Poetry / Sonnet 130

Thanks.

Actually, it originally had a a subtitle:

A note to the budding poet:
A warning against passion

which needs to be added back in, or something like it to clarify the purpose, because it’s not really a rebuttal, but as you say more of a conintuation.  you’re right, the original did pretty much what i’m doing, except Shakespeare was speaking directly to the woman, and I am speaking to the people who speak to their lovers in this manner. i’m glad you got it, because a lot of people have been missing the point (which I am at least partly to blame for).  the last two lines are what really make the poem; it’s basically a shot at crappy love poetry and an attempt to save the words that too often become cliched metaphor by negating them.  

I agree, but I still think you should be more sarcastic in order to make it clear that this is a continuation of the original. Thanks for the comment.

I have no doubts about the last line.  The last line makes the poem.  Without it, everything else is just a Shakespeare ripoff.

actually the main line of thought does not come until the last line.  I should probably include the subtitle, which was A Note to Budding Poets: A Warning Against Passion.  Otherwise i think most people see pretty much the same thing that Shakespeare did in his Sonnet 130 and miss that it’s the “words” that are being negated, and not the emotions.

And I thought pretty much all the lines were one beat short.  Which wasn’t entirely by accident.  

actually the main line of thought does not come until the last line.  I should probably include the subtitle, which was A Note to Budding Poets: A Warning Against Passion.  Otherwise i think most people see pretty much the same thing that Shakespeare did in his Sonnet 130 and miss that it’s the “words” that are being negated, and not the emotions.

And I thought pretty much all the lines were one beat short.  Which wasn’t entirely by accident.  

actually the main line of thought does not come until the last line.  I should probably include the subtitle, which was A Note to Budding Poets: A Warning Against Passion.  Otherwise i think most people see pretty much the same thing that Shakespeare did in his Sonnet 130 and miss that it’s the “words” that are being negated, and not the emotions.

And I thought pretty much all the lines were one beat short.  Which wasn’t entirely by accident.  

actually the main line of thought does not come until the last line.  I should probably include the subtitle, which was A Note to Budding Poets: A Warning Against Passion.  Otherwise i think most people see pretty much the same thing that Shakespeare did in his Sonnet 130 and miss that it’s the “words” that are being negated, and not the emotions.

And I thought pretty much all the lines were one beat short.  Which wasn’t entirely by accident.  

separation? uh, no.

i’m glad it didn’t touch you emotionally, because it’s kind of a joke.

Do you have to be so rude?  I suppose you do.  I won’t review you again.  Have a beautiful weekend.

I was just going back and reading some of the comments here.  The one about Shakespeare and prepositions was funny.  As if the poem wasn’t based on Sonnet 130.  Anyway I went back and counted.  Me: 35 Shakespeare: 36.  I win.

thanks.  you seem to be the first to fully understand my intentions here.  more directly than attacking crappy love poetry, i was attacking those overused images; the words that are worn and ground into dust. by denying them, as you say, i was attempting to save them from their fate as cliched love poem metaphor.  i may go back through it at some point to improve the rhythm and perhaps clarify the ideas, but now you know the point of the poem.

That is wow… amazing work. The concept is a powerful one that I have never been able to bring across properly in my work. I love the ending especailly, but the magnificence was equal throughout the work. You’re use of symbolism and metaphor shows how adept you are with the poets tools, something I don’t get to see often.

Oh jeeze. In that case, i missed the target completely! Ugh, i feel rediculous now.

isn’t it nice when someone finally gets the point, mike?

wonderful, indeed.

ok, i made some changes.  added stanzas, tried to use more iambic and anapestic meter, moved a few words around.  would love to know what people think (does it flow better, is it awkward in places, is the meaning a little more clear).  for those of you who are sticklers for sonnet form, i know it’s not all iambic pentameter (thanks for pointing that out). in fact, most of it is tetrameter. i did try to fall into iambic rhythm at the end of each line, as this is the part that will ultimately determine how sonnet-like the poem feels, but i do not think that straying from the sonnet form in the strictest sense hinders the flow of the poem. basically, what i’m trying to say (in the most polite way possible) to all of you who would want this to be a perfect sonnet: screw you, i’m not shakespeare.

i didn’t read the first version…so…but I wanted to say that the last two lines were perfect and they’re worth the rest of the poem being “gotten” or not. The way I’d interpret it is that you’re mocking Shakespeare…(but that’s because I’m a wordnerd and didn’t have to be told the source of the title.) Yes, sonnets are tough to write…and that’s what the poem says to me. I especially got that from the near rhymes in the first stanza…like you were trying your damndest to make it all sound the same….as in same ol’ same ol’. Anyway, I think it’s pretty hilarious.

(And because of my wordnerdiness, I also hear a touch of Marvell in the second stanza’s d rhymes…”If there were but world enough and time…God I love that poem..another hilarious one…but I digress…)

thanks.  well, i wouldn’t say i was mocking shakespeare so much as playing off him.  his sonnet 130 does pretty much the same thing, saying how his love is not some perfect being, but he loves her anyway.  i just took that idea and gave it a new twist.

When together, you be two, not one;
And she’s not a goddess, but blood and bone.

this line is perfectly written. i am very impressed.

I’ve tried to read ossian’s work as well with no luck.

No I don’t want you to scrap the whole thing, just the parts that have been suggested. And the last two lines aren’t so profound. All the suggested changes apply there as well.

It’s only a matter of a little more deliberation. I’ll find your other somehow.

Well it was a joke; in fact the whole poem is somewhat of a joke.  I hadn’t really thought of it in years; maybe now I will go back through it though.