Review my composition(s), anyone?

[xibalban]

Hello folks,

I have been trying to compose a few lines in my leisure, but never had the courage to go any further. Lately, and after scanning the numerous helpful threads in this wonderful forum, I was motivated to consider writing as a serious hobby.

I, however, lack good composition skills. I am here to request all you good-fellas to help me by reviewing one of my compositions: a poem.

Please indicate the shortcomings and how I could improve the following draft. Thanking you in advance, here goes:


...and the Devil Flees!!


Narrator:
An amateur, a novice with a debut;
An imp, budding devil for an abduct.

Imp:
O, Wise Sage! Forebode my triumph,
Courage I seek; that lady to dump.

Sage:
A devilish an asset, but do beware,
A woman she is, may grant you tear.
Saccharine acid, concealed within gene,
Horrid surprises; all before unseen.
A poison Ivy, ask all history,
O Devil you, but death she's for free.

Imp:
Joan of Arc; Brave Lakshmi Bai,
A mother she is, who lends her pie.
O, Wise Sage! Why devotion to the deity?
Nurse to brave; she builds society.

Sage:
O, Novice Imp! Even with your evil sane,
Escapes the escapades to her filthy lane.
All brave men; the great span un-witnessed,
Times of wisest men; whence knowledge harnessed.
Where science flourished and female suppressed,
Seems a paradox; but truth duly addressed.
Harems of harlots; when foundries scarce,
Evident need for confines; a protective brace.
Learned as they were; all wise men,
Enlightenment that was, which dawned then.
O Dull Devil! Seek all Nature,
Feminine to breed; young to nurture.
Sharp instincts; animals though unwise,
Would choose to cohabit, if otherwise.
Retreat O Imp! Lest you care the least,
That female parasite shall infest and feast.

Imp:
O Wise Sage! Much you know than I sees,
Enlightened and convinced, this devil flees!!

[HarryT]

Two points:

1. Rhyming couplets are about the "twee-est" form of poetry around. I'd suggest choosing a more interesting metrical pattern. But good on you for having a meter! The fashion today seems to be to write prose, split the lines in random places, and claim that it's poetry. Writing to a meter is much more challenging, and the result much more interesting to read.

2. Pretty much all your semicolons really should be commas.

[crich70]

Originally Posted by HarryT

Two points:

1. Rhyming couplets are about the "twee-est" form of poetry around. I'd suggest choosing a more interesting metrical pattern. But good on you for having a meter! The fashion today seems to be to write prose, split the lines in random places, and claim that it's poetry. Writing to a meter is much more challenging, and the result much more interesting to read.

2. Pretty much all your semicolons really should be commas.

Oh I don't know I think it's possible to write good poetry in couplets. I have posted some myself in the past. The 1st one was read by a professional reader for an audio tape.

Cupid

Christmas Child

[xibalban]

Originally Posted by HarryT

1. Rhyming couplets are about the "twee-est" form of poetry around. I'd suggest choosing a more interesting metrical pattern. But good on you for having a meter! The fashion today seems to be to write prose, split the lines in random places, and claim that it's poetry. Writing to a meter is much more challenging, and the result much more interesting to read.

A guide on choosing a more interesting metrical pattern would be nice. Do you have any guide ebooks to suggest?

Originally Posted by HarryT

2. Pretty much all your semicolons really should be commas.

Thanks for that, and thank you for reviewing the whole composition.

[xibalban]

Originally Posted by crich70

Oh I don't know I think it's possible to write good poetry in couplets. I have posted some myself in the past. The 1st one was read by a professional reader for an audio tape.

Cupid

Christmas Child

Very admirable poems, those two. I can see how it can be so simple yet effective. How important is it for a poem to be "sing-able" or to remain within bounds of some poetic metre?

[crich70]

Originally Posted by xibalban

Very admirable poems, those two. I can see how it can be so simple yet effective. How important is it for a poem to be "sing-able" or to remain within bounds of some poetic metre?

