Critique of Jenel's Poem

Jenel’s poem, With Wild Abandon, is literally about building a dam against water, but then becoming dry due to the lack of it. At the end of the poem, but her doing, the dam is let loose once more. Metaphorically, we could say that the water resembles some kind of problem or pain. Shutting the water away was akin to supressing or ignoring it. But this only made things worse. So perhaps the emotion and pain broke through and she had to deal with it again. Or she did it herself, which is what the poem seems to suggest.

My first impression of the poem was that it didn’t flow. After reading it several times, I’m not entirely sure I’m convinced either or. But I do think that many of the words in the poem were needlessly alternative to their basic meaning. Words like incessant, edifice, emaciated, meaning unending, a structure, and withered, respectively. These words seemed needless, and could have been swapped out, I think, with simpler words. They seemed out of place, as if it suggest a greater degree of eloquence. The poem is, overall, decent, but I think the words make it look as if it’s trying too hard to impress. Unless this is, of course, executed with a purpose that I have not noticed. As it stands now, for me, I’m not seeing the purpose.

This poem is good for its concrete words. I loved line 12’s, “my bones like honeycomb.” That was mentally stimulating, and it was pleasantly easy to imagine. I also like the first three lines. They seemed to come together quite nicely, and I enjoyed reading it.

What I would focus on is diction. I would also enjoy if you described the environment more and what you were doing. That is, more verbs. And not just verbs. Maybe describe interactions. I can’t exactly see what’s going on. Only vaguely. As if I were in a dream within a dream: very murky. So maybe describe a little bit more, so I can really imagine some things.

This poem isn’t quite there yet, but it’s definitely got a hell of a structure ready. Good job. I think the last line was an excellent execution. The alliteration and words are very strong. Don’t change that.

Critique of Nicki's Poem

Nicki’s poem, Still the Same, appears quite literal and starts us off with street lights and the author waiting for someone. From the infinite cycle of the street lights and the cars, but the contrast of the the author waiting and the coffee both standing still, we can easily see, generally, that life is moving forward, but the author is not, at least in a certain sense. And this is because of someone she is waiting for. I am not certain to the tone of the poem. It may be that the author is definitely willing to wait for this person, or reluctantly doing so, and unable to do anything about it.

Nicki has chosen her poem to start somewhere that sells coffee, and the perspective is of someone waiting for another while having coffee at night. Because it’s at night, I presume this is supposed to be a date. I feel it is implied that the author loves whoever this is. Despite the fact that this person is not there, the author is still waiting. Whether this is love for family or love for another, it seems unconditional. The infinite cycle around her is contrasted with the coffee and herself, and I think that, to my mind, sums up the poem.

Given the tools she was presented with in picking this theme and this location, I think Nicki did an okay job. I might omit some lines. An example being lines 12, 16 and 17. They repeat again the poem, but I don’t feel that in this poem, they belong. Repetition can be useful, but in this case, I think the contrasts used in the poem get the point across very well.

While I also enjoy the contrast, I feel it’s somewhat lost when you consider that the street lights and cars are on an infinite loop. That is, they’re not quite changing that much either? They’re doing the same thing, over and over. It’s almost kind of a cycle, which portrays a completely different idea then “moving forward,” which is what I assume this poem is about, not being able to move forward because of the other person.

All in all, I enjoyed this poem, but I think it can be improved upon. I think it could have been condensed a little, and maybe even expanded with newer more vibrant details that more effectively express just how stuck in time the author is while everything around them is moving forward.

Critique of Dennis' Poem

Firstly, Blood In My Eyes is well-done. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it. The meaning of the poem is clearly about dying and being reborn, perhaps in lifestyle, if not spiritually. My first impression before reading the poem was that, this might be a very good poem, but it’s long. And in my experience, the longer a poem is the quality of each line is divided, because attention and revision are divided over more work. With that in mind, it might be that a lot of errors will be present. Whether or not that held true for this poem specifically, we’ll get into.

A lot of lines stick out in this poem, which may be a good or bad thing. But there are quite a few details I don’t understand, like why are some lines in quotations? Some are obviously dialogue, but others I’m not so sure. In line 18, Dennis writes, ‘and all that blood “all my blood” my blood’. Why is “all my blood” in quotations? Also, many words are capitalized, but I’m not sure why. For example, in line 37, Dennis writes, ‘Oh My God! It’s True? ---before Dying.’ I cannot see why truth and dying are capitalized. The difference between a noun and a proper noun is that a noun is any standard thing, like city, pencil, girl. A proper noun is a specific name. For example you have the thing death, and then the person, Death. So why is True and Dying capitalized? Are they trying to represent something bigger than their original definitions? I’m not sure. But I see at least 5 to 6 debatable capitalizations. At least to my knowledge.

