»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #2
»
Hearts on Wing
| Critical Analysis #2 |
|
Hearts on Wing |
|
|
Nan
Administrator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-05-20
Posts 21191Cape Cod Massachusetts USA 
|
Kamla made me do it - She dared me to post here... So you guys can have your way with this one. Go ahead - Do your thing - I can take it...  Hearts on Wing Fly off, My downy pigeon. Test your anxious wings. Depart your sheltered nest And learn what Unfettered prolusion may bare For you. Yet, veer not from the flanks Of the protective Homing fold, Lest your lone flight Finds you unapprised, Perched upon an insecure precipice Descrying inquisitively upon Delusive entreats from the Throes of nesting urbanity. Scintillating lights lure you Into dark corners Laden with cardboard blankets, And tandem benches host Hackneyed beguiling temptations Masquerading as apoplectic Bag dwellers with bulging sacks Offering deceitful morsels To obediently kept flocks, Which peck their way to Plumper lives ~ Wanting to suckle Your sweetness, only then to Cast you aside for Yet another acquiescent featherling. Your wanderlust and Wanton flight may find you In precarious skies Where one lone pigeon is Helplessly succulent prey for that Gracefully soaring Predatory she-hawk, Flyring vulturously in wait To stalk you and impale you with Garish black talons, Consuming you and devouring Your innocence. Beware, my sweet pigeon, Lest you waft astray And lose sight of the Safety of your homebound brood, While this languishing Domestic nest revivifies its Imperviously embracing shield ~ A sanctuary for a contented and Sagacious aviant. Fly off, my sweet pigeon, Fly off. Soar afar. Fly off. Alight within the Sanctity of home |
||
| © Copyright 2002 Nancy Ness - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
Lots of big words here and I think the vocabulary distracts the reader from the message, an extensive vocabulary is a good thing, in a similar way that salt is but used too liberally either can spoil the broth. There are also a couple of possible inaccuracies of description that tripped me: Yet, veer not from the flanks Of the protective Homing fold, Homing fold would seem to suggest that the pigeon is a homing pigeon if so the suggestion that it didn’t veer from the protective flanks doesn’t ring true – it is in fact the exact opposite of what a homing pigeon is bred to do. Homing pigeons are released on mass in a remote location and then timed on their return to the home roost, they do not flock and definitely do not perch, they fly home by the shortest route and normally do it alone. The part with the hawk is accurate although the reference to vultures seems odd, the two birds are, at least to me, so dissimilar in their nature and actions that the parallel confused me. I’m presuming that there’s an overall message unrelated to pigeons in this piece, my first guess was that it was warning advice to a child or innocent as an introduction to the world. Then I wondered if it wasn’t more specifically aimed at these forums and the interactions that take place here. Neither really seemed to be clear enough for me to be certain and I think that certainty on the part of the reader is important. I don’t need to get the right meaning but I need to believe I’ve got the right meaning and unfortunately I was just left wondering whether there was any real meaning to get. Maybe that’s more my fault as a reader than an error in the writing but I thought I’d mention it in case it was any help. All the above is of course only my opinion and thoughts, I claim no qualification to either critique or write poetry so please feel free to disagree or ignore my weak attempt. [This message has been edited by Crazy Eddie (10-06-2002 09:47 AM).] |
||
|
brian madden Member Elite
since 2000-05-06
Posts 4374ireland |
Nan, I have to agree with Eddie on his points, your vocabulary is impressive but it does weight down the rhythm of this poem. I would also see the earlier lines being longer, having a slower flow up to the encounter with the She Hawk, where the sentences are suitably short. Let the words speak for themselves, if a simpler word can create a nicer flow, use them. eg “Laden with cardboard blankets, And tandem benches host” The last few lines were perfect, not overstated, but gentle and emotive. “Fly off, my sweet pigeon, Fly off. Soar afar. Fly off. Alight within the Sanctity of home” There is one more little complaint I have “Consuming you and devouring Your innocence.” “Devouring your innocence” is weak in comparison to the rest of the poem, You are amazing poet, capable of writing more powerful images than this. Overall I enjoyed the read and glad that Kamla dared you to post this. El riesgo vive siempre! |