I think it is important to have some sort of rhyming scheme myself. I've read some stuff that didn't rhyme at all which seemed more like prose to me. In fact the one I linked to "Cupid" won me an honorable mention in a contest and the grand prize winning poem read like someone's description of walking down the street in the big city. i.e. 1st I saw this then that, etc. I don't know what criteria they used to determine that it was worth the grand prize but it seemed more like a prose essay to me than poetry. I think having a rhyming scheme like the couplets that I used helps in memorizing poems. I don't know if I could remember a very long poem from memory but with the limitations on what word rhymes with a given word i.e. power & flower it does make it easier with a shorter one. Of course not every poem rhymes in quite the same way. Shakespeare had his own pattern of structure that was 14 lines long (if I recall correctly) and reads a lot differently I'm sure than a series of couplets do.

[gmw]

xibalban, I don't have any guide books to suggest, but the thread on which crich70's posts were found give a diverse range of examples. Starts here.

Like Harry, my tastes run to poety that has a strong rhythm (I prefer to say "rhythm" to "metre", because I'm not familiar with all the technical jargon for poetry anyway). Rhyme is less critical to me. One reason for the reputation for "twee" that Harry spoke of is that often an author's search for rhyme can detract from the flow of the poem such that the emphasis always lands on the rhyming syllables rather than where it might otherwise fall more naturally - and this can lead to unwanted/unwarranted exaggeration.

It's one thing to ask for comments from readers, they can tell you whether they like it or whether they don't. Do I like it? I like the feel of it, the rhythm and choice of language, but I'm not so sure I like what it says.

But when you ask for comments in the realm of writers, you have to be prepared for comments to the effect of "if I was doing this ..." . So, with that in mind:

I would be inclined to use either Chorus or Prologue (both of which have a sense that means "the one who speaks the prologue") rather than Narrator for the first part - as in some Shakespeare play introductions. To me, one of those would fit the language you use better.

There are several lines that I would want to smooth out. Certain word choices (eg: "filthy", "Much") and punctuation choices that I think you need to review - you need to help the reader gain the sense of your text (which bits flow together in meaning as opposed to rhyme or rhythm).

[crich70]

Originally Posted by xibalban

Very admirable poems, those two. I can see how it can be so simple yet effective. How important is it for a poem to be "sing-able" or to remain within bounds of some poetic metre?

Thanks for the compliments to my poems.

[hildea]

Commenting as a reader, not a writer: I'm not sure I understand it. Admittedly, English isn't my first language, but I read it quite a lot, and don't usually have problems figuring out what's going on. As far as I can tell, your poem goes something like this:

Narrator: Here's an imp who's going to abduct someone.
Imp: Hey, sage, I want to dump a lady and need courage.
Sage: Women are bad.
Imp: Some women are good.
Sage: No, seriously, women are really bad.
Imp: OK, you've convinced me.

This confuses me, mostly because dumping someone is pretty much the opposite of abducting them.

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by xibalban

A guide on choosing a more interesting metrical pattern would be nice. Do you have any guide ebooks to suggest?

Guidebooks? No. Just look at other poetry and see what other poets do. One of my favourite poets is Rudyard Kipling, and he uses all sorts of different rhyming patterns. Eg:

God of our fathers, known of old,
   Lord of our far-flung battle-line,
Beneath whose awful Hand we hold
   Dominion over palm and pine—
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!

Here we have line 1 and line 3 rhyming, and line 2 and line 4 rhyming, with a final rhyming couplet.

Or:

 You may talk o' gin and beer
When you're quartered safe out 'ere,
An' you're sent to penny-fights an' Aldershot it;
But when it comes to slaughter
You will do your work on water,
An' you'll lick the bloomin' boots of 'im that's got it.

Here lines 1 and 2 rhyme, and lines 4 and 5 rhyme, but line 3 rhymes with line 6.

Both of these are much more interesting to read than a simple succession of rhyming couplets.

[xibalban]

Originally Posted by hildea

Commenting as a reader, not a writer: I'm not sure I understand it. Admittedly, English isn't my first language, but I read it quite a lot, and don't usually have problems figuring out what's going on. As far as I can tell, your poem goes something like this:

Narrator: Here's an imp who's going to abduct someone.
Imp: Hey, sage, I want to dump a lady and need courage.
Sage: Women are bad.
Imp: Some women are good.
Sage: No, seriously, women are really bad.
Imp: OK, you've convinced me.

