me of Jose' Phillip Farmer's work. I am currently reading one of his books that has about a dozen or so of his stories in it. It is called : "Up the Bright River" I don't know who the author you speak of, is. I will look them up. Yes, I think it does need a little clarification, but, nice stuff. Welcome to Neo. ~ Geezer

this is an interesting full of imagination poem , but i do agree that there are places where I become loss in the words. but all in all I like the use of enjambement lines in it.
The imagery seem to be separated it times from the actually thym at a few place to me. the words run off in a feathering manor. I think if you get control of the imagery the specifics's will become clear to the reader.
You just can't see it in your mind alone you have to convey the picture to the mind of the reader.

Eddie C.

OOO you tantalise me, I find my brain teased and turned and fascinated by the words here.

"while stealing Eve's apple,
and nibbling at the root of the world,
the eye of the past became an arrow,
under strange-familiar music,"...I just loved this bit it is stunningly interesting.

And:-
"phenomenon-confused anger on grasses too gentle ---"... the anger and gentle in the same line here is a sandwich of deliciousness.

Well come, to us Nevel, I think we shall enjoy you.
Love from Ann of Norway.

I do actually enjoy the abstract metaphors in this as they make me visualise what you're trying to say. I like your opening although I would drop 'the' (the light of many houses) has a better flow to it. I'd also suggest a line break there:
The light of many houses is
not a child's toy
my body too weary to
carry its own strength

It seems as if there might be an image missing between first and second lines to explain why you think the light is not a child's toy? The next is a great image of the apple and nibbling at the root of the world, like someone wanting to know all there is to know but taking their time to do that. I would get rid of the 'while'

tasting Eve's apple and
nibbling at the root of the world

is how I'd place the break. Again the next I would remove 'the' and leave it as (eye )

eye of the past becomes the arrow
under strange(ly) familiar music? - strangely seems to work better.

This part had me wondering if you were looking into your past to better understand your future, the dreams you may have had coming back to give directions.

where language fingered
all hungry wolves (nice here...the need for writing, the want to write and live it through words)
in circular embrace of
a dutch farm (this gives me the impression you were feeling enclosed in this place)

I omitted a few filler words but I think this is a strong stanza.

The last part I admit has me lost completely and perhaps before I crit it, I might ask you to explain that part of what you were trying to get across, what your thoughts were and how you came to see it that way?

Erwin would have to be 'do' angels...not 'does' to make complete grammatical sense. I still don't see it as tying it together though. Unless tenuously as the light being the angels toy/weapon. I am wondering if it should not be to do with the light somehow...(do angels play with the brightness?) and then my body too weary to carry 'their' strength... This might apply better as you refer yourself to the light then. Just another thought. Still working on crit for that second stanza and your explanation makes it easier.

By the way you left out familiar in the line 'strangely familiar music' lol

The more I read it the more I want that first part to say 'i milked sky in children's bones' to make that image more stark and raw than having the gerund (ing word) there. I wouldn't change 'inside a tulip's belly' as it's a great visual. I think I get hung up on the statement of 'mud was my nickname' it seems out of context at that point of the poem but I don't know where exactly I'd put it either lol. One of the other workshop people in Jess and Pam might see something I can't. So will leave that bit..I guess it's just because it sort of hangs there without explanation again. The next line I stumble because phenomenon is just too long I think. to be hyphenated with confused anger. Mud lends itself to more thick, opaque and unseeing (blind?) than a phenomena..because I am trying to associate those two lines together. Might be a part to try to work on at making it blend better there.Last line is good but again it needs more oomph...Love the 'hills of my dreams' though so perhaps you should look at making it an aphorism...such as 'the hills of my dreams become the valleys I dwell within when contentment bids me stay...or something like that lol

The light of many houses is (the light *in* many houses makes more sense)
not a child's toy
(do angels play
with the brightness?)
my body too weary to
carry their strength;
tasting Eve's apple and (a taste of Eve's apple and I am nibbling at the root of the world)
nibbling at the root of the world

eye of the past became the arrow
under strangely-familiar music,
where language fingered
all hungry wolves
in circular embrace of
a Dutch farm.

