forums.' It also occurred in my creative writing paper at university. I think it occurs at all levels of writing discourse - simply because cliches are ridiculously common. 6.something billion people. Lots of writers. Lots of writing - lots of cliche.

Lots of opinion too.

Tim, if writing from the heart is all that matters what's the point of growth? I must challenge you. You say 'it needs work' and 'nothing tops writing from the heart.' I see two contradictory philosophies at work here. Another challenge - poetic devices don't always involve simile and metaphor. In fact, many poems I myself write involve neither. Is that all you perceive poetry that isn't from the heart to be? Poetry that is studied, and improved, can well be written from the heart. I know all of mine are, despite the attention I give to growth.

Just my thoughts...

Bgryan - for you I say I mostly agree with Sid. One example - you speak of travelling. Travelling a path, or a road, for God is an ancient image - one that has been overused, largely in connection to the relevant verses in Jeremiah.

It's not always possible to write without cliche, especially in regards to writing that deals with a relationship with God. My suggestion would be take that larger idea and think of a few new ways to say it.

K



[This message has been edited by Severn (11-30-2003 01:17 AM).]

Tim
Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794

5 posted 2003-11-30 01:39 AM


if I am not to have an opinion other than the regulars of the forum, then I suppose I best be leaving. I suspect my life will function at least on some level. I didn't see the criticism as valid and had an opposing view. Apparently I should not have.  I took the redundant comment as arrogant, especially when the line is not redundant in my view.  Am I arrogant? maybe so, maybe not, I don't try to be, but we are all human.  I decided to try my hand at critique forum and it appears my views and opinions are different than others and I do not fit in.  I have never held myself out as a good poet although I occasionally attempt to put some effort in my poetry.  Such is life.  I wish ya well and have a good one.

Severn
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-17
Posts 7704

6 posted 2003-11-30 02:30 AM


quote:
if I am not to have an opinion other than the regulars of the forum, then I suppose I best be leaving.


Er...all I have done is challenged you, Tim. I have said - I don't agree with you, and offered my reasons why. I'm honestly surprised that that's all it takes for you to leave. After all, you did disagree with Cynic...did you expect him to leave too? I'm saying this lightheartedly...but really. Can't this just result in a discussion, rather than a (dramatic?) leaving?

Tim - it's ok to disagree, and to discuss. How about you just be yourself and not worry so much about not fitting in. Just expect some discussion, and perhaps someone not agreeing with what you say, along the way.  

K




[This message has been edited by Severn (11-30-2003 02:34 AM).]

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
7 posted 2003-11-30 02:54 AM


If you had come back and presented your evidence I would have respected that and been willing to listen. I may still have disagreed, but that’s what debate on these forums is supposed to be about. There’s no reason for you to become distressed over an opposing opinion. I’ve stated numerous times that they are all subjective anyway and should be taken with a grain of salt.
It’s not up to us to rewrite Mr. Ryan’s poem for him. I’m quite sure he’d rather it remain his work anyway. We can offer opinions regarding whether we think it’s working or not—and why or why not. My opinion doesn’t have to agree with yours any more than I expect yours or anyone else’s to always agree with mine.
I’m not attempting to convey superior knowledge here, regarding poetry. I’m learning to critique, as are you. I do however, feel I can sense when something in a particular piece is working or not and I write my opinions based on that. If you disagree, I’d like to know why. But, just because I come back and argue my point further, doesn’t mean I can’t respect your opinion—if you present it logically.
But, if you don’t feel you fit in, it’s not because your opinion is being stifled more than, the (so called), “regulars,” it’s because you are unwilling to make your case.

My opinion regarding the redundant line is self evident. Even so, it is the least of the problems in this piece.
If you wish to argue that calling something a cliché, is in itself a cliché, I’m willing to indulge you…how about: The lines in this case are stale?

Feel free to prove me wrong.

Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com
www.primerhymeetc.com

Tim
Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794

8 posted 2003-11-30 10:13 AM


I’m sure this would sound fine as an inspirational chorus or testimony, but sacred themes don’t automatically equal creativity. As poetry, this fails because it has not one fresh idea, and each line is clichéd…with the exception of “fortune of wealth,” which is redundant.

