9/11 – basically – all the rest for you to deduce- i thought that’s clear
Poetry / "I had not thought death had undone so many."
“Memory’s a stranger, history’s for fools” – Roger Waters
1.Advent
The showers began from the middle.
Clouds billowing, downwards and up -
They kept opening & closing their mouths.
Goldfish behind glass,
in the aquarium. I heard no sound.
Things moved, not moving;
as in poetry and when timelessness
is caught on celluloid -
The buildings became branches in a storm.
Leaves falling from on high –
Galileo’s feather and ball? -
& when they hit the ground, turned red.
Two giraffes, sideways, sidereal in slow motion;
something more than their legs buckling, finally,
far beneath them.
Touched my cheek.
Dry.
Nary a drop?!
Nein.
India,2004 – Death Anniversary(9/11)
You need to log in to urbis or create an urbis account to review this writing.
Reviews
Sort Reviews by Newest | Oldest | Highest Quality | Lowest Quality | Newest Comments |
neoprose reviewed Version 26 -
Read 100% of the Item
A little tip: “It has to be looked at as a poem written by someone who was an eyewitness, late; and that too, only through the media.” That is the worst way to come across to an audience. Let the poem speak for itself, if you need to instruct the audience how to approach it, then the poem has failed.
“1.Avent” – the opening catches the eye.
“Touched my cheek.
Dry.
Nary a drop?!
Nein.” – interesting closing, nice wit.
“is caught on celluloid -
The buildings became branches in a storm. ” – if you arrange this a little different, then there could be some great enjambment present. Cut the ”-”. The way I read this (I have an arrogant way of altering poetry when I read it) a little differently…
Things moved, not moving;
being unrestrained and ink splayed
of the poetry caught on celluloid
branching out, in becoming in a storm of buildings
to leave past the falling leaves
rising on the high; time and the nothing
of Galileo’s feather and ball -
& when they hit the ground, in weightlessness.
“I had thought so, of life, of its partnered nothing.”
But I guess the probably completely ruins the poem. shrugs just another opinion I guess. My bad.
As for the rest of the poem, well, it is good value but feel a little restrained [IMO].
- add/view comments (5)
chickiemcweird reviewed Version 26 -
Read 100% of the Item
The imagery in this has an ethereal, disembodied quality. I am partial to spare, incisive prose.
NITPICK: “& when they hit the ground, [they] turned red.”
Also, check for tenses-changing, and using predictable descriptors, such as “billowing.” I think you should turn the cumulo-nimbus in the first two lines inside out before they become goldfish.
Things moved, not moving? What things, how? Did they halt? Was their motion an illusion? Was it simply that the scenery was moving, and they were still against it, like in old Western movies?
Get more specific than “on high,” and claim the storm: call it “the,” not “a.” Leaves are veined, and glass can be veined. Perhaps shards fell from the broken sky, or the shuddering sides of buildings shed them, shaking steel branches.
The message is powerful, and the analogy unique. It insinuates the parallel between nature and disaster, which is brave and insightful.
Human nature? International disaster?
yewie reviewed Version 26 -
Read 100% of the Item
in this poem you orchestrate, between stanzas and even lines, subtle and yet striking tectonic shifts and through these shifts relate together things from the conrete world, constructing almost a kind of psychology…though, from the mentioning of the two giraffes down (an allusion to Dali perhaps?) it begins to fail, in my oppinion, as there is no discernable relevance to the giraffes (why giraffes? no occult or esoteric significance or any resemblance to anything cosmic, only animals) and while creating a strange image of cosmic giraffes i can take from this stanza no meaning as from the others, especially when in relation to the others…but then again, it is still more adept than how you end the poem (are the more sections, as the 1. potentially denotes?...that is, with a mirth up until this point not present or exhuded anywhere in the poem…what gives? the poem, for the most part, is truly wondrous and i hate to see it ruined by maybe your unwillingness to live up to ‘wondrousness’, as is prevalent in most “learned” poetry today.
very good though…
—mike
crystinawritersblog reviewed Version 26 -
Read 100% of the Item
I think this a great poem and you did a good job describing the eyewitness acount.