Now, one thing I like about this poem might be a negative thing or a positive thing: I’m not sure. But while I was reading, I felt that the poem rambled on a bit. The point of the poem seemed more easily expressed in fewer lines. However, when I hit the final line, it felt as if the bulk of the other lines was justified. For some reason, that last line shined even more with a longer poem. I’m not sure if that’s a good thing. I’m not sure if my mentality was, “Yay! It’s finally over!” or if I thought, “Wow, that line was perfect to top all of it off!” Either way, I was left with a positive feeling. So I’m gonna go with this being a good thing.

There were some lines in the poem that didn’t read right to me. For example, line 26 has written, ‘and hid an abandon house for hours’. Are you saying someone hid the abandon house? Or hid in the abandoned house? I assume it’s hid in the abandoned house. I’m not entirely sure; I try not to assume.

Overall, I liked the poem, but like any other poem, it can use a lot of work before it’s complete. I would continue working on the poem if you were interested in improving it, and I would focus on eliminating everything you don’t need in order to express your main point. Thanks for the poem!

Critique of Tommy's Poem

Like usual, Tommy’s poems are filled with imagery. Isolation One is no exception. What I love about this poem is how short and to the point it is (then again, it’s very ambiguous). I’m thinking the poem is either deceptively literal or expectedly metaphorical. If there’s anything wrong with this poem, it is that it’s too vague or too poorly executed in expressing the bottom line.

The first line, “Children cycle by like circus then they're gone” portrays children cycling by, so we can assume they’re on bikes. They do so like a circus, so we can assume they’re wild or colorful. Then they’re gone, as they have gone by. I notice that circus is neither plural, nor does it have an article before it. I’m not sure if this is intentional or a grammatical mistake. The second line, “and my mind screams out like a slaughter house at dawn” is pretty straightforward, and is continued in the following line, “or a railway to Treblinka,” Treblinka being an extermination camp in the Holocaust. Simply, he screams to a degree that these places would have experienced. Why he says at dawn, I do not know. Dawn usually implies a beginning generally, or a specific beginning that follows an end. This may imply that something has happened. Perhaps he is jealous of the children? The use of the word circus may be taken as insulting. Jealousy may be present, in this case.

Now, the fourth line, “and then the sun sags like a testicle in flames,” is interesting. The fact that the sun is sagging after a line that mentioned dawn is interesting to me; although, it might be unintentional. Perhaps time has passed quickly. A testicle in flame is interesting as well. Off the top of my head, a testicle might be a symbol for manhood or reproduction. Which, I’m not sure, and how it relates to the first lines, I’m not sure. Perhaps something has happened to the author that has not happened to the children. Otherwise, I’m not sure what the purpose of the diction was. The last line is written, “It's too fucking hot and I go back inside.” Fire was used in the preceding line, and so was the sun, so this following line is understandable. What it means, I’m not sure. Perhaps the author can’t “take the heat.” The use of the word fucking connotates anger, and the retreating inside connotates just what it is, a retreat.

Ultimately, I’m not sure what the poem means, but this doesn’t mean anything’s wrong with it. I’m interpreting it, as specifically as I can, to be the result of an author with some kind of problem, perhaps even trauma. The very strong imagery and references aren’t appropriately proportioned to the meaning of the poem if the meaning is not also as strong. I expect there is definitely some kind of trauma.

Critique of Caitlin's Poem

Caitlin’s poem, Utopia, has a title very descriptive of the poem’s content. After reading it, I found that it was simply about a wished utopia that either doesn’t exist or is far removed from the entire scope of reality. Unfortunately, it was very vague, for me, and beyond this summation, I don’t have much of anything to say regarding the meaning.

Critically, this poem is shallow in detail. At least to my perspective. It talks about a utopia, and that, seemingly, it doesn’t really exist. It’s a rather hopeless sounding poem. But beyond that, it doesn’t lend an alternate meaning, or any kind of special quality that separates it from other poems. Neither does it have any concrete details. I feel like, when reading this poem, my mind is floating around. What I want is to feel tethered to reality, to something with some substance. Whatever this poem is about, it could have been done in a more concrete way. For example, if your poem were about being a mother whose baby died, then instead of talking about the feelings, you can talk about the moment you got the news. Or the most profound moment in that loss.

I just feel like the topic of the poem has a lot of potential with more concrete details. I was also really confused by line “But with evil intentions I conspire.” I don’t know why this line is in the poem. It really has no partnering line that lends a context as to why it’s there. Line 11 starts with the word ‘for’, which means because. So you conspire with evil intentions because when you wake, your journey ends and your boring life begins again. I just don’t understand what this means.

All in all, I would adapt the poem’s topic to more substantial grounds; that is, a concrete place, and then use little details to evoke some emotion in us.