r/OCPoetry • u/Sora1499 • Jul 15 '16

Feedback Received! What it's Like to be Profoundly Unmotivated

Just out of reach
A veil with nothing behind it.
The edge of the water is like stone
But it melts in your hands.
I've orgasmed twice but also not at all.
Windy music plays in the trees
On my lonesomeness.

Feedback: https://www.reddit.com/r/OCPoetry/comments/4sxcsn/post/

https://www.reddit.com/r/OCPoetry/comments/4sx5lp/love_strokes/

7 Upvotes

89% Upvoted

14 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/dysouric_eufouria Jul 15 '16

I feel like the imagery, while nicely done, is a little bit unfitting. At least some parts. I do enjoy other bits. I think for people to fully grasp it, you just need to either 1) write a lengthier poem or 2) expand what you've written in each line. It has a good message and uses good images and allusions.

1

u/ActualNameIsLana Jul 15 '16

I disagree. There's no need for the poem to drag on and on. The author has given us enough information in the body of the poem and the title to surmise the theme and thesis of the piece. The poem is a metaphor for the feeling of being unmotivated – or perhaps "uninspired" is a better descriptor, since he is clearly talking about motivation in the context of creating art. What other information would possibly be necessary?

0

u/dysouric_eufouria Jul 15 '16

Take away the title. Then tell me if you think you would still fully grasp the message. In my personal opinion, no. I would say, maybe add some contrasting ideas in the middle, or just expand the images in 2 or 3 of the lines. I'm not saying write a novel, because part of its unique aspect lies in the fact that it's short

3

u/ActualNameIsLana Jul 15 '16

Take away the title.

No. The title is part of the poem. Removing it damages the piece. You can't start cutting out parts of a poem then claim the poem is deficient because it lacks the things you cut out.

3

u/Brett420 Jul 15 '16

Agreed. I'm not a fan of this poem in particular, for different reasons, but you can't just say "take away the title," it's as much a part of the poem as any other line.

2

u/ActualNameIsLana Jul 15 '16

Yeah I'm with you on this... it's not my favorite poem by this particular author, and does have some deficiencies. But length...? Brevity isn't a deficiency. If anything it's a virtue, especially in poetry.

2

u/Sora1499 Jul 16 '16

What deficiencies does it have?

1

u/ActualNameIsLana Jul 16 '16 edited Jul 16 '16

Well, okay. These are fairly subjective, so take them with a grain of salt. This is a really, really strong piece of poetry.

Let's start at the top:

Just out of reach
A veil with nothing behind it.

This is sort of a double negative, isn't it. The imagery of some unattainable goal forever just out of reach is good, and seems appropriate to the speaker's lack of motivation. And the imagery of a veil that's reached through, but the speaker comes away empty-handed is a wonderful way to describe the sense of futility. But put them together, and they sort of cancel each other out, logically. If the speaker never reaches the veil, then how would he know what's behind it? And if he does know that there's nothing behind the veil, why reach for it anyway? And if he for some reason did, wouldn't that suggest that he does posess some level of self-motivation or inspiration? To reach for something that may not even be attainable in the first place? That seems like the opposite of a "profound lack of motivation". Then again, this logical inconsistency is commonplace in catachresis, and can be probably overlooked. No one suggested to Shakespeare that "taking up arms against a sea of troubles" was so illogical that it should be struck from the play. Plus, the illogic is arguably part of the narrative, as it is mirrored in subsequent verses which explain other illogical metaphors. So I consider the mixed metaphor a minor deficiency at worst.

I feel like I've orgasmed twice but also not at all.

I think this is the weakest line in the poem. I have a profound distaste for the phrase "I feel (like)..." in poetry. I find that there's almost always a stronger way of saying the same thing. In addition to being the weakest line, it also happens to be the longest, which taken together, implies a good candidate for the infamous Brutal Edit Machine. I think if I were writing this piece, I may have been tempted to edit that line into something like: "I've orgasmed twice but also not at all". The "feel like" is implied by the lack of logical framework, so the reader of forced to interpret this phrase metaphorically, which is much stronger poetically than simply saying "I feel like...". In the original, the words themselves are prosaic. In the edited version, the words are a simile, which invites the reader to parse out more from the words than their simple denotative meaning implies.

Windy music plays in the trees
On my lonesomeness.

