Poetry / Taurus

Thank you so much for your words. Very helpful. I was questioning the use of the word “sweet” myself. I do plan to change this piece, I just have not done so at this point. I will repost a new version soon enough and would love to have your review.

the word ‘sweet’ for me, painted a stark contrast
in the contradiction of the scene and created a nice tension.

evath

of course the word paints a contrast. The problem is it does so with too obvious a stroke. It’s ‘gilding the lily.’ A poet can be subtle, choose not to twack the reader over the head, & still manage a good poem.  Just my two cents.

You two get along wonderfully.

This poem was written to a current lover. About what, I will not say outright, because I do not know how old you are. “Taurus” simply refers to that person, other than that, it bears no meaning. You need not understand astrology to understand the poem.
I do know not to end a sentence with a preposition, but I bend the rules a little with my poetry, and I am not the first to do so.

Thanks for the edification.
I will read it again and replace “Taurus” for
“You asshole” ;-)P
or maybe “my heartbreaker”
Another name that didn’t make this
so obscure, or only meant for
that one person, would work better.
And I’m 48 by the way
so nothing is off limits!
Anyway, as for the dangling preposition,
I see your point, others, too have employed this,
however, if it served any useful purpose to leave
it dangling there—so blantantly incorrect,
especially at the end of the poem… hmmm,
If it had rhymed with the earlier line,
or the line it would have rhymed with
had there been a rhyme scheme…
but it serves no purpose
doesn’t make the line flow any better.
You should consider revising that line.
if only not to leave the reader with the thought
that it was weak.
just my humble opinion. and who am I?
best
E~
P.S. Perhaps you should retitle this:
for your eyes only.

Sorry, but “evath” is making too much of a very limited point of grammar. As I pointed out before reading his/her remarks, English is capable of sustaining an understood object. The ban on ending with prepositions comes down to us from Latinate lanuage studies. Take it whence it comes.

Well, the poem as a whole seemed weak in it’s irrelevance
and usage of a “name” that brought nothing to
the poem at all.
Which is why, in addition to the feeling of obscurity
leant to it by that fact, taken together with the fact
that the work ends in incorrect grammatical usage
just rendered me stunned, and not by impression of exclamation
of awe, but as in ‘ho-hum.’
Now, I will say that this is merely my opinion.
But that is why you are here, for our collective opinions.
I am not one to mince words.
I pointed out what I thought were the flaws of the work as well as what I thought was its strength.
It is up to the author to accept and correct…
or stand by the import of the inital inspiration and stick by that.
Overall the effect was the weaking of what might otherwise have been a short poem of considerable impact.
MHO
All who disagree are free to do just that, but I will say
that most of the greats “from the latinates” on down,
have been fond of reworking, rewriting and strengthening
their work, if it merits it.
Although there will always be those who will disagree,
I believe that there are rules of grammar for many reasons,
and unless in breaking them you break new ground, or defy
the rules for some particular point, I find it irrelevant
to the work to merely disregard them.
Not everything that sounds poetic has any poetic merit or value.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinions.
Here you have mine; take them, or leave them.

I’m glad. That is how I read it as well.