Want To Trash (serious critics invited) This Poem?

Question

FROM THE ASHES OF CELESTIAL DEBRIS


Deprived of the hibernation of
indifference,
seemingly self-imposed, quite often
self-inflicted,

separate souls are drawn back onto the
stages of life.

These characters, being favored by
the Gods that be,
had fate directing them onward towards
the chance meeting.

Against their will their passions kindled
the flames anew,
again fueling the once diminished
embers of care.

Knowing that they are nurtured now by
requited love,
the once wounded hearts of two lives beat
in unison,

thriving within the rhythm of one
mated heartbeat.

(It's my own. Be honest here. My ego is healthy enough.)

Roald, while this poem may have it’s many flaws neither structure nor meter are among them. It is flawlessly metered in alternating 9-3-9-3 syllables of lines, and structured in likewise metered poetic beats and matching couplets. That poems could go from four to two or eight or seven or five lines per verse while alternating them is hardly uncommon. Poets like T.S. Eliot and Wallace Stevens often did this.

That's 9-4-9-4 instead of 3. Sorry about that.

Answer 1

I like your poem. I like the visual imagery. The "hibernation of indifference" is an interesting way of explaining how we become insensitive to parts of our lives. You have a good way of showing the coldness of separation, the catalyst of passion and the warmth of human love. Nicely done.

Answer 2

I don't know if I'm a serious critic, but I like to try to help sometimes.

The line "seemingly self-imposed, quite often/ self-inflicted" confused me, because I wasn't sure if you meant that the indifference was self-inflicted, or the deprivation of it. Since "deprived" implies an outside force, I think it refers to the indifference, but it isn't clear.

Some of it felt wordy: "the once diminished/ embers of care." Embers are diminished, so it felt repetitive.

The problem I have with it (since you asked) is the lack of meter. It felt too chaotic, and the changing structure (four-line stanza to two-line, back to four for awhile, then back to two) added to the chaos.

I like ash/ kindled/ flame/ fuel/ ember though-- how you keep the images close together (you lose that toward the end).

And I know that meaning is often subjective, but when I read it (especially with the title: From the Ashes of Celestial Debris), I imagined two chunks colliding in space to form new worlds, or maybe the collision that resulted in our Earth being formed, and our moon, so that the two "beat in unison" (the ocean tides/ one revolving around the other), and how the two are "thriving within the rhythm of one/ mated heartbeat." And I liked how the poem worked on that scale and on the human scale-- debris colliding in space, or humans colliding in love.

I think the poem has great potential with some revision, and I hope I've helped you some.

Edit: in response to the meter: I should have clarified. I see that it is metered by syllable count, but I meant metered by this definition: a systematically arranged and measured rhythm in verse (with an emphasis on the word rhythm). When I read a poem, syllable count doesn't stand out. What stands out is the beat of the words, and reading it felt awkward. I don't care what T.S. Eliot did; it felt wrong here.
While you might be able to get away with the 4-2-4-4-4-2 structure or the lack of a solid rhythm, both combined felt like too much to me. But what do I know? I'm a novelist. I hope your ego is still healthy, and that you realize I still like much about your poem. Good luck.

Answer 3

i don't be attentive to if i'm a extreme critic, yet i like to attempt to help each and every particularly situations. the line "possible self-imposed, extremely in lots of circumstances/ self-inflicted" puzzled me, through fact I wasn't particular in case you meant that the indifference replaced into self-inflicted, or the deprivation of it. on account that "disadvantaged" implies an outdoors tension, i think of it refers back to the indifference, even with the shown fact that it extremely is not sparkling. a number of it felt wordy: "the as quickly as dwindled/ embers of care." Embers are dwindled, so it felt repetitive. the concern I even have with it (on account which you asked) is the lack of ability of meter. It felt too chaotic, and the changing shape (4-line stanza to 2-line, back to 4 for awhile, then back to 2) extra to the chaos. i admire ash/ kindled/ flame/ gas/ ember even with the undeniable fact that-- the type you hold the pictures close mutually (you lose that in the direction of the tip). and that i be attentive to that meaning is in lots of circumstances subjective, yet as quickly as I study it (exceptionally with the identify: From the Ashes of Celestial debris), I imagined 2 chunks colliding in area to type new worlds, or possibly the collision that led to our Earth being formed, and our moon, so as that the two "beat in unison" (the sea tides/ one revolving around the different), and how the two are "thriving interior the rhythm of one/ mated heartbeat." and that i beloved how the poem worked on that scale and on the human scale-- debris colliding in area, or human beings colliding in love. i think of the poem has great ability with some revision, and that i'm hoping i've got helped you some. Edit: in keeping with the meter: I could desire to have clarified. I see that that's metered by ability of syllable count style, yet I meant metered by ability of this definition: a systematically arranged and measured rhythm in verse (with an emphasis on the be conscious rhythm). as quickly as I study a poem, syllable count style does not stand out. What stands proud is the beat of the words, and examining it felt awkward. i don't care what T.S. Eliot did; it felt incorrect right here. mutually as you may desire to be waiting to flee with the 4-2-4-4-4-2 shape or the lack of ability of a sturdy rhythm, the two mixed felt like too plenty to me. yet what do i be attentive to? i'm a novelist. i'm hoping your ego remains healthful, and which you already know I nonetheless like plenty approximately your poem. solid good fortune.

Answer 4

The meaning isn't real enough. It's attempting to be deeper than it's capability and it makes you feel detatched from the poem

You do well in writing the actual poem, if it's real enough to attatch the reader emotionally, then it will be a great poem.

Answer 5

you have amazing use of words and putting them together. a lot of talent. the beginning of the poem is very very vague, and I dont see the point till the end. to keep readers interested, you might want to make your point more apparent, or make it much more vivid in the beginning so people see what youre tryig to say, otherwise, cut out the beginning.

Answer 6

I like it, especially the words used and btw I wasn't getting angry at you on your last poem query where I critiqued your poem a bit harshly and got thumbdowned, I was cursing out the trolls.

Answer 7

when you have returned to the dust, the earth, nothing remains., but the eternal. In the words of holy men "and as it is appointed for man to die once, but after this the judgment" Hebrews chapter9 verse27, where we will stand and give an account. Of what we have done whether good or bad. There are choices to make that will effect our eternal destiny. John Chapter3 verses16 thur 19 and Romans chapter2 verse 16.

Answer 8

I'd rather trash True-Blue...what the hell is that blather?

Answer 9

Ok i will trash it.
I dont like it.
Poetry being something you are born with
this is not something i like,
its mixed and makes no sence.
Keep working maybe you can learn to be good.
but yeah it stank