Dan Abnormal...(Not normal at all) (the_ninja_gamer) wrote in omega_poetry,
Dan Abnormal...(Not normal at all)
the_ninja_gamer
omega_poetry

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Washes the grave with silvery tears...

Gods of their mighty fortress that they built,
Dreams are shattered when they kill.
Busied by their swords and majical words,
Cutting down souls in furious herds.
Merry-go-rounds take them to a faraway place,
Before they fire their gun do they even look at a fathers face?
Lost in a tranquil land of kings and theives,
They are forced to kill not using their eyes to see.
A mothers kiss readies them for a dream state,
Thrown is a single rose on the soldiers' grave.
Do not these little children know,
A soldier they may be in the malady of tomarrow?
Blinded by the visions of media,
A loved one screams in hopes their sadness will lift up.
Cursing god and Democracy,
Praying viewers watch the birthdates on the screen.
Silent vigils into the night,
While brave soldiers read letters from home and cry.
In the distance stands a "worthy cause,"
Was it worth what children never saw?

I do not intend to ruffle anyone's feathers, this is just from a liberal point of view. If one can respect that, I will respect you. Thanks, I hope u enjoyed it...
any comments would be appreciated,

Jessica Pawluk
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic
  • 3 comments
Okay, I think you have some good imagery in this poem, but I'm going to offer a lot of suggestions. Keep in mind that they are only my opinions, and feel free to take them or leave them as you see fit.

First and foremost, I think you should get rid of the rhyme scheme. It's hindering the poem, forcing lines to invert themselves and forcing you to cater to the rhyme, as opposed to having the rhyme cater to you. I think you could get your point across much clearer and with much more poignance if you didn't restrict yourself to rhymes and assonance (words that sound alike but don't rhyme exactly).

I also think if the lines were longer, you'd be able to say more. As it is, each line seems kind of abrupt.

Busied by their swords and majical words,
1) It's 'magical'. 2) I can't figure out why, but this line just doesn't do it for me.

Cutting down souls in furious herds.
This line I like. A lot. It's a powerful image.

Merry-go-rounds take them to a faraway place,
Before they fire their gun do they even look at a fathers face?


These two lines here don't fit together at all. You're connecting two unrelated points, to start, and the second line breaks the rhythm drastically. On top of that, it really doesn't make sense. I get what you're trying to say, but it seems like the poem could do without it - it's an awkward sentiment to try and get across in words.

Lost in a tranquil land of kings and theives,
'Tranquil' is not the first word that springs to mind in describing a land rife with kings and thieves.

They are forced to kill not using their eyes to see.
I think this is where the poem clearly starts bending to the rhyme. Here's the best advice I have for you: DO NOT LET THE RHYME CONTROL THE POEM. You're the author, therefore you are in charge. If the rhyme wants to do something that you don't like, or that you feel is awkward, don't do it. Worst comes to worse, you can either temporarily leave the line blank (I use a * when I need to come back and fill in a line), or break the rhyme.

A mothers kiss readies them for a dream state,
Awkward phrasing, and seemingly out of context. If they're away at war, their mothers are far away. And if the war itself is a dreamstate of any kind, I'd be more inclined to call it a nightmare.

Thrown is a single rose on the soldiers' grave.
Nice image, lacking in the execution. The line is inverted to, once again, serve the rhyme and not the image.

Do not these little children know,
Same as above.

A soldier they may be in the malady of tomarrow?
The closest I can see to "malady" is "milady", which is wrong. I think the word you're looking for is "melee". And it's 'tomorrow'. If you do decide to break the rhyme, I think maybe a bit of a more sweeping sentiment could be fit in here, such as, 'Tomorrow these children could be soldiers in the melee of tomorrow's world', or something along those lines. I don't know, that's really just a shot in the dark.

