after reading that you like the original style of haiku the best I fell upon this haiku of yours.
it is simply blissful in its message and imagery.
however, I feel that your first line loses a bit from repeating the word one.
It makes sense that you repeat the word but I feel that in a haiku it's better not to repeat because of the syllable restrictions. I thought of another first line for you even though I rather not intrude on your well done haiku already.
"In time, each leave falls:" or "Each leave falls in time:"
I also think these words together have a better reflectiveness then your present line.
even without my suggestion I think your haiku is outstanding.
the cause of your yelling speaks to my heart very dearly.
and you have some great strength in your words.
some of the lines could be shortened or split into two lines for better reading and flow (which I will show in a few lines with some other suggestions.
Like a parrot, that which you are just repeating?- the part after the comma is really hard to say you might want to reword it.
here is a shorting of a line into two and that reminder line is just their for better show:
"Are you able to see my intent and my soul while you fight off the evil
That might brush off onto you?"
try something like:
"Are you able to see my intent, my soul,
while you fight off evil
That might brush off into you?"
notice I took out "and" replacing it with "my" next to "soul"- the repeating gives some more emphasis then the passiveness of "and"
also I took out "the" next to "evil' because it disrupts the flow. don't for get you don't have to be grammatically correct with poetry you have that flexibility because poetry is suppose to be spoken out loud and not said in your head like normal reading.
there are a few more sentences that have a off rhythm because of "the" and some of the other lines have a line length that could be changed to be two lines instead of one like the one I should you but I think you will be able to figure it out.
thanks for the read and stick to your principals
they are yours to have,
no matter what maybe said
no matter how much they won't listen
nobody can take them from you.
this is a pleasure to read even with the lingering sorrow and pain I felt afterwords.
if anyone has ever felt lonely at any time in your life you should read these muttered lines, they will help you understand how you feel. I'm not saying they will make you feel better in the least or that you will never be lonely ever again just that you might understand that feeling of not being in love a little bit better than before.
"But I refuse to conform."-you might want to think about taking the But out of this line.
with but in there it seems, not as strong. just saying "I refuse to conform" is stronger with power and emotion.
your poem got me thinking about the stigmatization of gays in society and I think the efforts of late towards gay marriage have help bring the issue into the foreground bring more acceptance in media and so forth. I dont think such avenues however will bring gays to be 100% accepted. For total acceptance I think our society needs to break down our fears of sexual intimacy and not stigmatize sexual intimacy as a disgusting act merely for procreation but as an enjoyable activity like tennis on a summer day. My thoughts sadden me because I do realize that this is not something that will be easily changed. but I will leave with a question.
sexual intimacy and sexual activities are very enjoyable, why does it matter who you enjoy it with?
this poem is absolutely great.
the way that you connect the fantasy and desire is simple sublime.
I do have one problem with the poem but it might be irrelevant and I really don't think you should change anything for it and if you wanted to I don't know how you would.
the narrator doesn't seem to be overwhelmed by this being. they seem almost to calm and cool about talking about the temptress and I think that even a narrator explaining this being would be lost in lust for it.
but besides that amazing and good luck in the contest.
this is horribly great in depression in regards to the legacy of humans.
also I think its a great representation of the philosophy of existentialism as in part to the meaningless of the world and how you can't leave your mark on it but you must make these marks as you live anyway.
I like the cave metaphor very fitting especially in an analysis of beauty.
I'm a huge fan of mixing philosophy into poems and this poem you do a brilliant job.
I just have a couple suggestions:
"passers by" for this instance should probably be "passer-by" I think.
you might want to think about breaking up this piece into stances just so the ideas dont get to cluttered together.
not really for you but more for the reader to be able to take these changing issues in strides rather than one long looking session.
I like this beginning and think you can bring it further.
what do the clouds look like?
What does the sun do to the clouds in your brain?
why do these clouds make you feel so alone?
did you trip and fall, is that why everyone is around you?
or are you at a park and you can hear everyone muttering?
I guess I just want more.
I'm greedy like that.
good start now make it shine or dull and gray either way I would like some more.
the way you explain this little since in life is brilliantly timed with perfect word placement.
however I think that a point gets lost in the end which might be found if you find a profound title.
I think I'm in poem mode or something which might be way my words are coming out this way.
I like some of your analogies but besides this it seems to be a list. I guess I just want more to it. More feeling of not being able to be without your Christ. I'm just not getting it here. maybe if each line had a personal story to it or each line was the title of a poem of your reflection own reflections or of a three line description of the first line. Something like that would be great. Its a great potential skeleton for a bigger poem piece in my eyes. I think it would be well worth adding to this piece and I think you have the skill to. thanks.
