»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #2
»
The Tree
| Critical Analysis #2 |
|
The Tree |
|
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
The Tree One under welkins Won by standing still Steadfast under stars Stood fore God's will. Heroes met ends On the heath spears Both fiends and friends The fate of years. If only the fouse Fighters in gleam Upheaved their boughs Like the Heaven's beam: Bound in his blessed Unbrittle wood Over tall the tallest Terror withstood. His weighed upward Wielded through the fray Limbs to the Lord And lived another day. Welkins: skies Beam: Tree Fouse: eager |
||
| © Copyright 2006 Essorant - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
serenity blaze Member Empyrean
since 2000-02-02
Posts 27738 |
Is it okay to reply to something just to ask a question? I sure hope so, 'cause I'm too tired to fight--my head hurts. Not from your poetry though, I found it very palatable, but I was wondering (if you'll forgive my ignorance) if this was a specific form, if so, what is it? It would be very helpful to me, since this is a learning forum, if a few of you folks more learned in the aspect of form poetry and meter would explain it to me (and I have an awful memory, so I may even ask a few times) Pretty please.  And thanks too for the word "fouse", I didn't know that one. and wait, I'm not done, because I wanted to add what it was that I found palatable, if it's okay to just enjoy a poem for its tone, then that's what it was that I most enjoyed. I am a tree hugger, with no apologies. I feel a peaceful vibe from some trees, and I felt your poem captured that quality. (I really miss trees--there aren't nearly enough of them now.) And no, I'm not being facetious. I really hope my reply is okay with everybody.  THAT was facetious.Sometimes I reply to learn--not to instruct or otherwise state preferences. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
I've no questions of form yet, I'm just wondering what " God's will" is, along with "Heroes", Heaven's beam", "Terror" and "Limbs to the Lord". So abstract, without description. The assonance "steadfast to the stars" reminds me of the old sea-faring nick-name for ships; 'wood'. It's a bit of a mouth work-out! Which brings me to your use of (I'm assuming) 'old' language. Personally, I think "welkins" and "fouse" are ugly words. I've got no problem with "beam", it's 'here and now'. This poem reads as musty and dead to me, because of the rhythm (I'm a 21st Century gal), but I have to say, the rhythm made me look. Reading further (note; I have no clue about *valiant battles) I'm unsure what "upheaved their boughs" would mean in the context of "heroes meeting ends". "unbrittle wood" is good to my ears, that verse (4), makes me think of 'The Ents' in Lord Of The Rings. Plus, it ties in with the 'wood' thing I noticed in v.1, "steadfast to the stars". To your last verse. "his weighed" what? What's "Weilded"? (btw, why the capital letter?) Oh, I seee. *Arms. *Open arms to "the Lord." So, from the above rummaging, I think this is saying that *'outstretched' arms (*embracing 'God') helps *natural survival (the tree). I'm having trouble linking "Over tall the tallest/Terror withstood" (again, why the capital'?) Are you saying that 'God' is 'the tallest' terror? It's only by *'supplicating', that the natural things "live(d) another day"? (*words, inspired by this) [This message has been edited by kif kif (10-07-2006 06:35 PM).] |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
I liked this, the meter was good and the rhyme simple but flawless. Welkins is sky and fouse is eager (I think) I didn't mind having to work out the meanings; one of my favourite poems had me diving through dictionaries. Altarwise by owl-light in the half-way house The gentleman lay graveward with his furies; Abaddon in the hangnail cracked from Adam, And, from his fork, a dog among the fairies, (From - Altarwise by owl-light - Dylan Thomas) As far as the meaning goes, well it's all about a tree growing and being there for a long time, and a lament that humans could do worse than to follow the tree's example. Onward and upward. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
On 2nd thoughts, perhaps the'musty and dead' rhythm ties up the suggestion of 'Heroes meeting ends'? What's a Hero? (beyond a dictionary) |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Hi Serenity Your question is fully welcome. A good explanation of the form that I am somewhat emulating is here: Building Blocks of Old English Poetry. Although, instead of presenting the half lines beside each other with a caesura between them, I put the second half line underneath the first. And I also use two or three stresses for each half-line instead of just sticking to only two. The endrhyme is also my own addition. I'm glad you liked the word fouse. That is a word from a project I am working on dedicated to restoring primarly native English words, that are discriminated against under labels such as "old" "archaic" and "obsolete" unduly detering people from using many and many words of our very own language. It is also dedicated to restoring words that never made into modern spellings by giving them modern spellings based on the evolution of sounds and spelling in English. The word fouse is based on Anglo-saxon form fus (with a long u). This word is not rare at all in Anglo-saxon literature, especially in poetry such as Beowulf. On the basis of a word such as mus becoming mouse, hus becoming house, lus becoming louse, other similar words, the form fouse for fus is a restoration fully supported by the evidence of evolution. The principle of this process is the key to restoring hundreds of words of the English language that are currently locked in old spellings. Here is the entry for fus in the Bosworth and Toller Dictionary:
Note the other senses of "ready" and "ready for death" I hope that helps. Thanks for sharing questions and thoughts about this. |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Kif Kif Thanks for commenting.
