»
Archives
»
Dark Poetry #4
»
D.CWOTD - "patina"
| Dark Poetry #4 |
|
D.CWOTD - "patina" |
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
At this stage of life the patina on my skin is more morning dew than the rust of experience or the sheen of wisdom. I long for a varnish on my thin veneer, that makes me impervious to the wounds inflicted by difficult people in a difficult world. I want to glisten like the eyes of a mystic who sees beyond this temporal existence. I want to seal the judgmental grain ringing my core, cover myself with the balm of Gilead and be lamb for the lion, leading him out of the den of injustice to fields of compassion in my forgiving world. [This message has been edited by JenniferMaxwell (06-01-2008 08:23 AM).] |
||
| © Copyright 2008 JenniferMaxwell - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
GreenDragon Junior Member
since 2008-06-05
Posts 10USA |
Oh Jennifer, I love the variety of surface treatments that you have applied. The ones which fall as a mist, oxidize, are brushed on, buffed and grow in rings- wonderful! |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Patina is experience. I long for a varnish on my veneer, to make me impervious to wounds . I wish to glisten like a mystic. I want to seal my core, cover myself with balm, be the lion's lamb and lead him to fields of compassion in my forgiving world. Dear JM, I went for what I felt were the bones of it, knowing that this wasn't the poem you were writing but simply a vision of it from where I sit. I did try to strip away everything that I though was extraneous matter, though. Your revision or decision not to revise will be better considered than this one. I'm impressed it's so far along. For something that must be reasonably new, Sincerely, BobK. |
||
|
pyre Member
since 2008-05-16
Posts 136 |
i've been reading you and i like your vocabulary -pyre |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
Thanks very much, GreenDragon and pyre. Bob K, sometimes you’re such a meanie when you won’t let me get away with tap dancing though a vent in my gloriously verbose lyrical shoes.  |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear JM, Feel Free, JM. I'm probably off base anyway. Yours, BobK. |
||
|
JenniferMaxwell
since 2006-09-14
Posts 2423 |
As always, you're right on target, Bob K. Not much slips by your discerning eye. But I wonder if a person can change a wordy vent into a real poem. Or are we too emotionally attached/bent to be able to stand back and tackle the topic more objectively? |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear JM, Narcissism has always been my problem in revision. Anything I write is always wrapped with a thick golden coating of it, like karo syrup or peanut butter; so much so that the thing I'm going after is not always visible beneath. It's totally obscured by my mistaken perception of wonderfulness. If I'm incredibly lucky, this clears slightly within a few weeks. More often it hangs on for years, and on occasion for decades. I have some pieces that I've been working on for 20 years or more where I can't yet tell the kernel from the shell. It's all still thickly coated by the cosmoline of self entrancement. Some very good poets can't tolerate feedback about this sort of stuff. Or won't give feedback that threatens somebody else's golden aura of invincibility and grandiosity, lest the favor be returned. I find that really good writers seem to be able to deal with feedback pretty well, though, if it's not belittling. ("The gang and I were out playing touch football the other day; sorry to say your submission didn't make it over the barbed wire." —Field Magazine to BobK, circa 1972.) That is, it should be specific to the poem, there should be some sense of how the change would improve the poem, and there should be, even if there is some rancor to it, a solid sense of craft and direction behind it. That this, even people who don't like me or my work can sometimes be helpful. Nobody says you have to tackle the subject more objectively. More objectively is one way, certainly, but not the only way and maybe not even the best way for any particular poem. The only way that I see as being impossible is by being boring, and for all I know, that exclusion may be a limitation that I've imposed on myself. And continue to impose, by the way. Now if only I could figure out all the things I was doing that were boring. I can tell you that I've got things squirreled away in drawers and notebooks that I've completely forgotten about. If I look at them today, I'll probably be able to tell you if they're any good or not, and how I should go about fixing them, if I wanted to fix them. Every now and again I do exactly that. Very often I find I've moved on, and while I could fix them, they don't seem to matter to me any more. If they still have something to say for me, I may work on them. Ten or fifteen years offers remarkable perspective that in the heat of the original obsessive attachment seems impossible ever to achieve. The evaporation of some of that narcissistic bond accomplishes wonders abounding. I hope that's not too prolix an answer for an innocent question. Sincerely, BK |
||
|
Bob K Member Elite
since 2007-11-03
Posts 4208 |
Dear JM, Discerning? Yeah, right. Narcissism has always been my problem in revision. Anything I write is always wrapped with a thick golden coating of it, like karo syrup or peanut butter; so much so that the thing I'm going after is not always visible beneath. It's totally obscured by my mistaken perception of wonderfulness. If I'm incredibly lucky, this clears slightly within a few weeks. More often it hangs on for years, and on occasion for decades. I have some pieces that I've been working on for 20 years or more where I can't yet tell the kernel from the shell. It's all still thickly coated by the cosmoline of self entrancement. Some very good poets can't tolerate feedback about this sort of stuff. Or won't give feedback that threatens somebody else's golden aura of invincibility and grandiosity, lest the favor be returned. I find that really good writers seem to be able to deal with feedback pretty well, though, if it's not belittling. ("The gang and I were out playing touch football the other day; sorry to say your submission didn't make it over the barbed wire." —Field Magazine to BobK, circa 1972.) That is, it should be specific to the poem, there should be some sense of how the change would improve the poem, and there should be, even if there is some rancor to it, a solid sense of craft and direction behind it. That this, even people who don't like me or my work can sometimes be helpful. Nobody says you have to tackle the subject more objectively. More objectively is one way, certainly, but not the only way and maybe not even the best way for any particular poem. The only way that I see as being impossible is by being boring, and for all I know, that exclusion may be a limitation that I've imposed on myself. And continue to impose, by the way. Now if only I could figure out all the things I was doing that were boring. I can tell you that I've got things squirreled away in drawers and notebooks that I've completely forgotten about. If I look at them today, I'll probably be able to tell you if they're any good or not, and how I should go about fixing them, if I wanted to fix them. Every now and again I do exactly that. Very often I find I've moved on, and while I could fix them, they don't seem to matter to me any more. If they still have something to say for me, I may work on them. Ten or fifteen years offers remarkable perspective that in the heat of the original obsessive attachment seems impossible ever to achieve. The evaporation of some of that narcissistic bond accomplishes wonders abounding. I hope that's not too prolix an answer for an innocent question. Sincerely, BK |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