Do I feel the above is a worthwhile constructive critique? No.  Each line is not a cliche and fortune of wealth is not redundant in my opinion no matter how self-evident that fact is.  

By my saying so,

"A question - you don't feel faintly arrogant do you, suggesting that someone's valid critique is just a cliche? In fact, Tim, you've undermined Sid's critique and suggested that it lacks value."

Does CynisRus feel slightly arrogant in his critique?  Do you feel slightly arrogant in your response?  You correctly caught the fact I suggested the critique lacked meaningful value to the writer.  A cliched critique was given with no insight or assistance to the writer.  That is my opinion. Is that undermining the critique? Perhaps.

If one wants to say the poem lacks originality or creativity, then so be it.  I do not consider the poem trite and every line a cliche.

If appreciating sincerity is connecting on an emotional level, then so be it.

I fully understand your views on writing as well as those of CynicsRUs.  I happen to disagree which is why I prefer more traditional poetry that needs to be spoken to be appreciated rather than poetry best analyzed as an intellectual exercize.

An example, I think Mr. Bouder does a fine job in critiquing and is technically a fine poet.  His good poetry (in my opinion) is written when he writes about his son.

It is not difficult to criticize someone we feel is less skillful.  To offer constructive criticism that will be properly received is the hard part. Sometimes you take baby steps before taking off at a full gallop.  (that is a cliche and written with the slightest tinge of arrogance)





Not A Poet
Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885
Oklahoma, USA
9 posted 2003-11-30 11:17 AM


But it is almost impossible to criticize honestly without the critique itself being a cliche. After all, poets keep making the same mistakes and, therefore, keep requiring the same advice over and over. After it has been given so many times, it by definition is a cliche.

And hardly anyone ever agrees with my opinion. Opinions are like a... Well, you know the rest and most of them do stink. Most except mine, of course

Pete

Tim
Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794

10 posted 2003-11-30 01:41 PM


had no plans on making a dramatic exit, just an exit as I find most discussions of this sort rather pointless and not of much personal interest. That is my problem.  *smile*

But you have piqued my interest Severn, do you concur that "each line is cliche'd and that fortune of wealth is redundant.  Just a curiosity on my part.

If the theme is a cliche (traveling) then I do concur, although I would then counter not much could be written by anyone.

Nice touch Pete, besides Mr. Bouder, I enjoy your critiques also, but I suspect we will never agree on the issue of the dryness of the poetry in CA.  I think it has something to do with right and left brain, or someone like me who is stuck mid-brain, or as my wife puts it, hair-brained.

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
11 posted 2003-11-30 01:54 PM


The point has been argued countless times, that almost every thought in life is cliché. I would submit that “constructive criticism” is also very cliché, and—as in this thread—almost meaningless.

Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com
www.primerhymeetc.com

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669
Michigan, US
12 posted 2003-11-30 02:01 PM


quote:
"Critique has been used as a verb meaning 'to review or discuss critically' since the 18th century, but lately this usage has gained much wider currency, in part because the verb criticize, once neutral between praise and censure, is now mainly used in a negative sense."

from dictionary.com


Are Sid's comments a critique, or simply criticism? Is the writer offered anything of value for this specific poem?

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
13 posted 2003-11-30 02:26 PM


Mr. Webster, (the modern “Collegiate,”) still offers: Critique 1. a critical analysis or evaluation of a subject, situation, literary work, etc. 2. the act or art of criticizing; criticism—vt., vi.—tiqued’ --tiqu’ing to analyze and evaluate ( a subject, literary work, etc.); criticize

I offered my opinion, (a criticism) short of attempting to rewrite Mr. Ryan’s poem for him. Where am I wrong?



Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com www.primerhymeetc.com  

[This message has been edited by cynicsRus (11-30-2003 02:56 PM).]

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669
Michigan, US
14 posted 2003-11-30 02:59 PM


quote:
... short of attempting to rewrite Mr. Ryan’s poem for him.


Seems I've heard this phrase before. What does it mean, Sid? Is a suggestion, whether vague or detailed, a rewrite? If so, are we limited only to "I liked this part" and "I didn't like this part?" If not, at what point do suggestions become a rewrite?