Keep on Trucking
doing some grey area reviewing
to show of my new sigs.
the most confusing part of this poem for me is the "of" in the second line. I don't think you need it and it seems to be to be disrupting the flow of the piece.
I find it interesting in the end that your scared to let God see your message because if you are or were a believe you shouldn't be scared of your judgment unless you have been very bad.
so I'm guessing you have been bad.
As usual another great read from Dan.
Keep on Trucking
doing some gray area reviewing
to show of my new sigs.
this poem is actually pretty amazing except for the end part where your hope is God (just a little existentialism joke but really no qualms here). the pace is beautiful with desolation and I love it.
the only problem I have with this poem which might be opinion based but I actually have reasoning for it too is in the little fragmented line "Bound by their rejection of God - a killing cast." my problem isn't with the whole line but more with the "a killing cast part." I'm not saying I'm offended because that doesn't even matter but that I think the representation of "the killing caste" should not be about the peoples themselves since they are aloud to have their own view of life but about pertaining to the view of their soul without a God. so basically I'm saying these people themselves aren't bad for dieing with their own views that are not similar to your own but more that their souls want be saved in the same way.
I hope that wasn't confusing and if it was please ask me questions and I will do my best to clear up any mis understandings.
I like the poem
the meaning of this simple piece of life.
even thought the object has no life.
it remind me of a certain philosophy that I'm not going start rambling about now.
the only thing is the beginning line is very awkward to say.
I understand the reflective necessary at this point but it is to much.
a great point that most people don't think of I'm glad you brought it up in this masterful poem.
"Blend our nation with all cultures; embrace
true acceptance."
this line is brilliant and a problem at once but I don't think you should change it I just wanted to make a point that you probably already know. Its a conceptual problem with Blend our nation with all cultures and a problem I've been arguing with various people over time. there are two analogies used to describe America's cultural mix "Melting pot" and "Salad Bowl." you are portraying the melting pot with states we are all a mesh of multiple cultures which can't be deciphered the salad bowl still sows some of these cultural distinctions because your thrown in the bowl but the identity is still there. The problem with the melting pot is you have to make everyone the same which is typically unrealistic because people of different groups look to be part of the different group. I'm just getting at that blending it all together isn't the best idea for understanding tolerance but that seeing the differences and allowing them to occur is a better way to represent them.
that is neither here or there and good luck on the contest.
I think I'll write an essay for my full response of your survey so I don't use the review forum as a personal plug of my own work.I want to commend you for giving me these swirling thoughts in my head with your survey, THANKYOU.
I would like to say here that it's great that people like Bill Maher exist to challenge belief systems so that people can yell and say WHAT or say inside to themselves "maybe hes right" all of it is good and well I just hope no one gets shot over it.
I've read this piece a few times and never made a comment and I'm deciding now seems a good time to leave a comment. I love this piece because I've been over this argument many times in different philosophy classes I've taken over the years which happen to make this piece even more enjoyable because I've read many times why this argument came about. Its
It's about two different issues: can things happen without human experience and can a person actually understand and explain things that happen without human experience?
the conundrum is a lot of fun and I like the scientific and nonsensical answer you explain in this entertaining story. Very well done.
Still my favorite joke about this issue is from the one-liner-mono-drone stand up comedian Steven Wright.
"I was walking through the forest alone and a tree fell right in front of me and I didn't hear it...have any questions?"
the last line seems very out of place. I think the guys in your story are past the point of wondering what death is like and just want to get it over with and die.
I think you should add more to this piece and kill off each of the men. you could do a sequence where the other two are telling the story of the old man friend that died in this story a year after the fact and then one of them die.
or
you could have the one guy that wasn't talking ask the talking guy do you know how old that guy was and after he gives the guys age he can say wel I only have so many years but I hope I don't make it that long.
this poem is great I love the idea of the poem and the way you've used this drop like effect in the rhythm of the poem itself.
I do have one suggestion:
ludicrous
coincidences—
I see what your trying to get at this point but these two words don't seem to produce the right effect.
how about:
randomized
coincidences—
I think this is a better representations of what your trying to say. But it is a little difficult to say so another word might fit better than that one.
I love this poem its great. Very funny and original.
I only have one problem with this poem and it shouldn't be that much of a problem to fix.
the last line feels like mud on the tongue. the flow doesn't roll like the rest of the piece.
(and) pick a long line to (wait) in!
I think you might want to take out the (and).
or you might want to change the word (wait).
these words seem to have a heavy speaking pattern making the whole line hard to say with flow.