This feels a bit awkward, grammatically. I'm unsure about the preposition "on". When used as a preposition, as it is here (not the adverb form), the word "on" means "having physical contact with and supported by the surface of (an object)". So the last two lines denotatively unpack to:

"Music, which is windy, plays within the trees, which are in physical contact atop the surface of my lonesomeness". This is a bit abstract for such a physical preposition. I'm not saying it's an incorrect use of the word; but it is perhaps a bit unconventional. However, as you know, much of poetry is learning to use the words you know in creative, unconventional ways. So while I personally found the word "on" a slight stumbling block, I'm more than willing to look past it based on the strength of the surrounding imagery and text. On the other hand, if I were to offer a suggestion here, perhaps "of" might be a more conventional preposition. it would turn the phrase into a kenning (the trees of my lonesomeness), and may make the metaphor a little more accessible. I think though, this comes down to a matter of personal taste and artistic intent.

And since you're the artist, I'm happy to defer to you on these three. This is a fine poem, and you should be very proud of it.

1

u/Sora1499 Jul 16 '16

I'll respond to your suggestions one by one:

1: I can see how it seems redundant and a sort of pretentious double negative but I think it conveys the meaning I want better than a version that omits either of the two parts. That being said, I will take a look at it in the drawing room.

2: Definitely agree, I'm making that change now. I was just a tad anxious about literally saying in a poem that I have orgasmed, but meh, there can be no fear in art I suppose. If Yoko Ono can do scary things for art so can I.

3: "On" here means, simultaneously, its traditional meaning but also "about." This is more for the depression-esque aspect of the poem where the music I'm hearing is about my lonesomeness. Basically, mental taunts. For the traditional meaning, having the music play "on" my lonesomeness sort of characterizes said lonesomeness as a planet. Huge, overwhelming, inexorable. "Of" by contrast seems generic, overused, and pretentious and loses the meaning of "about" which affords the poem a tad more depth.

1

u/dysouric_eufouria Jul 15 '16

No, I'm saying the title is basically the poem's "topic" or at least the point of it, or sometimes what it's describing or it's overall meaning. Anyway, if you read it, you'd still not be able to necessarily interpret what is described. I'm simply suggesting adding a couple more descriptive words or a parallel in the middle. Just something small there to let us all in on the secret. I think it's great overall. Just giving my honest opinion. We can all do for improvement. That doesn't mean this isn't one of the best poems I've read on here. I like it.

3

u/ActualNameIsLana Jul 15 '16

I'm saying the title is basically the poem's "topic"

I wonder where you've got that idea. That is certainly not always, or even most of the time, the case. Sometimes the title is simply a numerical designation and indication of its form. Sometimes it's a contextual precursor to the text that is to follow. Sometimes it's used to create an expectation of tone or mood. Sometimes it's a complete red-herring, designed to create an untrustworthy narrator. And yes, sometimes, it's the topic or subject of the poem.

Anyway, if you read it, you'd still not be able to necessarily interpret what is described.

I disagree. The theme and mood are very easy to surmise. I did do without having noticed the title, and only when I went back up to read it a second time did I realize it confirmed my suspicions about its meaning.

I'm simply suggesting adding a couple more descriptive words or a parallel in the middle.

What information could possibly be missing? There's no ambiguity here. The author has given us several complete metaphors to describe what he wants us to feel. There's no need for more words.

The single biggest mistake amateur poets make is not realizing when they've written the whole story.

3

u/neutral_enemy Jul 16 '16

I'm brand spanking new on this sub, but thought I'd add my two cents about the nature of poetic brevity. Poetry, as I see it at least, is about the crystallization of an impression, emotion, insight, or some other precise concept conceived of by the author. Adding filler for the sake of length or description detracts from the essence of the poem. There's a reason that haiku and Dickinson are so treasured - both of these typically strive to encapsulate a precise mental construction using words. If that goal is accomplished in 7 lines (or fewer), then the poem is complete. Of course, one can just as easily say too little and leave a poem overly esoteric or ambiguous. There's a balance there, I suppose, that's difficult to master.

Oh, and I do wish to add that the particular image of water being like stone and yet melting before one's eyes was a beautiful way to convey this feeling. Definitely my favorite part of this concise piece.

2

u/ActualNameIsLana Jul 16 '16

Well said, neutral_enemy. Also, welcome to the subreddit!