I'm not saying your comments were "wrong" (as opposed to your opinion being wrong, which is an entirely different question), if only because I'm less than clear where the line between right and wrong has been drawn. Again, setting aside right and wrong, was the writer offered anything of value for this specific poem?

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
15 posted 2003-11-30 03:47 PM


If by “value,” you mean did I go through and offer better words for the author, then; no. I don’t believe it’s incumbent on either of us to do so. You obviously have a different idea on what constitutes critique than do I. Mine seems more frank, while yours is more idealistic—simply different styles as I see it. Shouldn’t this forum be about such differing styles?
If he, (or any)author in question cares to sift through the meat of each critique, there are morsels in each that he alone must pick through. If he wants it rewritten, it seems Tim extended such an offering—one with which the Admin seems to concur. If he wishes to have faults pointed out to him, in a frank manner, sans any cutesy qualifiers, then he can ponder mine. Or, he can accept neither and consider it finished as written. In which case, the entire thread will have been rendered academic.
I won’t pretend by offering only positive critiques. If that’s all you desire on a critique forum, then the entire idea behind it should be reconsidered…along with the name.  If you’ll look through all my previous critiques however, you can clearly see that I willingly point out the positive as well, when there is indeed positive.


Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com www.primerhymeetc.com

[This message has been edited by cynicsRus (12-01-2003 01:35 AM).]

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669
Michigan, US
16 posted 2003-11-30 04:40 PM


quote:
... one with which the Admin seems to concurs.

First, Sid, my approach to the poem would have likely been just as different from Tim's as it would have been different from yours. If my car will neither go nor stop, I don't bother replacing the brakes until after I've fixed the engine.

Second, my questions are sincere and come from "Ron," not the Admin. Yes, we have different styles. Doesn't mean we can't understand each other.

You can define value any way you like, Sid, assuming of course you're willing to share the definition so we can all stand on common ground.

Severn
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-07-17
Posts 7704

17 posted 2003-11-30 05:21 PM


Oh wow, it's all happened since I went to sleep...that's what you get for living in the southern hemisphere.

Tim - thank you, sincerely, for not leaving, but for coming back and responding. I do appreciate your humour. Arrogant in my response - it may well be the case. Sometimes, I can be very arrogant, though I was not intending to be so here. I think, though, that arrogance can seep in sometimes, for many of us. Now, in terms of Sid's value toward the critique. Ron and Sid are obviously discussing this now, but I also believe it isn't necessary to rewrite a poem, or offer line by line advice, in order to present a constructive critique. Was Sid arrogant? You will have to ask him lol. To me, the insight that Sid gave was advising the author that the poem is largely - in Sid's opinion - cliched. Perhaps, other poets may have chosen to suggest how to fix that. Sid did not. For that matter, I didn't either. I chose not to because the author has specifically asked for a mild critique.

My views on writing, ah yes. The question of an academic approach to critiques has been raised before, and not in a favourable light. Unfortunately, the truth is I have completed post-graduate studies in English literature. This is not a boast, this is a fact. I attended a Creative Writing paper (course) with two of NZ's premier authors - one a poet, one a writer of novels. Again, this is not a boast - but a fact. My studies, under the tutelage of excellent men, have seriously affected how I approach critique, and the demands I have on myself as a writer. I cannot do otherwise but look with a critical eye when I approach another's writing that has been placed in a critical analysis forum. This does not mean that I view all writing from a purely dry point of view - as I say, my own writing is rooted in emotional responses to life. I am, in fact, a person ruled by emotion. That may be hard to believe; I know how I come across here.

You say, Tim, that it is not difficult to criticise someone who is less skilled. And this I think is the crux of the issue - the difference between criticism and critique. For me, and I can only speak for me, anything I say in response to a poem in this forum is critique. Negative criticism for me would read something like this - this or that poem sucks. Which I have not, and will never, say. Because it has no value to the author. Note I said negative criticism, because, as Ron has already pointed out, that is the assumption isn't it? That criticism is negative...

