deepundergroundpoetry.com
WHAT CAN HE DO?
WHAT CAN HE DO?
He was obliged to share as all his brothers were.
There were some people killed and some lost land and homes.
All that took place when he was still a mere, young child,
and heard a story that his parents don't admit.
Now, he's supposed to swear to prove a new lawsuit.
He knows it is not true, but he can't contradict.
His father, uncles, aunts will be gravely condemned.
He should swear on what's wrong or lose those who are dear.
His conscience is so stunned, and sharp teeth start to bite
his tired mind that weeps and asks refuge through death
ere that most horrid day will request him to swear
and bring him fearful pain or loss of those so dear.
BY JOSEPH ZENIEH
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
____________________________________
He was obliged to share as all his brothers were.
There were some people killed and some lost land and homes.
All that took place when he was still a mere, young child,
and heard a story that his parents don't admit.
Now, he's supposed to swear to prove a new lawsuit.
He knows it is not true, but he can't contradict.
His father, uncles, aunts will be gravely condemned.
He should swear on what's wrong or lose those who are dear.
His conscience is so stunned, and sharp teeth start to bite
his tired mind that weeps and asks refuge through death
ere that most horrid day will request him to swear
and bring him fearful pain or loss of those so dear.
BY JOSEPH ZENIEH
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
____________________________________
Published 19th Oct 2019
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 0
reading list entries 0
comments 10
reads 368
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
20th Oct 2019 5:36pm
This is not poetry. It is a series off all tell/now show prose declarations set out in line breaks, as can be seen when the line breaks are taken away:
He was obliged to share as all his brothers were. There were some people killed and some lost land and homes. All that took place when he was still a mere, young child, and heard a story that his parents don't admit.
Now, he's supposed to swear to prove a new lawsuit. He knows it is not true, but he can't contradict. His father, uncles, aunts will be gravely condemned. He should swear on what's wrong or lose those who are dear.
His conscience is so stunned, and sharp teeth start to bite his tired mind that weeps and asks refuge through death ere that most horrid day will request him to swear and bring him fearful pain or loss of those so dear.
There's no concrete appeal to the senses, no imagery, no use of simile or metaphor here, and what meter the lines have is ragged.
Also, the statements are largely incomprehensible since they assume things that are never made clear.
"He was obliged to share as all his brothers were".
Who is this “he” you speak of. And what is it that he is obliged to share?
"There were some people killed and some lost land and homes."
When? Where? And what does this fact have to do with obligating a person and his brothers to engage in sharing?
"All that took place when he was still a mere, young child,"
“Young is” redundant. Is not a mere child a young one. It looks like you used “young” in order to fill out your desired meter, not because it adds anything to your statement.
"and heard a story that his parents don't admit."
Don’t or didn’t. And what is this story?
"Now, [sic] he's supposed to swear to prove a new lawsuit. "
"Swear" to what? And what lawsuit? And is a lawsuit something that is “proved”?
"He knows it is not true, but he can't contradict."
What’s not true? And what is it that he can’t “contradict” ("contradict" demands a stated object).
"His father, uncles, aunts will be gravely condemned."
For what? And what about his brothers?
"He should swear on what's wrong or lose those who are dear."
In court when testifying, one swears TO what's wrong, not ON what's wrong. And "dear" to whom? And what is this “wrong” you speak of?
"His conscience is so stunned, and sharp teeth start to bite"
Can a conscience be “stunned”? What was this stunning like?
"his tired mind that weeps and asks refuge through death"
His mind weeps? And are you pronouncing “refuge” as reFUGE?
"ere that most horrid day will request him to swear"
What is the meter here?
"and bring him fearful pain or loss of those so dear."
Pain OR loss? So dear to whom?
He was obliged to share as all his brothers were. There were some people killed and some lost land and homes. All that took place when he was still a mere, young child, and heard a story that his parents don't admit.
