Chant

[Troggy]

*Current Version in Post #12*

Chant

Rusted radiators whine
through a stark mad winter.
Shuffles of specters
tap dance,
dance tap on my stomach.
Groans gnaw away at
barren
walls I see you standing
in front of.

My eyes grind the speckles
from an ancient projector,
greying what
I remember of your
savory tones.
Lush pinks evaporate
from your lips as
a swirl of dust billows
through the frame.
I pummel the instrument,
desperate for
clarity.

Several times I shut this door
knowing less your
words, but more your
pale autumn eyes.
Yet the familiar creak
has its allure,
just as you once did.
I should not have
saved
the film, but still
my reasons warped
in the smothering
sand of an hourglass.

If ever fear,
if ever a ghost
I would miss you, the most.

Version History:
3/25/2009: 1.0 (Original Draft) - Post #1
3/30/2009: 1.1 (Word Choice Edits) - Post #12

[fishingthe_sky]

Don't have time to look at this right now, but I'm commenting to remind myself. I saw "gnaw away," though, and I like that.

[fishingthe_sky]

Ah, Trogs my boy, finally. You've made my day by posting this. Let's get to it.


Rusted radiators whine
through a stark mad winter.
Shuffles of specters
tap dance,
dance tap on my stomach.
Groans gnaw away at
barren
walls I see you standing
in front of.
I'm a big fan of assonance, but I'm a little off put by your first line. I think that if it were not the first line, I would like it flat out, but I think that it has a certain 'whiny' quality to it, and having it open the poem doesn't sit well on my tongue. I like the image of the rusted radiators, though. Is 'stark mad winter' an allusion? I feel like I've heard it before (not saying it's hackneyed or tired or cliche, though). "Shuffles of specters" throws me, because shuffle is an action, yet it wants to act like a modifier of specters. Perhaps not the best word, or the best word order? Nice little play on dancing with your 'tap dance/dance tap.' I still like the sounds in "gnaw away," too.

My eyes grind the speckles
from an ancient projector,
greying what
I remember of your
savory tones.
Lush pinks evaporate
from your lips as
a swirl of dust billows
through the frame.
I pummel the instrument,
desperate for
clarity.
Solid first line, 'speckles' is a great word to use here. Using lush as a way to describe lips is pretty tired, though; there's no power in it, nothing exciting or unique. 'Swirl of dust' is also a well that's down to its last drops, but you save it somewhat by having the consonance with billows, which is a fine word. I'm also a bit put off from pummel. It seems too over the top for this piece, which is operating on a smaller, more confined level; the action involved in pummeling sort of defies the poem's containment. I'm also a bit lost on the image here: it seems like the speaker's eyes are what's causing the picture to be out of focus, not the machine itself. Perhaps that's my own erroneous reading of the first line, but that's what it feels like.

Btw, we both like to use grey instead of gray.

Several times I shut this door
knowing less your
words, but more your
pale autumn eyes.
Yet the familiar creak
has its allure,
just as you once did.
I should not have
saved
the film, but still
my reasons warped
in the smothering
sand of an hourglass.
There's some language that could be cut out of here: the "but" in the third line (knowing less your/ words, more your/ pale autumn eyes has a tight cohesion that doesn't require the connection); the "just" in the seventh (again, you're working with taunt lines, and these words are rather meaningless, as they're sort of implied within the lines themselves); I'm also not sure how I feel about "yet," but I'm not quite decided what I don't like about it, so I'm just going to throw it out there that I'm not down with it. I see where you're going with the metaphor in the last four lines, but it's not quite there, yet. The initial phrase "still/ my reasons warped" doesn't push forth a definitive rationale, which is almost necessary if you're going to meaning your reasoning at all. You don't have to clarify what your reasons are, but you need to give something of a trajectory so readers can infer. It would also help give better meaning to your image of the hourglass, which contains a great amount of metaphoric power that isn't getting used right now. There's no sense of temporality or inevitability captured in this stanza, and I think if you're going to use an image that has that potential you need to actively use it; otherwise, what's the point?

If ever fear,
if ever a ghost
I would miss you, the most.
Ah, the chant. I like it, though I leave it feeling like I want one more line, something to sort of even it out and make it more chant-like. But I like the way your language is working.


I liked this. I think you could take some more liberal uses of the taunt and concise language and form you're using here, and there are some areas of clarity that are pulling it down, but I'm pretty content with reading it as is.