(past eyes became arrows
strangely-familiar music,
language fingered hungry wolves:
a Dutch farm in circular embrace)

I milked sky in children's bones,
inside a tulip's belly; mud was my nickname
dirt-confused anger on grasses too gentle ---
'till pigeons nest on the hillside of my dreams.

(perfect! ending though I would make the above changes were it my poem)

it makes for a more evocative image.

Welcome Nevel, I am glad you have arrived on Neopoet shores
~ Anna

Hi Erwin, for me light is almost always a poetic metaphor. For me the light *o*f evokes a fire, hence cmy suggestion.

On rereading it the ending might be better served without the *of my dreams* and end with on the hillside... a rendition that returns the reader to the *houses*, perhaps?

I love abrupt endings that don't spell things out.

~A

I didn't read the other critiques, I'll read them after
submitting this. In my opinion, you have some very good
lines that do not seem to connect in any way to the reader,
too abstract, focus on what it is you are saying, and say it.
I'm not opposed to abstracts, in fact I think they are part of
poetry (no matter what academia thinks), but I do believe you
have gone way overboard with their use.
The poem is interesting enough to try to figure out what it is
you are saying, but even after two reads I'm left wondering,
might just be me too, now I'll go read the others comments
and see how different they are.

thanks for posting in the pool

Richard

While both Anna and Chez had good suggestions for
making this poem read smoother, I believe until Nevel
implements some clarity it will be just some abstract
carnival of words that won't mean anything to most of
the readers ... just my honest opinion.

Nevel, you do have some great images within, but it
takes more than images to make a reader feel what
you are writing.

Richard

I will do my best to provide you with an honest review of this work. Please keep in mind that most critiques are subjective and opinion weighs heavily with each reader. I have not viewed your author comments on this piece nor have I viewed the other critiques at this time so that I am able to remain objective.

There are some really visual images presented within this verse; lights, angels, Eve's apple. Many of these significant images come with their own history so I must assume their use has some significance in this poem. (good and evil, messengers of God, the forbidden fruit and original sin)

I like the title. It caught my attention, but all through the piece, I kept trying to find how it related to the words. I felt like I was still waiting for the "catch" to happen and the poem was -- over. I did, however, love the last stanza for its visual clarity and the feel it has to it.

Which brings me back to the opening lines and the meaning of the poem; I must ask: Will an average reader grasp the meaning? Honestly, I am not sure. I have a difficult time understanding exactly what message I should get from this piece. The work appears to be a more personal piece of work. But, as I read I keep wanting to know just how the poem relates to me? Where do I fit in? What can I take home from it for me? If it is all about you and some personal moment then OK, but so what? Why should I read this? Though these questions may sound a bit stern, rest assured, they are not.

Here is what I see when I read:

To me, the title bears images of the shades of skin color and opinions mankind has surrounding them. The phrase "just eggs" is "simply life". So I read your title and I hear "who cares what color, life is life" so that's where I start when I begin to read the verse.

As I begin, I see the knowledge, or the knowing in a home, and immediately visualize a nursery, children playing and angels controlling how much is learned and how much is not. Those messengers of God determining light and dark, how much good and how much evil can be rendered in the play.

I lose track though with the sudden jump to "my body too weary to carry" and feel like I must have missed something initially. So I go back and start again. I have a hard time finding the cohesion and simply read on hoping to catch it as I go. After all its a poem, I want to read it straight through and come out at the end feeling ... enlightened.

Since the tense changes in this piece from present to past - it keeps me off balance and when I get to the end of the first stanza, I'm not certain what I read. What I know is that there is a home and family on a Dutch farm with all kinds of interaction and influences molding them. (OK. that works but why is it important?)

The last stanza is really quite well done. It could use some honing and I would change "I milked sky in children's bones" to "I milked the sky through children's bones".
I would also work on line breaks a bit for a more heightened effect.

But ultimately - I am not certain what I should be getting from this verse.