However, alerting a poet to the presence of cliche, (obvious cliche, because we have already had that discussion lol), is to me a valid critique.

You asked me if I agree with Sid's assessment that each line is cliched? As I said earlier, I agree with most of what Sid has said.

Let's see:

'I fear no man, no evil deed' - Absolutely.

'I shall not weaken' - Yes.  

'I cry no tears for the wicked heart' - Wicked heart, yes, however most who profess to love the Lord, also profess to cry tears for those with wicked hearts because it is the duty of the Christian to evangelise to the lost. So, this is interesting.

'I seek not for what I wish I had' Yes. Seek is common enough terminology within in Christian jargon. That said, the proper use of the word 'shall' in line 2 also links to Christian terminology by dint of 'seek and ye shall find.'

'I love my lord' - Yes, however I wonder at the lack of a capital L for lord. An oversight, or provocative? Given the more formal use of words and ideas throughout the rest of the poem, I think the former. Used as a break between verses, it almost becomes a mini-chorus, actually putting me in mind of several psalms.

'I fear not the darkness' - Classic metaphoric inversion. Again, cliched. Darkness referring to the darkness of losing one's way - again, linking to the path.

'in the dead of night' - night, here, links of course to the image above, and also several preambles for your stock standard horror movie.

'though the curtain may be drawn' - thus the darkness becomes an extended metaphor.

'before the morning light' - tied to the extended metaphor, of course. Now, truly, this is an ordinary way to say this. How many times have you read morning light? Here is a perfect example of the validity of alerting an author to cliche.

'I love my lord' - as discussed.

'I waste no dreams
on the fortune of wealth' - I can see how Sid views this as redundant. Fortune, and wealth, are synonymous words. However, in this line fortune has become an adjective, while wealth is the noun. It may be better to change fortune to something like 'mass of wealth' etc. Something that describes the size of wealth, which is what I think the author is going for. I, myself, in my own poetry, avoid phrases that have _____ of ______. They make for heavy lines, and are easy to fall into.

'no growing desire,
for perfection' - Now, here, I have again become interested. Simply because I ask - perfection of what? Serving the Lord? Isn't that a good thing? Or, living life on earth - but, again, doesn't the Lord want us to strive for perfection, to be the best we can be etc. I feel that this is not so cliched, but that it does need expanding to convey precisely what the author means. It needs context.

'I fear not the passage of time
I have travelled
the road of faith
and rediscovered everlasting grace'

Well, you know my views on this one lol. Everlasting grace is very cliched. More Christian terminology. Again, the inversion of 'I fear not the...' which I am fairly sure is intentional.

I love my lord

'The light shone and glowed within' - Very cliched. Light shone, and light glowed. The two most cliched ways of presenting the activity of light. I remember my English teacher when I was 13 used 'the light shone' to teach us about cliche.

'lifting my soul, beyond sorrows reach' - More classic Christian terminology. Souls are always lifted. I could go so far as to present the idea of the Soul as a cliched image, however, I'm well aware that the central issue of the poem is a Soul, so that isn't appropriate, but you can see my point I'm sure.

'placing me in the hands
of my keeper' - Keepers hands. Very cliched. Christian terminology, again.

Now, we reach the point where I am ususally misunderstood haha. Christian terminology yes. You might say - well, that is what the poem is about isn't it? So, why not make abundant usage of such terminology? My challenge to the author is to step out of that mould. Say the same thing in a different way. Changing the 'theme' - ie, travelling to God, would defy the point of the poem. Yes, it's been written about before, many times. But, like I have already said most things become cliche in the end - everything has been written about, in one way or another. It's inescapable. What we now have to do is work with that acknowledgement. Breaking free of the mould (now, that's a whopper of a cliche lol) encourages growth as a writer. The author did place the poem here for commentary. This suggests that he/she welcomes critique, and is ready to hear suggestions.

Bgryan - I know you have asked for a mild critique, and I hope you don't mind the hyjacking of your thread here. Or my more extended critique that has resulted here.

Sid - I disagree with you, however, that constructive criticism is meaningless. That smacks too much of futility. I hope, honestly, I've demonstrated that constructive criticism in detail is indeed possible for this poem, and in general.