Willow_Wren reviewed Version 26 -
Read 100% of the Item
An interesting new title, as I have just reviewed an older version of this poem and I’m liking this new direction better, though it is a but cryptic. Is the title in quotes because it is truly a quote? Then is should be told who said it. What I like about the poem is that it is open to so many interpretations, not just the one you have in mind. I would still lose the nein as the last word and get rid of the ?! after drop and end with just a period there. I think that would be more powerful. There is nothing earlier in the poem that really references Germany except in your mind, which is OK, what has come out of your mind is a beautiful poem, but the nein makes little sense in the context of the rest of the poem. I would also agree with SirM about timelessness being caught on celluloid..celluloid makes timeless what is caught not the other way around I think. Still the title is a bit awkward as written still. Perhaps being more direct as in How Death Had Undone the Many. Just a thought. By personalizing the title with I whereas the poem is omnipotent is somehow creates an unbalance, for only at the end does the personalization come in, my cheek, which is very strong at that point as the narrator has not been introduced previously. I would the narrator out of the title then.
Miscast reviewed Version 25 -
Read 100% of the Item
I loved the imagery from nature to buildings and merging into destruction. It is a very eerie image… for a giraffe to be caught with their ground buckling under them. I liked the strangeness, but also the cleverness (the Galileo allusion) of your lines.
I must say though, the last stanza almost means nothing to me. The words “Nary” and “nein” are past my knowledge… they also sound like a foreign language. If this is true, it IS a nice touch and I will redeem myself by looking them up.
peacemeal reviewed Version 25 -
Read 100% of the Item
I don’t really think that the epigraph is accomplishing anything. I think your poem would stand much better without it.
The advent of what? Advent of terrorism? I feel like that word is also out of place. And why have a numbering system if there is no two?
I feel like the structure of your third stanza needs re-working, and this could be done by moving the words aroung the line breaks. Plus, things move in poetry, or at least we’d like them to.
Where does galileo come from? And I think the final stanza has such a different tone when compared to the rest of the piece that you could probably just remove it.
Willow_Wren reviewed Version 24 -
Read 100% of the Item
There are such beautiful moments in this poem starting with it’s deceptively simple beginning and yet the concept of combining two such momentous tragedies world’s apart, one a natural disaster, one man made seems a bit of a stretch for so small a poem. How do the two relate except that in destruction all sadness is a universal emotion. Not sure what Galileo’s feather and ball has to do with all this, seems out of context. That buildings seem fragile and fall like branches in a storm, in a monsoon, tsunami or a bombing is a lovely metaphor. In the notes it is said the poem should be looked at both as an eyewitness late, not sure what late means, one either is or is not an eyewitness. I witnessed the Trade Towers falling. But to see it only through the media is not to be an eyewitness. The lines that begin with Two giraffes is most touching. The ending however leaves me wondering and a bit lost. So profound the events the narrator couldn’t cry? Is that all for all that has preceded? Such monumental tragedy touched my cheek? It touched us all did it not? This has great potential but still seems skeletal, the author has a way with words that makes the most destructive elements feel like air. I wonder where he really wants to go with this.
brokenhand reviewed Version 24 -
Read 100% of the Item
I have read another version of this and I hate to say, but I don’t feel like it improved. The end is wierd. Maybe it is just because I am from the states and we don’t use words like “nary” unless we are trying to make fun of brits. But the end makes your poem seem silly. I think you should cut that last stanza.
Also, now the numbering is standing out to me. Where is number two?
In your third stanza – there is something muddled in your meaning from you sticking the poetry allusion and the movie allusion together with the word and. I think you can fix this by stretching out the stanza. You could bring down the “not moving” put the “as in poetry” on it’s own line and make it a full sentence. Then the last bit can be a cool fragment :) However, I would suggest replacing the word timelessness with something like a pause. Timelessness is borderline cliche, especially when you consider the subject matter.
In the fourth stazna, the third line sticks out to me. I don’t know what you are trying to do with it. It seems like you are making a metaphor between leaves and bodies, and then galileo comes out of nowhere. I like the metaphor, and I like the third line, but I don’t feel like they go together.
Lastly, I feel like you are inappropriatly using the dash and I would suggest removing all of them. Your line break is accomplishing what I think you want those dashes to accomplish.
Good Luck
Valencia_Rodallec reviewed Version 24 -
Read 100% of the Item
I think this is a nice poem, but…
maybe you can put quotationmarks where there is a voice.
The line “Galileo’s feather and ball?” seems forced into a question and kills the rhythm of what preceeds it. It is also an emotional disconnect from what’s going on.
I think you have a good draft. I hope this helps a bit.
Showing 1 - 10 of 40
Next →
Review item
Add to favesCreator
Relevant Links
Item Stats
GENERAL
5 Reviews 7 Comments
Version 26
Latest Activity: 5 months ago
REVIEW QUEUE
Appeared in Queue: 62 Times
Skipped: 3 Times
Ratings & Rankings