Now, he's supposed to swear to prove a new lawsuit. He knows it is not true, but he can't contradict. His father, uncles, aunts will be gravely condemned. He should swear on what's wrong or lose those who are dear.
His conscience is so stunned, and sharp teeth start to bite his tired mind that weeps and asks refuge through death ere that most horrid day will request him to swear and bring him fearful pain or loss of those so dear.
There's no concrete appeal to the senses, no imagery, no use of simile or metaphor here, and what meter the lines have is ragged.
Also, the statements are largely incomprehensible since they assume things that are never made clear.
"He was obliged to share as all his brothers were".
Who is this “he” you speak of. And what is it that he is obliged to share?
"There were some people killed and some lost land and homes."
When? Where? And what does this fact have to do with obligating a person and his brothers to engage in sharing?
"All that took place when he was still a mere, young child,"
“Young is” redundant. Is not a mere child a young one. It looks like you used “young” in order to fill out your desired meter, not because it adds anything to your statement.
"and heard a story that his parents don't admit."
Don’t or didn’t. And what is this story?
"Now, [sic] he's supposed to swear to prove a new lawsuit. "
"Swear" to what? And what lawsuit? And is a lawsuit something that is “proved”?
"He knows it is not true, but he can't contradict."
What’s not true? And what is it that he can’t “contradict” ("contradict" demands a stated object).
"His father, uncles, aunts will be gravely condemned."
For what? And what about his brothers?
"He should swear on what's wrong or lose those who are dear."
In court when testifying, one swears TO what's wrong, not ON what's wrong. And "dear" to whom? And what is this “wrong” you speak of?
"His conscience is so stunned, and sharp teeth start to bite"
Can a conscience be “stunned”? What was this stunning like?
"his tired mind that weeps and asks refuge through death"
His mind weeps? And are you pronouncing “refuge” as reFUGE?
"ere that most horrid day will request him to swear"
What is the meter here?
"and bring him fearful pain or loss of those so dear."
Pain OR loss? So dear to whom?
20th Oct 2019 8:53pm
Hi Baldwin,
Excuse me if l say, "There is nothing in your comment which is worth answering,". You really surprise me. Your questions show me that you have no idea about poetry at all, or else you wouldn't have asked such questions.
His parents don't admit now. Is it possible you don't understand this point? How can you read poetry? Baldwin, you have lost all credibility to me.
Excuse me if l say, "There is nothing in your comment which is worth answering,". You really surprise me. Your questions show me that you have no idea about poetry at all, or else you wouldn't have asked such questions.
His parents don't admit now. Is it possible you don't understand this point? How can you read poetry? Baldwin, you have lost all credibility to me.
Characterizing my "comment" and attacking my person instead of directly responding to what I have said about your piece and showing though argument and evidence why what I have said is not worth responding to is the sort of dodge that poor poets make when their submissions are criticized.
I think the real issue is not whether I can read poetry, but whether you can write it. There's nothing poetical in your submission above. And it is far too insular to be understood.
What was your purpose behind this piece? What point is it trying to make? What is it that it is supposed to get a reader to see with his/her eyes shut?
And you have yet to answer what it is that the parents of the man you are speaking of don't admit to. Do you really think that this is plain from what you have written?
I think the real issue is not whether I can read poetry, but whether you can write it. There's nothing poetical in your submission above. And it is far too insular to be understood.
What was your purpose behind this piece? What point is it trying to make? What is it that it is supposed to get a reader to see with his/her eyes shut?
And you have yet to answer what it is that the parents of the man you are speaking of don't admit to. Do you really think that this is plain from what you have written?
Poor man.
He witnessed people whom he knew
committing genocide.
And then before the day
that he was called upon to testify
in court to what he saw,
a thug in the employ
of murderers
approached him, saying he must lie
about the culpability
of those that he was bound by law
to solemnly decry
as wanton killers of the innocent
or see his family subject to great pain
and then to death,
refrain from telling to a jury
and a judge all that he knew
was true about the witnessed crime
or face the knowledge
that he would be the one responsible
for bringing rue upon
his kin and kin.
