Poetry / Notoriety (Analysis)

Thank you for your kind review!

Thank you, I am extremely flattered.

Thank you for your very kind and just review.  I agree with all of your points.  I have tried to make my signature in poetry by personifying a word and placing the personified word at the end of the poem.

But, as you note, I could have worked this better and I will make the changes you suggest.

Again, thank you for a very good review, I just needed some advice to perfect it.

-Michael

WHEW!

After reading the last reviewer’s comments and your subsequent response, I was actually a little worried that you would react in a similar fashion to my review. Not that I blame you for your reaction, but I wasn’t sure if you were going to be one of those hyper-sensitive type writers who would reject even the notion that their work wasn’t flawless. I’m glad you sent me a message, but I was keeping an eye on what you were going to respond anyway. :D Be well, and if you change it up, I’d love to see the edited version to see if anything I suggested was incorporated.

WHEW!

After reading the last reviewer’s comments and your subsequent response, I was actually a little worried that you would react in a similar fashion to my review. Not that I blame you for your reaction, but I wasn’t sure if you were going to be one of those hyper-sensitive type writers who would reject even the notion that their work wasn’t flawless. I’m glad you sent me a message, but I was keeping an eye on what you were going to respond anyway. :D Be well, and if you change it up, I’d love to see the edited version to see if anything I suggested was incorporated.

lol

Wow, you lack the ability to critique properly…  You remind me of John McWhorter who is very knowledgeable of the English language, but uses it out of its proper context.

For instance, “in the penultimate line, the subject-predicate placement leaves it ambiguous.  in other words, technically the encyclopedia could itself be providing notoriety with something.  but i think you mean that notoriety is fed through encyclopedii in the sense that the contents of encyclopedii list notorious events.”

Your interpretation of the piece does not hold true for everyone.  In Fact, most EDUCATED people understand that an Encylopedia (such as the Encyclopedia Brittanica) is defined as a comprehensive written compendium containing notable issues, articles, biographies…etc.  Encyclopedias act as a catalogue of notable events in our history.

Few would perceive it to be a container of notorious events such as you…

This also leads us back to your comment about the history, “the writings history line doesn’t work maximally. become history can be either in a negative (disappeared) sense, or an adulatory (esteemed) sense. here, your wording fails to disambiguate these senses, thereby contaminating the force of the piece.”

I believe your inability to read the poem as a whole instead of in pieces prevented you from putting the encyclopedia line and history line together.

Regardless, for the first time on this site, I find myself stating:

Your entire critique is invalid and you should refrain from doing such a task with poetry until you gain more common sense education.

-Michael