[Troggy]

Solid comments, good sir. I am excited to edit this one.

I'm a big fan of assonance, but I'm a little off put by your first line. I think that if it were not the first line, I would like it flat out, but I think that it has a certain 'whiny' quality to it, and having it open the poem doesn't sit well on my tongue. I like the image of the rusted radiators, though. Is 'stark mad winter' an allusion? I feel like I've heard it before (not saying it's hackneyed or tired or cliche, though). "Shuffles of specters" throws me, because shuffle is an action, yet it wants to act like a modifier of specters. Perhaps not the best word, or the best word order? Nice little play on dancing with your 'tap dance/dance tap.' I still like the sounds in "gnaw away," too.

You really echo a lot of my own concerns here. I struggled and struggled to work out the transitions and such in the first few lines and I wasn't quite happy with it. Maybe I should just change the verb? If I have them doing something else, that may change the tone.

Stark Mad Winter is kind of a borderline cliche. It's not common enough to be annoying, but it doesn't really have to allude to anything in particular to be familiar to someone reading it. I was writing stream-of-conciousness at first, and that's when things like that appear. I don't hate it.

I know Shuffles of Specters doesn't make grammatical sense, I just loved the way it sounded. I could change it to Specters Shuffle blah blah blah, if that would be better. I didn't think it was awkward enough to be confusing. Liberal use of 'poetry' there.

Solid first line, 'speckles' is a great word to use here. Using lush as a way to describe lips is pretty tired, though; there's no power in it, nothing exciting or unique. 'Swirl of dust' is also a well that's down to its last drops, but you save it somewhat by having the consonance with billows, which is a fine word. I'm also a bit put off from pummel. It seems too over the top for this piece, which is operating on a smaller, more confined level; the action involved in pummeling sort of defies the poem's containment. I'm also a bit lost on the image here: it seems like the speaker's eyes are what's causing the picture to be out of focus, not the machine itself. Perhaps that's my own erroneous reading of the first line, but that's what it feels like.

Yeah, you got me again. Thanks for pointing out which phrases were not good choices, I was so focused on trying to pack my meaning in here, that I overlooked some of those. Lush is a lame word, I agree. I'll go dig into the thesaurus there. I hear ya with Swirl of Dust too...it could possibly be a swirl of something else? I can tone down pummel, I never liked it that much, maybe I shouldn't show quite that much frustration.

As far as the eyes go, I should probably find a new word instead of grind. I make it clear at the end of the stanza that my 'memory projector' is the problem, not my eyes. Good catch.

Btw, we both like to use grey instead of gray.

Something about the e really makes a difference to me, haha. I guess you are the same way. It looks a lot better, somehow.

There's some language that could be cut out of here: the "but" in the third line (knowing less your/ words, more your/ pale autumn eyes has a tight cohesion that doesn't require the connection); the "just" in the seventh (again, you're working with taunt lines, and these words are rather meaningless, as they're sort of implied within the lines themselves); I'm also not sure how I feel about "yet," but I'm not quite decided what I don't like about it, so I'm just going to throw it out there that I'm not down with it. I see where you're going with the metaphor in the last four lines, but it's not quite there, yet. The initial phrase "still/ my reasons warped" doesn't push forth a definitive rationale, which is almost necessary if you're going to meaning your reasoning at all. You don't have to clarify what your reasons are, but you need to give something of a trajectory so readers can infer. It would also help give better meaning to your image of the hourglass, which contains a great amount of metaphoric power that isn't getting used right now. There's no sense of temporality or inevitability captured in this stanza, and I think if you're going to use an image that has that potential you need to actively use it; otherwise, what's the point?

Oh, look who is the extra words police now. Those are some good catches. I hate when I have to use 'Yet', but sometimes I feel backed into a corner to transition. I hear you on the last little section, it needs to be clear for this poem to do its thing. The hourglass here is mostly just time, not so much temporality or inevitiablity, and maybe that was the wrong image. But the thing is, the fact that the experience the speaker had with this person is over does kind of lend itself to those words. So to answer your question about what the point is, the point is that the hourglass = time and i don't really need it to do anything else. It seems like it is doing other things, and if those things are what you said, it might still work.

Ah, the chant. I like it, though I leave it feeling like I want one more line, something to sort of even it out and make it more chant-like. But I like the way your language is working.