||
|
Sunshine
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-25
Posts 63354Listening to every heart |
I would only ask for one change... "flyring"... unless a bit of word play by you, should read "flying", yes? |
||
|
Radrook Senior Member
since 2002-08-09
Posts 648 |
Coherent development! Bursting with dramatic visual imagery! I like this poem! IMHO, organizing the poem into stanzas would enhance the effect of the dramatic monologue. The following is how I would organize it. Hearts on Wing Fly off, My downy pigeon. Test your anxious wings. Depart your sheltered nest And learn what Unfettered prolusion may bare For you. Yet, veer not from the flanks Of the protective Homing fold, Lest your lone flight Finds you unapprised, Perched upon an insecure precipice Descrying inquisitively upon Delusive entreats from the Throes of nesting urbanity. [Lest] scintillating lights lure you Into dark corners Laden with cardboard blankets And tandem benches host Hackneyed beguiling temptations Masquerading as apoplectic Bag dwellers with bulging sacks Offering deceitful morsels To obediently kept flocks, Which peck their way to Plumper lives ~ Wanting to suckle Your sweetness, only then to Cast you aside for Yet another acquiescent featherling. [Lest] your wanderlust and Wanton flight [] find you In precarious skies Where one lone pigeon is Helplessly succulent prey for that Gracefully soaring Predatory she-hawk, Flying vulturously in wait To stalk you and impale you with Garish black talons, Consuming you and devouring Your innocence. Beware, my sweet pigeon, Lest you waft astray And lose sight of the Safety of your homebound brood, While this languishing Domestic nest revivifies its Imperviously embracing shield ~ A sanctuary for a contented and Sagacious aviant. Fly off, my sweet pigeon, Fly off. Soar afar. Fly off. Alight within the Sanctity of home. [He is being urged to fly off from his sheltered nest [home?] in order to reach home? Is this an intentional paradox?] Good read! Thanks for sharing! [This message has been edited by Radrook (10-06-2002 03:32 PM).] |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
Nan IMO it's not so much the use of some infrequently seen words in this piece that weigh it down, as the overwhelming use of modifiers. Adverbs and adjectives abound to the point where I feel almost as if I am wading through a thick syrup of words which entirely smothers the sound, tone and message in this poem. I know that what I have just said is an oft and easily trotted out criticism of poems, but in this case I really think you need to ask yourself what you are adding to the poem by introducing so many modifiers which, in many instances, are so entirely abstract that they bring nothing to the images that the "underlying" nouns and verbs suggest. Perhaps you will now be thinking that, for instance, the phrase "helplessly succulent prey" conveys something more than just "prey" , or even "succulent prey". However firstly you need to consider whether the extended metaphor actually needs such an (misguided imo) attempt at precision. Secondly, having decided that it does, you need to find a way of showing the reader what you want to convey about the prey rather than just slapping in a couple of modifiers which seek to tell us. You can get away with this slightly lazy approach maybe once or twice in a poem of this length but certainly not in practically every line. The other thing is that you need to watch your line breaks. There are several here that seem weak, two of the worst offenders being: And lose sight of the and A sanctuary for a contented and Also I'd say that generally it is a bad idea to separate an adjective from its noun. I know that there are occasions when this can be used to convey split meanings or create other effects, but it always seems to me to be somewhat of a cheap trick! An example would be: Masquerading as apoplectic Bag dwellers with ... I hope that I've been helpful. Regards. Rob PS And Eddie makes some good points about homing/racing pigeons. Knowing that much about them he has to be a Brit though, and from Lancashire. But I guess I won't hold that against him! [This message has been edited by Robtm1965 (10-08-2002 08:24 AM).] |
||
|
Crazy Eddie Member
since 2002-09-14
Posts 178 |
Rob, If you'd have gone for the town and guessed Blackburn I'd have been really impressed.  |
||
|
Robtm1965 Member
since 2002-08-20
Posts 263 |
I thought so. Call me Inspector Morse. |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