K

[This message has been edited by Severn (11-30-2003 05:42 PM).]

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
18 posted 2003-11-30 05:25 PM


First, Ron, I’m willing to admit that my remark was a bit of a swipe and will gladly take it back.

Second, value is a rather subjective definition as it applies to critiques. (My opinion of course.)

I consider my critiques to have value, though not always to the receiver, but often to those folks who lurk these particular forums. Furthermore, I believe them to have even more value when they are being opposed through honest debate. For, it is then that the reader is forced to consider each view rationally and use his own mind to consider and logically define within himself which—if any, or all—options makes the most sense. And, later, which he will use or reject in a revision. I certainly look for the same whenever I post poetry here. I don’t want someone giving a patronizing remark simply because he’s afraid I’ll take offense and verbally "tar and feather him." If I disagree, I simply say so. Yet his critique has value to me nonetheless, because it forces me to consider the issue he raises. I will often rewrite a piece according to such a critique just to see if I can possibly agree in some way. In the end, sometimes I do and sometimes I don’t.
But, it’s all of value to me, since I am still growing.

Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com
www.primerhymeetc.com

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
19 posted 2003-11-30 05:52 PM



quote:
Sid - I disagree with you, however, that constructive criticism is meaningless. That smacks too much of futility. I hope, honestly, that I've demonstrated, that constructive criticism in detail is indeed possible for this poem.


With all possible respect intended, Kamla; another difference of opinion. You’ve basically gone through and rewritten the entire poem. One could more accurately call that “reconstructive criticism. Admittedly, not something I was willing to do on this particular piece. Don’t get me wrong however, I know I’ve done similarly—on poems I felt had something already unique to work with.

Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com
www.primerhymeetc.com

Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669
Michigan, US
20 posted 2003-11-30 06:41 PM


quote:
You’ve basically gone through and rewritten the entire poem.


Say what?! Can you point out even one line that Kamla rewrote, Sid? What I see is someone being specific about her take on the weaknesses of the poem. Tim offered suggestions, Kamla didn't, but both could (and should) be of great value to the writer.

Suggesting a specific change is no more a rewrite of a poem than is an expression of like or dislike. Both a suggestion and an opinion imply a course the writer "may" choose to follow, but neither a suggestion nor an opinion obligate the author to comply. Everything about this craft resolves to choices. Offering someone choices they might not otherwise see seems, to me, to be a pretty good definition of teaching.

cynicsRus
Senior Member
since 2003-06-06
Posts 591
So Cal So Cool!
21 posted 2003-11-30 08:14 PM


Ron,
So, I don’t see how you managed to miss at least the essence of my point. If “What [you] see is someone being specific about her take on weaknessss…” , and by inference drawn from her numerous suggestions, involves most of the poem. OK, not the entire piece as I had stated. I must concede that particular point. (Been trying to multi task here and didn’t read her reply thoroughly enough; apologies to Kamla) She has proven there are problems throughout the piece though. I inferred in my post that it was every line, (and still contend as much), but declined to go through each one, since even to a novice, which I—for the most part—consider myself, the clichés were pretty obvious. In fact, on its merits alone, this hardly even deserved such a lengthy thread, but the adjunct topics are hard to resist, aren’t they?
quote:
Both a suggestion and an opinion imply a course the writer "may" choose to follow, but neither a suggestion nor an opinion obligate the author to comply.

I have stated the same thing in my posts previously, but anytime you suggest such changes you in essence are rewriting it for the author, if only in your own mind. That was my point.



Sid @ www.cynicsRus.com www.primerhymeetc.com

[This message has been edited by cynicsRus (11-30-2003 08:37 PM).]

