deepundergroundpoetry.com
your puppets
Ill scratch the word innocence of your face. watch this world break at
my feet. ill find inspiration from your blood soaked shirt. Ill cut
your puppets. ill make you dance without your strings. innocence is not
in my vocabulary
my feet. ill find inspiration from your blood soaked shirt. Ill cut
your puppets. ill make you dance without your strings. innocence is not
in my vocabulary
Published 14th Jun 2011
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 2
reading list entries 0
comments 6
reads 755
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
Anonymous
15th Jun 2011 7:03pm
<< post removed >>
21st Jun 2011 6:02am
16th Jun 2011 2:42pm
find inspiration from your blood-soaked shirt--make you dance without your strings- friggin awsome imagery!
21st Jun 2011 6:01am
I was confused by the transition between "Ill [sic] cut your puppets" and "Ill [sic] make you dance without your strings". Aside from the fact that you didn't put apostrophes in the "I will" contractions, I was confused because:
The second sentence seems to imply that the first meant that you'll cut the puppet's strings. Except that isn't what you said. Cutting puppets is fine, I can grasp that concept, but it's a different concept.
I don't know how to describe what I'm trying to say in a succinct way but the sentences together seem to imply they are related yet I see no relationship between them as they stand. That has the effect of me having to read that section of the poem over and over to make sure I haven't misunderstood something (which in turn breaks the flow of the poem).
If you truly meant "I'll cut your puppets" then I would have thought it would be better served if it was place before the "blood soaked shirt" sentence, implying the puppets bled out on the shirt, which would make more sense to me. Then the cutting of the strings would stand out as a concept on its own, which would also make more sense.
I guess it's all down to interpretation, but this was my reaction from reading your poem. Otherwise, I quite like it. An attempt at something original with more than just face value.
EDIT: I just reread another half a dozen times or so and it occurred to me that you are meaning that you'll make him dance without his string [puppets]. Which also makes sense but then I can't help feel that the string is the key in both sentences so you need to find some way to apply the "string" to both of them.
Maybe I should just have a cold beer and a sock puppet.
The second sentence seems to imply that the first meant that you'll cut the puppet's strings. Except that isn't what you said. Cutting puppets is fine, I can grasp that concept, but it's a different concept.
I don't know how to describe what I'm trying to say in a succinct way but the sentences together seem to imply they are related yet I see no relationship between them as they stand. That has the effect of me having to read that section of the poem over and over to make sure I haven't misunderstood something (which in turn breaks the flow of the poem).
If you truly meant "I'll cut your puppets" then I would have thought it would be better served if it was place before the "blood soaked shirt" sentence, implying the puppets bled out on the shirt, which would make more sense to me. Then the cutting of the strings would stand out as a concept on its own, which would also make more sense.
I guess it's all down to interpretation, but this was my reaction from reading your poem. Otherwise, I quite like it. An attempt at something original with more than just face value.
EDIT: I just reread another half a dozen times or so and it occurred to me that you are meaning that you'll make him dance without his string [puppets]. Which also makes sense but then I can't help feel that the string is the key in both sentences so you need to find some way to apply the "string" to both of them.
Maybe I should just have a cold beer and a sock puppet.
21st Jun 2011 6:02am