All in all, as a personal work, this poem probably works, but for the masses, I am not certain it does.

I hope you will consider this critique to be constructive and positive and I thank you for the opportunity to read and absorb your words. ~Pamela

I am obviously not an editor who is involved in a certain venue, a certain style. When I read poetry, I read for content and any feeling it might evoke. The deeper the feeling, the greater the content is for me, whether or not I understand the images, metaphors or story (personal or otherwise) the poet is poeticizing.

For me this is a netherworld, the space between words and meanings, understandings and openness to possibly not ever understanding, but somehow feeling the context. More often than not I refer to my partner's love of Sylvia Plath. That she was a remarkable writer with the most original metaphors ever conceived is a given imo. That writers are still trying to decipher her meanings is evident and abundantly clear.

What does this have to do with Nevel's poem and critiquing for better understanding?
Everything and nothing.

We can only offer our thoughts and see where it takes us: with the poet's response and our
own unique perceptions.

~Anna

Yeah, I learned some things too:

1. We'll agree with folks we agree with.
2. Some folks need a road map and/or reference guide to see what the visuals point to.
3. Some folks need explanations though their poetry often offers none.
4. Some folks are linear-minded poets.
5. There's poetry for everyone and every poet has their own take...good bad or indifferent.
6. All of the above
7. Some of the above..
8. None of the above.

This is fun and I hope no critics, poets or poems were harmed in the above analysis.

~Anna

1. Try to keep initial critiques brief, under 200 words, we are practicing here for our day to day critiquing on Neopoet.
2. The poet should not make any replies until all the critique is in, then only a single comment summing up the value or not of the feedback s/he has received.
3. Please avoid from engaging in dialogues with each other about the critique. The process goes- critique/poet's reply/critique of critique/revisions if any/final critique optional.

The reasons for leaving revisions to last are to ensure everyone is commenting on the same poem and to avoid overwhelming the poet. It takes time to consider and assimilate feedback and taken to easily or literally can lose the poet's vision.

These suggestions are designed to streamline the workshop and avoid any adversarial approaches. We are cool, Erwin, I am quite over it and you did no harm. It'll all run smoother on the next poem.

Well done everyone. It was more chaotic than I envisaged, but no biggy, some great critique given. I do want to wait just a little longer for judyanne, Seren and Roscoe Lane to have a say before moving on. Will PM them.

Are you happy with the critique, Erwin? Has it given you ideas or inspiration to improve the poem? And, be brave here, how did you feel about the feedback that was right off the mark? Is this the level of feedback you would like to get on every poem?

She did a sterling job.
I will be more pro-active on the next few poems but I hope you understand my hands off attitude on this one.

When I am first comment on a poem and praise it, it cops heaps of praise. When I slam one, it cops heaps of critique (or the sewing circle attacking me for my honesty). I am not feeding ego here, it just happens.

On the next poem I will be just one of you.

one final summation. Erwin. DONT't put in your final revisions yet. You've been getting the best feedback from the best at Neopoet. Take in the feedback, compare the contradictions, but always come back to your own vision. Remember what I said about the baby and the bathwater?

...I'm in agreement with the others that stated that this piece is very imaginative, it IS ! I also believe it to be very "visual", if you will.
Freeverse is not necessarily my forte,, but I also don't think that "freeverse", doesn,t necessarily mean, or equal....."abstract".
It is pretty vague, but still I enjoyed it's imagery.
Sincerely,
doc.

I see you've revised this poem, but it would appear that
you've only moved the lines around a bit, changed a couple
of images, which in my opinion, hasn't helped the clarity for the
reader at all. I don't feel I should need to ask the writer to clarify
the intent, in fact, it is up to the writer to have a clear enough
vision to relay that to his/her readers.

Again, great images, but they fail to come together to form one
poem.

"While a poem doesn't have to be totally transparent [heaven forfend!] if the intent is totally unrecognised by the reader it is either a complete epiphanal success or, more likely, a failure."

This is pure gold, Jess.

I'll have to remember it word for word.

~A