Tim
Senior Member
since 1999-06-08
Posts 1794

22 posted 2003-11-30 08:50 PM


Severn, thank you for the reply, that was the reason I made the request and you supplied the response I anticipated.  One should not begrudge their intellect or their accomplishments.  
You have mentioned in the past at least on a couple of occasions your background, so I was aware of the same and as such expected your response.
"Fortune of wealth" was not redundant in my opinion, as it was used, and I actually found the line an interesting use of language.
The use of cliches is a bit more subjective and I am not as quick to label something cliche and had problems only with the more obvious ones.  But then again, it is a matter of opinion and I recognize the worth of mine.
I also apologize to bgryan as he or she indicated he or she wanted mild critique only, and he or she ended up with far more than bargained for I suspect.
I will still take my leave as I entered the forum because of some comments I read about wanting more involvement and activity and I thought I could supply a more non-intellectual counter-balance and perhaps a wee bit of guidance to those poets who are at the bottom of the learning curve and need a gentle shove in the right direction.  (drats, those darn cliches again)
But as indicated, I do not particularly enjoy these type of discussions, perhaps because I make a living listening to intellectual type people argue and I do not need the stimulation. I write poetry for a different reason, as a stress release.
Take care, cioa and good luck with the poetry
bgryan.

jbouder
Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash
23 posted 2003-12-01 09:43 AM


Tim:

You're not helping me feel any younger by addressing me as "Mr. Bouder."   You can call me Jim.

Bgryan:

I'll come back to the poem later.  For now, I think some of the best poems written are about subjects the writer is passionate about ... the key, I think, is giving the reader enough information to grasp the feelings that inspired you to write the poem.  Biblical allusions are fine, but if you do not personalize them, sometimes they can come across as a little flat.

I'll be back later.

Jim

Not A Poet
Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885
Oklahoma, USA
24 posted 2003-12-01 10:57 AM


Well Jim, you're not getting any younger

Pete

Never express yourself more clearly than you can think - Niels Bohr

jbouder
Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534
Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash
25 posted 2003-12-01 11:49 AM


Bgryan:

A professor at Concordia Theological Seminary once related a discussion he had with another Christian who asked him, “When and where were you saved?”  The professor answered, “I was saved about 2000 years ago a short walk from the center of Jerusalem.”  His point was that it is the finished action of God the Son that serves as the source of our salvation.  I think he would also agree that our strength and perseverance as Christians shares similar roots.

I’m curious about your theological leanings.  I know that there are differences between the many Christian denominations in the world, but I’ve found that most of them focus first on the source of strength and salvation, then on the response of Christians to what has already been accomplished on their behalf.  “We bark because we are dogs, we don’t bark to become dogs,” as Martin Luther put it.

You almost do this in the final stanza, but still it seems that the “light [which] shone and glowed” originated in the speaker.  This makes the poem’s theological viewpoint very Pelagian, in my opinion.  To quote Luther again, who wrote “A Mighty Fortress,” “My body they may kill, God’s truth abideth still, His Kingdom is forever.”  While personal faith is a waivering and unreliable friend, the object of faith is the fixed and solid foundation of that faith … namely the Christian Gospel.  You’ll also note this theme in other old hymns such as “Amazing Grace.”  Unfortunately, the depth of more contemporary Christian music is more akin to pudding skin and lacks such substance as in the more traditional pieces.  There are exceptions, but not many.

Some might have problems with this advice, but I would recommend that you smooth out the language by eliminating the rhymes, and reinforce the notion that your love for your Lord and how you respond to that love is in response for His undeserved favor and loyalty toward you.  Still, you may run into the problem of writing something with an originality that stands out, but I think it will more closely reflect the orthodox teaching of the roles grace and works play in the Christian life.

Also, perhaps you could try to couch some of those old sayings and “Christian-isms” into something fresh and new.  There is almost always more than one way to say something, and I find that I prefer the kind of poetry that finds a novel way to approach an old subject.

Just some suggestions.  Thanks for the read.

Pete:

That wasn't nice.

Jim

Not A Poet
Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885
Oklahoma, USA
26 posted 2003-12-01 04:00 PM


Sorry then

Post A Reply Post New Topic ⇧ top of page ⇧ Go to Previous / Newer Topic Back to Topic List Go to Next / Older Topic
All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format.
navwin » Archives » Critical Analysis #2 » I Love My Lord.

Passions in Poetry | pipTalk Home Page | Main Poetry Forums | 100 Best Poems

How to Join | Member's Area / Help | Private Library | Search | Contact Us | Login
Discussion | Tech Talk | Archives | Sanctuary