What could he do
in such a circumstance
but sin?
Now before you tell me that this isn't poetry, please note that its all of the features that you have declared a writing must have to be poetry and not prose, namely, rhythm, rhyme, a deep subject, and interesting language. Moreover, unlike a great many of your pieces, it is comprehensible without a reader having to fill in any purported implications, and it has no errors of grammar.
He witnessed people whom he knew
committing genocide.
And then before the day
that he was called upon to testify
in court to what he saw,
a thug in the employ
of murderers
approached him, saying he must lie
about the culpability
of those that he was bound by law
to solemnly decry
as wanton killers of the innocent
or see his family subject to great pain
and then to death,
refrain from telling to a jury
and a judge all that he knew
was true about the witnessed crime
or face the knowledge
that he would be the one responsible
for bringing rue upon
his kin and kin.
What could he do
in such a circumstance
but sin?
Now before you tell me that this isn't poetry, please note that its all of the features that you have declared a writing must have to be poetry and not prose, namely, rhythm, rhyme, a deep subject, and interesting language. Moreover, unlike a great many of your pieces, it is comprehensible without a reader having to fill in any purported implications, and it has no errors of grammar.
21st Oct 2019 8:39pm
Hello Baldwin,
1- You write your poem in iambic, but you make a lot of mistakes in the rhythm. Go through the poem, and you can easily find them.
2- you don't limit yourself to the same metric number in each line, which make your writing much easier. For me this is like prose.
3- You paraphrase my poem very poorly as you lose the main idea of the poem, namely his fear of swearing and his remorse.
4- Your paraphrasing is prose with some effort to use poor rhythm.
5- Why don't you show your muscles by writing original ideas with regular number of meters all through the poem? Thank you, Baldwin.
1- You write your poem in iambic, but you make a lot of mistakes in the rhythm. Go through the poem, and you can easily find them.
2- you don't limit yourself to the same metric number in each line, which make your writing much easier. For me this is like prose.
3- You paraphrase my poem very poorly as you lose the main idea of the poem, namely his fear of swearing and his remorse.
4- Your paraphrasing is prose with some effort to use poor rhythm.
5- Why don't you show your muscles by writing original ideas with regular number of meters all through the poem? Thank you, Baldwin.
Please show me where I made mistakes in the rhythm of my piece.
And where is it written that each line in a poem has to have (be strait- jacketed into) the same number of feet as the others or it will be prose?
Perhaps you'll tell Linda Pastan ( winner of the Dylan Thomas Award, a Pushcart Prize, the Alice Fay di Castagnola Award [Poetry Society of America], the Bess Hokin Prize [Poetry Magazine], the 1986 Maurice English Poetry Award [for A Fraction of Darkness], the Charity Randall Citation of the International Poetry Forum, and the 2003 Ruth Lilly Poetry Prize) just how wrong she was to think that this metrically varied and inconsistent line lengthed piece of hers was poetry:
When they taught me that what mattered most
was not the strict iambic line goose-stepping
over the page but the variations
in that line and the tension produced
on the ear by the surprise of difference,
I understood yet didn't understand
exactly, until just now, years later
in spring, with the trees already lacy
and camellias blowsy with middle age,
I looked out and saw what a cold front had done
to the garden, sweeping in like common language,
unexpected in the sensuous
extravagance of a Maryland spring.
There was a dark edge around each flower
as if it had been outlined in ink
instead of frost, and the tension I felt
between the expected and actual
was like that time I came to you, ready
to say goodbye for good, for you had been
a cold front yourself lately, and as I walked in
you laughed and lifted me up in your arms
as if I too were lacy with spring
instead of middle aged like the camellias,
and I thought: so this is Poetry!
Who said I was paraphrasing what you wrote? Writing on a similar theme -- and with far greater specification of circumstance and in full thoughts -- is hardly a paraphrase (a rewording of something written or spoken by someone else) of your piece.