This confuses me, mostly because dumping someone is pretty much the opposite of abducting them.

Correct interpretation. I meant no offense to womenfolk, by the way.
Well dump also means "to knock down" and thats what I meant. It is always safe to knock someone down before abducting .

[xibalban]

Originally Posted by gmw

xibalban, I don't have any guide books to suggest, but the thread on which crich70's posts were found give a diverse range of examples. Starts here.

Like Harry, my tastes run to poety that has a strong rhythm (I prefer to say "rhythm" to "metre", because I'm not familiar with all the technical jargon for poetry anyway). Rhyme is less critical to me. One reason for the reputation for "twee" that Harry spoke of is that often an author's search for rhyme can detract from the flow of the poem such that the emphasis always lands on the rhyming syllables rather than where it might otherwise fall more naturally - and this can lead to unwanted/unwarranted exaggeration.

It's one thing to ask for comments from readers, they can tell you whether they like it or whether they don't. Do I like it? I like the feel of it, the rhythm and choice of language, but I'm not so sure I like what it says.

But when you ask for comments in the realm of writers, you have to be prepared for comments to the effect of "if I was doing this ..." . So, with that in mind:

I would be inclined to use either Chorus or Prologue (both of which have a sense that means "the one who speaks the prologue") rather than Narrator for the first part - as in some Shakespeare play introductions. To me, one of those would fit the language you use better.

There are several lines that I would want to smooth out. Certain word choices (eg: "filthy", "Much") and punctuation choices that I think you need to review - you need to help the reader gain the sense of your text (which bits flow together in meaning as opposed to rhyme or rhythm).

It is a privilege to receive comments on my mediocre poem, from an accomplished writer like you. Thank you, and I can assure you that I am not a misogynist .

Originally Posted by HarryT

Guidebooks? No. Just look at other poetry and see what other poets do. One of my favourite poets is Rudyard Kipling, and he uses all sorts of different rhyming patterns. Eg:

God of our fathers, known of old,
   Lord of our far-flung battle-line,
Beneath whose awful Hand we hold
   Dominion over palm and pine—
Lord God of Hosts, be with us yet,
Lest we forget—lest we forget!

Here we have line 1 and line 3 rhyming, and line 2 and line 4 rhyming, with a final rhyming couplet.

Or:

 You may talk o' gin and beer
When you're quartered safe out 'ere,
An' you're sent to penny-fights an' Aldershot it;
But when it comes to slaughter
You will do your work on water,
An' you'll lick the bloomin' boots of 'im that's got it.

Here lines 1 and 2 rhyme, and lines 4 and 5 rhyme, but line 3 rhymes with line 6.

Both of these are much more interesting to read than a simple succession of rhyming couplets.

Thank you for the tip, and those wonderful examples. By guides, I meant guides to poetic rhythm (or rules to follow, etc).

[crich70]

I think it depends on what language the poetry is written in as well. "The Iliad" and its sequel "The Odyssey" for example were originally written in Ancient Greek and don't read quite the same most likely when translated. Wikipedia has an article about the use of Meter in Poetry.

Meter In Poetry

[xibalban]

Originally Posted by crich70

I think it depends on what language the poetry is written in as well. "The Iliad" and its sequel "The Odyssey" for example were originally written in Ancient Greek and don't read quite the same most likely when translated. Wikipedia has an article about the use of Meter in Poetry.

Meter In Poetry

Thanks for that link, it helped a lot. However, it also made me realise that poetic metre is no child's play, thus making my composition seem very amateurish to me.

[BookCat]

Most rhyme schemes are denoted by letters. For example: a b a b means that the third line rhymes with the first and the fourth line rhymes with the second (in a stanza of four lines). There are many variations of this. As suggested above, read lots of pre 1960 poetry and work out the schemes, using a new letter when a new rhyme is used in the same stanza. For example, in a six line stanza it could be abacc (using a rhyming couplet at the end of each stanza, a bit like a sonnet).

This is how I was taught to scan during A level and at uni. Here's a witty, rhyming poem of mine, note the use of rhythm too, which is always something to bear in mind as there are many metrical choices usually denoting by stressed and unstressed 'beats'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__ko...8-R4gTJ-eSBPkg