Poetry / Tesseract

“only the sweetest to endure.”—Ah. This doesn’t make any sense.

—how does this not make sense? It’s clear to me. Is it the syntax or the diction? please clarify.

“She begged … hungry ribs.” Like this until ‘hungry ribs’ – doesn’t work. You aren’t personifying her ribs.

—I’m not intending to personify her ribs. Hungry ribs is an image of starvation.

“She put it down,” You don’t need this, it takes away. it’s narraration.

—I’m confused. What’s bad about narration? Also, I see it as important in the context of Urizen’s compass. In other words, she felt no need for reason. Maybe the allusion is too obscure, but I do hold my audience responsible.

“lifted to her widening eyes
that violet slip of cloth”—awkward

—How? The syntax seems natural to me.

“drunk,... white as an x-ray?”
You went too far. this smacks of soap box. Catholic symbols can be powerful, and are beautiful in their way, but I kind of just felt like some catechism wafers were just rammed down my throat with an altar cloth.

—I think you’re missing the message. Read again. I am not Catholic, nor do intend to push Catholic beliefs. In fact, I’ve commented on the hollowness of the symbols in this context.

“the buildings fall into acute geometry,” How? This means nothing to me. Even if you just said so. Is it meant to be death? heaven? Dreams? What.

—It’s pretty clear she’s tripping and going through sensory deprivation.

“Keep me in your silence;
Light only comes to darkness.”  This line does nothing for the piece.

—Why not? You haven’t been clear. This is a poem of attempted salvation, a vision quest. In the end, she is looking for a message. This is the message. I don’t see how I could remove it.

You’ve got some potential to do something great with this, but you have be make sure you don’t lecture your reader or try too hard to describe what you are not saying.

—This poem was never intended to be didactic, and I don’t believe it is. Maybe you missed the point, and that could be my fault to some extent. But to understand the commentary, it deserves a few reads.

Ok. When you write a piece that isn’t clear to the reader, you do not have the chance to stand over said reader and tell them what you meant. That isn’t how it works.  

“only the sweetest to endure.”—
—how does this not make sense? It’s clear to me. Is it the syntax or the diction? please clarify.
I’m sure it makes sense to you- you wrote it. However.  It doesn’t make sense b/c the cocktail is waiting for the sweetness of something to last? The words you have chosen do not work.

“She begged … hungry ribs.” Like this until ‘hungry ribs’ – doesn’t work. You aren’t personifying her ribs.
—I’m not intending to personify her ribs. Hungry ribs is an image of starvation.
I know what it is supposed to be, but it isn’t done well. Hungry lips. Hey, I think that’s an image of sexuality, but it doesn’t work.

“She put it down,” You don’t need this, it takes away. it’s narraration.
—I’m confused. What’s bad about narration? Also, I see it as important in the context of Urizen’s compass. In other words, she felt no need for reason. Maybe the allusion is too obscure, but I do hold my audience responsible.
No, you don’t ‘hold the reader responsible’. If you want to play the elitist game with writing, you will find that no one will ever buy anything from you. People do not read to be made to feel stupid.  There is nothing wrong with narraration in general, but it doesn’t work here. You, again, can’t explain to the reader what you meant.

“lifted to her widening eyes
that violet slip of cloth”—awkward
—How? The syntax seems natural to me.
Seems natural TO YOU, yes. But you are the author, and it is very very hard to climb out of your own head and see what a stranger who isn’t you wouls read. Trust me, it is not a smooth statement. You could re-word it to make it flow, perhaps “lifted the violet slip of cloth to her eyes”, I don’t care. The point is that the words in the order that you put them fumble over themselves and make an awkward image.

“drunk,... white as an x-ray?”
You went too far. this smacks of soap box. Catholic symbols can be powerful, and are beautiful in their way, but I kind of just felt like some catechism wafers were just rammed down my throat with an altar cloth.
—I think you’re missing the message. Read again. I am not Catholic, nor do intend to push Catholic beliefs. In fact, I’ve commented on the hollowness of the symbols in this context.
I understand that it isn’t meant to be ‘hooray church!’ This does not make it any less soap-box-y

“the buildings fall into acute geometry,” How? This means nothing to me. Even if you just said so. Is it meant to be death? heaven? Dreams? What.
—It’s pretty clear she’s tripping and going through sensory deprivation.
It’s not pretty clear. Hi! I’m the reader. I’m telling you it isn’t clear. Sensory deprivation I got, but not from this line. This line made things UNclear.

“Keep me in your silence;
Light only comes to darkness.”  This line does nothing for the piece.
—Why not? You haven’t been clear. This is a poem of attempted salvation, a vision quest. In the end, she is looking for a message. This is the message. I don’t see how I could remove it.
The line does nothing for the piece: It may have been your message, but it is stated poorly. Read those two lines, just as they are.  They don’t say anything. Sorry.

You’ve got some potential to do something great with this, but you have be make sure you don’t lecture your reader or try too hard to describe what you are not saying.
—This poem was never intended to be didactic, and I don’t believe it is. Maybe you missed the point, and that could be my fault to some extent. But to understand the commentary, it deserves a few reads.
I read it more than once, don’t get me wrong. However I’m sure I did miss the point. I still do not know what you think the point of this piece is. That’s your fault. You are the writer. It is your job to make your point come across. I’m sorry I didn’t pat you on the head and tell you this was wonderful, but it isn’t. This site is for critiques. Honest, genuine critiques. You don’t have to take anything I said to heart, and you don’t have to agree. I’m telling you what a reader of your work would say. Hi. I’m the reader, this is what I’ve said.

Wow, you are being extremely rude and immature. I was asking for more help, for you to clarify your statements. I have had this poem read before. You are not my only reader.
When you critique someone’s work, you have to give them specific reasons why. You can’t just stand there and trash a piece say “I’m the reader, this is what I say. It’s garbage. You have no defense.”

I’ve read your poems and you have clarity issues as well, so don’t sit there and act holier-than-thou. I was trying to understand why you felt certain things don’t work. Take it to heart. You are not a better writer, and you are not allowed to treat me as an inferior.

No no, you misunderstand me. That was not my intent.

All I’m trying to say is that when things are unclear you as the author will not have the ability to explain it.

I have neevr claimed to be better than you. I tried to explain why things don’t work. I’m not trashing your work, I’m critiquing. Again, you don’t have to take anything I say to heart. I do hope I’m not your only reader, nothing deserves to be read once by one person and have its fate decided.

I’m not being rude, I’m not being immature. I’m only trying to get you to see that as a writer it is your job ( my job, his job) to keep the reader interested, to get your point across to the reader, to keep the reader moving through the piece. I am giving you my opinion as your reader. I have not said my opinion is the One True Opinion. Please don’t confuse that. if you don’t like what I have to say you are not obligated to do a thing with it. You can attack my writitng, thats fine. I do have clarity issues. That’s why I am having my works reviewed.

I am not trying to wound your pride, I just don’t care enough to try to do that. Let it go. Dismiss what I’ve said if you don’t think it was useful. It doesn’t matter.