Alright here's a little "key" for you (and others): God's will: as God wishes Heroes: mighty deedsmiths Heaven's beam: a poetic way of saying "tree" Limbs to the lord: arms/boughs stretched to God.
That is interesting. Ships are also sometimes called "wood" in Old English poetry. No reference to ships though in these lines. Just a tree stead-fast (on the earth), under the stars of Heaven. By the way, not to be pedantic, but that should be alliteration not assonance.
Alas, it sounds like you are bowing to modernism here (i.e "only young or most common words are good"). Did you know beam is just as old in being an English word as welkin and fouse? If you really wish to use only modern words, you must stick to words like internet, telephone and cyberspace all the time. Words like love, soul, man, hand, etc are all over a thousand years old as being English words. Not especially "young" or "modern"
That line is in the optative mood, not indicative. It is the imagination of "if" they held their boughs/arms up to the grace of God like the tree, that they had the victory as the tree. Instead they fell in the field of war. But the tree still stands with its life, as a victor. I hope that makes sense.
I intended some ambiguity in these lines: It may be translated as: "Over tall (fighers in the field), (the tree) withstood the tallest terror (of war)." Or: "over tall (fighters) the tallest (the tree) withstood the terror (of the war)" [This message has been edited by Essorant (10-08-2006 02:48 AM).] |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Grinch, That is the might and main of this poem. Although was hoping that the tree here would come across as interchangeably a tree or a man. It is a tree/man that was caught in the midst of a war and was taller than all the other trees (men) by reaching out his arms to heaven and seeking the grace of God instead of engaging in the war. After everyone is gone or fallen, the tree/man is still standing/living under the stars and is the "victor" in the field. Thanks for reading and commenting. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
My question was to highlight the abstraction of these words...there's no description to form any understood 'picture'. 'alliteration'. Thanks, that's not being pedantic, it's being specific. If I sound like 'I'm bowing down to modernism', that's because words that have stopped being used are difficult to attach to anything except 'ancient text', in my opinion...getting back to my comment on 'understood picture'. My opinion on the 'ugliness' of your two words, "welkins" and "fouse" is not exactly because they're ancient---I understand that "beam" is an ancient word, like "wood", but their beauty is that they're alive and breathing today, because they work on a collective level. I 'come off' this poem feeling like I've been travelling through a dead metaphor...I can see how it did work, but it's decayed, and the brambles overgrown through time. This ties in with your subject matter (or, my opinion of your subject matter), so I think the highly stylised structure and language works for the piece. I'm not sure about the line "over tall the tallest/Terror withstood". You might add the extra word on as you read, but there's no reason for me to, a reader. You say you're looking for 'ambiguity' here, but the progression of the structure makes me think that it's "Terror's" "Weighted upward/Weilded through the fray ." To the question 'what is a hero?' you reply "mighty deedsmiths". If this was a poem in a book, I'd never know that, but even if you included a 'key', I'd still be left wondering what a 'mighty deedsmith' was. Of course, it's sparking my imagination, but it's very dim. For a poem like this, that uses objects and landscape, I crave intense description. (like "unbrittle wood", concise.) |
||
|
Essorant Member Elite
since 2002-08-10
Posts 4769Regina, Saskatchewan; Canada |
Kif Kif Thanks. The only problem is that this poem is so tight and brief, that I'm not sure making it more physically descriptive may help it. The words you mentioned weren't really meant to bring out what they referred to more than concisely bring out the contrast between the specific tree and the "forest" if you will. Referring to God's will is really meant to be like an adjective to express an aspect of the tree in contrast with fighters, rather than to express what God's will really is. If I explained and went into details about God's will, I think it may take away from the adjectival quality of that phrase. Also the expression of fighting and war in the second stanza was supposed to substantiate the word "heroes." These are daring doers of war, heroes that are fighting, both friends and fiends. This is meant to contrast with the tree that stands steadfast as God wishes. They were the "heroes" of war, but the tree is the victor of the war, still standing over the field with his life in the end.
You don't need to add any words, Kif Kif. Just use the words as you would a phrase such as "the poor", when "poor" means "poor people". In this sentence "tall" means "tall beings". But the word tallest may refer to either the tree as the "tallest being" or else it may modify the word "terror". I admit that it may not come right away in the reading, but using adjectives substantively is strong characteristic of Anglo-saxon writing, especially poetry. I didn't want the lines to read like everyday speech, but to have some special style and wordplay. |
||
|
kif kif Member
since 2006-06-01
Posts 439BCN |
Perhaps that's my problem. As a modern reader, an Anglo-Saxon reading is impossible for me, unless I'm familiar with the characteristics of the ancient text. I understand you not wanting to inflate the structure, but my critique still stands; I don't believe your words are descriptive enough to make this poem as atmospheric as it needs to be, in order to show the reader. I am left thinking that it's telling me that 'Heroes' went to 'war', but then it tells me they were 'over eager', and perhaps wrong, as your last stanza suggests? Which brings me again to your use of the word 'hero'. I'm still confused. Thanks for your time. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