And do you really think that it is clear in your piece that its main idea is about some unidentified person having a fear of swearing or being swamped with remorse?
BTW, grammatically your "which make your writing much easier" should be "which makeS your writing much easier" And you'll have to explain what you mean by "much easier" for your claim to be comprehensible.
And where is it written that each line in a poem has to have (be strait- jacketed into) the same number of feet as the others or it will be prose?
Perhaps you'll tell Linda Pastan ( winner of the Dylan Thomas Award, a Pushcart Prize, the Alice Fay di Castagnola Award [Poetry Society of America], the Bess Hokin Prize [Poetry Magazine], the 1986 Maurice English Poetry Award [for A Fraction of Darkness], the Charity Randall Citation of the International Poetry Forum, and the 2003 Ruth Lilly Poetry Prize) just how wrong she was to think that this metrically varied and inconsistent line lengthed piece of hers was poetry:
When they taught me that what mattered most
was not the strict iambic line goose-stepping
over the page but the variations
in that line and the tension produced
on the ear by the surprise of difference,
I understood yet didn't understand
exactly, until just now, years later
in spring, with the trees already lacy
and camellias blowsy with middle age,
I looked out and saw what a cold front had done
to the garden, sweeping in like common language,
unexpected in the sensuous
extravagance of a Maryland spring.
There was a dark edge around each flower
as if it had been outlined in ink
instead of frost, and the tension I felt
between the expected and actual
was like that time I came to you, ready
to say goodbye for good, for you had been
a cold front yourself lately, and as I walked in
you laughed and lifted me up in your arms
as if I too were lacy with spring
instead of middle aged like the camellias,
and I thought: so this is Poetry!
Who said I was paraphrasing what you wrote? Writing on a similar theme -- and with far greater specification of circumstance and in full thoughts -- is hardly a paraphrase (a rewording of something written or spoken by someone else) of your piece.
And do you really think that it is clear in your piece that its main idea is about some unidentified person having a fear of swearing or being swamped with remorse?
BTW, grammatically your "which make your writing much easier" should be "which makeS your writing much easier" And you'll have to explain what you mean by "much easier" for your claim to be comprehensible.
21st Oct 2019 10:25pm
Hi Baldwin,
1- Forgetting the S doesn't mean l don't know it. Please don't explain such goofs, which are common everywhere.
2- It's known that having irregular metric lines, and short lines are much easier in poetry. If you don't believe me ask poets.
3- l am not ready to waste time showing you your mistakes in rhythm. You can see them immediately.
1- Forgetting the S doesn't mean l don't know it. Please don't explain such goofs, which are common everywhere.
2- It's known that having irregular metric lines, and short lines are much easier in poetry. If you don't believe me ask poets.
3- l am not ready to waste time showing you your mistakes in rhythm. You can see them immediately.
21st Oct 2019 10:39pm
In other words, you are unable to show me my alleged mistakes.
And as to regular lines being easier to read, check out the piece by Pastan that I added to my previous message. Or look at the works of William Carlos Williams, or Elliot, or Yeveteshenko, or the imagists, etc. I do not believe that you have any knowledge whatsoever of what poets think.
And as to regular lines being easier to read, check out the piece by Pastan that I added to my previous message. Or look at the works of William Carlos Williams, or Elliot, or Yeveteshenko, or the imagists, etc. I do not believe that you have any knowledge whatsoever of what poets think.
21st Oct 2019 11:52pm
Hello Baldwin,
Why do you insist on not showing me an original poem of yours, and telling me where you are from?
Why do you insist on not showing me an original poem of yours, and telling me where you are from?
Why shouldn't I "insist" on this? Why do you think that my telling you these things is relevant to, and has any bearing on, whether the points I raise to you are valid?. Are you attempting to "poison the well" (assuming you know what that fallacy is)? Your question is another dodge of your responsibility to back up claims you make.