Here's where the rhyme *does* break:
Blinded by the visions of media,
A loved one screams in hopes their sadness will lift up.
Cursing god and Democracy,
Praying viewers watch the birthdates on the screen.
Silent vigils into the night,
While brave soldiers read letters from home and cry.


The first line here I'd say is erroneous because the soldiers don't actually, to my knowledge, get much exposure to the wartime media while they're fighting.

'god' should be 'God' in this context.

In the distance stands a "worthy cause,"
Was it worth what children never saw?


I like the idea of the worthy cause off in the distance, but I think the last line once again is distorted to serve the rhyme.

I think your strongest points of the poem, you'll find, are when you stopped worrying about the rhyme for those few moments. Look back on that part and reflect, try to get back into the mood, and write what you feel about the war, instead of worrying about what will rhyme about the war or sound good to a listener's ear.

Hope this helps,

Rick
I appreciate your comments. They are very helpful. malady (meaning diseased, bad), for one I used to express the bad time tomarrow will bring. Maybe u are right about the catering to the rhyme thing, I like the way it sounds though. But, what I am trying to get across, you said you understand, I wonder if you truly do...lol. no offense, some songs are written that are never really understood...
with each line a different story or vision is taking place. The whole thing is not meant to blend, but meant to make the reader think, kind of like a canticle. But, other than that I will take your comments into consideration! Thank you!
"you said you understand, I wonder if you truly do...lol. no offense, some songs are written that are never really understood..."

In a way you're right but you're also not getting Rich's point. Of course, a lot of brilliant writers *do* write things that are never fully understood. (Coleridge's Kubla Khan, for example) The difference is that you have to ask yourself: Can my work at least be interpreted? Can a number of people draw elements from it and add them together and say, "Well, this and this make sense, but it might be this and this..." I don't believe your poem really does that, at least not to the extent of a strong poet. In order to break rules you have to be able to know them, and I don't see how you can know all the rules just yet.

For example, poetry doesn't have to blend, but it can't be awkard, either (like your poem is). Your lines are very jutted and forced, and it disrupts and ruins the entire experience of reading the poem. You can't draw readers in if their reading of it pushes them away. Poetry doesn't have to rhyme, but it doesn't have to not rhyme; poetry doesn't have to have a scheme or some sort of formal set up, but it can. Choose what you want but let it enhance your poem, not diminish it.

I think what was so awkward about "malady" is it doesn't fit too well in the poem. It's good that you're branching out and using new and different words, but make sure you know how to use them before you do. I guess I'm saying that if you're going to use the word "malady," be sure not only to surround it with similar words ("Love's a malady without a cure" is an example, 'cure' indicates disease or ailment which indicates just what context Dryden was putting "love" in) but keep your diction similar throughout the piece. A lot of your wording is colloquial, whereas "malady" is a high level word. Use other high level words throughtout the poem as well.

Listen to ALL of Rich's comments, for they are good and insightful.

My biggest disagreement with your poem is that it sounds too much like the other "War is bad, peace is good!" poems. You have to make yours remarkably different, something that will make your readers go, "Hmmm.. I've never thought of it that way before." Can you draw on real examples in the past and allude to them in your poem? Is there some metaphor you can create that will make your feelings more vivid and images stronger? You've already got the idea of death and destruction in there--just *why* is it all so horrible? Can you make your poem stronger by adding grotesque, frightening images, or do you want to dwell on the sadness of it?

A little research might help a *lot*... everyone knows how destructive war is, but not everyone knows exactly what goes on behind the news. What weapons do they use that you find particularly inhumane? What manuevers or what particular actions do soldiers/war generals take that you don't like? Use these in your poems as examples of the hatred/destruction of war, and it will make it much more vivid and richer than it is right now.

And if you really want this to be like a canticle, then you need to add a lot more depth to it than it has, and probably more Biblical allusion. You might want to look to Derek Walcott's "A Far Cry From Africa" about the brualities of war or refer to a few other poems of his. He doesn't always discuss war but he has a lot of solid images that you should look at.