I like the parts of the whole just not how they are placed together. Most of the writing I've done in my life is has been academic writing. It is often straight foreword to the point and boring but it gets the information across. In academic writing you start with the topic, explain the topic, show an example, and finish it off with a summary. Now in this piece you don't really need all those parts just some of them. I think you should keep your starting point:
"Listening is a part of everyday life . . . and is it? So much talking, so little listening. True communication can not take place unless we learn to listen. Too many times we don't even realize that misunderstanding has taken place."
then start talking about you and you're friend not listening.
then you can go over the scene in detail of how you should be listening.
I love your questions- "How do you listen? What do we have to do to really listen?"
but they shouldn't be attached because they are talking about two different things. Actually they would be perfect subject headers to section of the piece. I would actually have "How do you listen?" the last line of the piece to bring everything into the readers mind of their own experiences. "What do we have to do to really listen?" is a perfect subject header after explaining the wrong things you and your friend do when you don't listen to each other.
I think if you get the ordering down it will flow better and be more persuasive of the issue at hand.
I think Martin Luther King would fight for equal rights for gay couples. Meaning, he would want gay couples/partners to have the same legal contractual rights that is apart of married. However, I think Martin Luther King's pastor status would disagree with calling this social legal contract marriage. To reiterate, he would fight for equal rights but not for the actual word marriage.
(side note: the distinction between the meaning of marriage, the social rights that go along with marriage, and the presumed moral qualms between the social acceptability of homosexuality and heterosexuality is a mashed-mass potato mess of one sided arguments, not realizing that each ingredient is a separate issue of the same subject and could actually be eaten in one gulp by some simply concept understanding. Then again, when I was little i always played with my mashed potatoes. But in the words of my parents, "STOP FOOLING AROUND AND EAT YOUR FOOD, YOUR MAKING A SCENE!!!")
Just a small suggestion on a monumental moment of some consequential time.
Just remember all we are are who we were.
Just remember all we 'are' are who we were.
I understand why you didn't use our instead of are and it's very necessary you don't use our but I think it needs apostrophes around the first are.
Just remember all we are are who we were.
Nothing more, but sadly oftentimes less than what we could be.
I understand the idea with time at the end. It just seems to me to neglected thoughts on the act-of-being. So I was wondering what your thoughts are on the act-of-being.
nothing more nothing less. something pretty simple.
there are many spelling mistakes in this small piece. I myself am a horrible speller and probably couldn't function without the use of the built in spell checker on Wring.com or with the infamous Word software. These things help immensely so don't be afraid to use it.
First of all, I disagree with your statement that a you shouldn't talk about religion and politics. For me to understand a person I think you need to know their beliefs, experiences, and thoughts. I do agree however that you are indirectly getting at is a better way in how people should talk about these subjects. When I say talk I actually mean listen to each other not confess, not profess, and most of all with a respectful grace. One problem that builds a in these situations is emotional attachment to the subject sets people into a defensive mind frame. They don't want to be judged or laughed and either does their listener, so they attack each other. that emotion is a problem but not all emotion. I love talking to passionate religious people as long as they are talking and not converting. I don't believe in God and very strong in my stance and that doesn't need any fixing. My life right.
Anyway, the biggest problem I see with your inquire is that for some religions their isn't a distinction between subjects that are religious and aren't religious because everything emanates from their concept of God. Which is fine for them but not for your thesis inquire. I'm Sorry for bursting your thought bubble so early in it's development. It is an important subject to me and to you and I hope you find another angle in or around the matter.
it is great you accepted what you've disliked with as much bravery as you did. Also, that you're able to give president Obama a chance to change your mind about him shows strong integrity. However, to make this piece even stronger I think you you should actually say why you dislike president Obama. Be it ideological, policy, or the way he acts on stage it doesn't matter.
Keep on Trucking
Printed from https://www.writing.com/main/profile/reviews/merlack/sort_by/r.review_creation_time DESC/page/9
All Writing.Com images are copyrighted and may not be copied / modified in any way. All other brand names & trademarks are owned by their respective companies.
Generated in 0.27 seconds at 9:26am on Apr 24, 2024 via server web2.
View Portfolio
Visit Notebook
Send Gift Points
Awards
Badges
Send Email
Community Newsfeed
General Discussion
Sponsored Items
Book of Trinkets
Static Items
Books
Groups
Interactive Stories
Audio
Campfire Creatives
Community Notes
Crossword Puzzles
Documents
Folders
Images
In & Outs
Madlibs
Photo Albums
Polls
Product Reviews
Quizzes
Survey Forms
Web Pages
Word Searches
