|
|
Post by cathyw on Dec 29, 2022 1:04:31 GMT -5
Hello. Here is my revision. It seemed to me that your questions centered around what was underlying the poem, so I added ideas from the first draft back in and revised again. I struggle between over-explaining and assuming too much. Please tell me what you think now.
Remember When I Wouldn’t Let You Say I Love You?
Step into this morning’s cold red-fire leaves
enveloped by white fog,
inhale deeply & slowly.
Does the scent of nothing remind
you of the forbidden L-word, forbidden
because it was mixed-up
with the S-word that was wrapped-up
in sin and shame and Satan?
Mist crystalizes, paints spiked leaf lobes
with hollowed icicles—miniscule
empty droplets—precise traces
of nothing, like S without L.
You don’t recall the mortal infraction
because you weren’t there then,
but it was you who broke the fence,
slowly, carefully, stone-
by-stone, you took it apart,
took me down into briars.
Thorns still persist in the hem
of my trousers, the soles
of my shoes, scars where you
mended these tatters.
My breath condenses nebulous
and I bite vapor to chew
the less-than-water essence
of pure, distillated, nothing.
Remember the void that was premarital
sex-in-the-back-seat obscenity?
You don’t.
You weren’t there for that.
My skin tingles pink with cold
as I return to our warm
home where you sleep still
and I undress to tunnel
under and curl into the bend
of you, between belly and thigh
and I thaw there. It’s been
18 years and your chest beats
a counter-rhythm through my
backbone to my heart—we
are in an alternating sync.
This is not nothing. |
|
|
|
Post by susandines on Jan 4, 2023 14:37:25 GMT -5
I love this revision, especially where you say: "like S without L." The language is just so fresh and interesting. The revision feels like the right balance of content, not too much or too little.
I think you've done a good job adding information that builds the conflict, "You don't recall the moral infraction / because you weren't there then." And the conversational tone of "Remember the void that was premarital /
sex-in-the-back-seat obscenity? / You don’t. / You weren’t there for that" pulls me into the poem even more. Wonderful revision, Cathy!
|
|
|
|
Post by denise on Jan 5, 2023 7:53:25 GMT -5
Hi Cathy --
I too love this revision. Eliminating the "I" in the beginning brings the "you" in fully from the start. The speaker is clearly thinking of him on her solitary walk. And I think you have added just enough detail. Terrific!
Denise
|
|
|
|
Post by Gerry on Jan 5, 2023 22:35:38 GMT -5
This new version of the poem, Cathy, is just terrific. It's fiercer and more powerful. This acknowledgment of the time before the beloved creates this personal demarcation line that feels real, powerful, and adds a bit of wistfulness to the poem, a weird sort of nostalgia for a time you DON'T want to return to. That's spot on, and it makes the poem pop.
|
|