I liked this. I think you could take some more liberal uses of the taunt and concise language and form you're using here, and there are some areas of clarity that are pulling it down, but I'm pretty content with reading it as is.

This poem came about because those chant lines came to me one day, and I couldn't resist typing them out. It was at the beginning when I was working this, but then I realized that was silly, so it became the end. I'm not sure if I want to change it, because it is the basis for all the other stanzas right now. Why don't I just compress it to two lines? That is chant-like.

Thanks for all the comments dude. I'll edit it and then we can talk about how well I communicated my message. It would help if you got in your head what you think the poem is saying. I'll admit, some things are subtle (I used a few intentional line breaks to communicate one part of it), but I made a conscious effort to put the pieces in there.

[doves]

great work troggy.

[Meenaghey Aym]

i never wat to say anything after fishy comments. he always go into details that are beyond me. but i guess we all hav our strengths, anyways i think i like the 3rd part the best. it was the strongest.

[bootsydan]

This was great.

Fishing the sky pretty much said it all. But the only other things I will add is I didn't get why you went 'tap dance' then 'dance tap'.

I also was really a not a fan of the last 3 lines. I know what you're trying to say. But it just seems too easy. Seems like not much time went into these 3 lines compared to the rest of the poem. They are the 3 most throwaway lines in the whole poem - yet they are your closer. So I think you can come up with much better.

I also think 'ghost' imagery has been so tried and tested that it's almost impossible to find a way to make it sound fresh nowadays. That was definitely a line I'd felt I'd read 100x before.

Aside from that, this was fantastic.

[Troggy]

Thanks for the input Dan's Boots!

I also was really a not a fan of the last 3 lines. I know what you're trying to say. But it just seems too easy. Seems like not much time went into these 3 lines compared to the rest of the poem. They are the 3 most throwaway lines in the whole poem - yet they are your closer. So I think you can come up with much better.

I see your point here, but something is drawing me towards leaving these lines here, as simplistic as they are. Like I said, those were just some random lines I jotted down, they weren't painstakingly constructed like a lot of the other images and details in here, so in that sense they were easy and not much time was spent on them.

However, they are interesting to me because they are not necessarily in the voice of the speaker. They could be general knowledge kinds of words, commonalities. That's the point of the italics, that this subconcious chant is taking place while the speaker recalls these experiences. I guess it depends on how you interpret it, though.

So to answer your comment, I could probably come up with 'better', but I'm not sure if I want to. What would you think if I dropped the last 3 lines and changed the title? Would it still work for you in terms of the ideas and the message?

I also think 'ghost' imagery has been so tried and tested that it's almost impossible to find a way to make it sound fresh nowadays. That was definitely a line I'd felt I'd read 100x before.

Which line are you referring to? The line with Specters or the like with 'ghost'? I know ghosts are done all the time, but that is because they are almost a universal infatuation. We can't help but want to believe in them, or at least talk about them. They are symbols for a lot of things, and although the concept is trite (I'll agree), I try to mix things up a bit in here so that it isn't too distracting.

The apparitions in the first stanza don't really symbolize anything, they are just describing the emptyness, nothing is in this place but the moving air and the loud thoughts of the speaker.

I plan on posting an updated version later today, I went back and did a lot of word choice kinds of edits, so please come back (all of you!) and give a second opinion when you see what I have changed.

[fishingthe_sky]

Which line are you referring to? The line with Specters or the like with 'ghost'? I know ghosts are done all the time, but that is because they are almost a universal infatuation. We can't help but want to believe in them, or at least talk about them. They are symbols for a lot of things, and although the concept is trite (I'll agree), I try to mix things up a bit in here so that it isn't too distracting.

The apparitions in the first stanza don't really symbolize anything, they are just describing the emptyness, nothing is in this place but the moving air and the loud thoughts of the speaker.

I plan on posting an updated version later today, I went back and did a lot of word choice kinds of edits, so please come back (all of you!) and give a second opinion when you see what I have changed.
I'm quite the fan of the whole ghost/specter image and its metaphoric properties. A few years ago, I actually started a series of poems that was influenced by reading a lot of Oliver Sacks and listening to a lot of Ghosts & Vodka (I freakin' love the spirits/spirit thing going on there), and amassed about 8 or 9 poems of it; unfortunately, it's sort of dead in the water now, and I haven't really given it the time of day in the past 2 years.

I'm actually planning on spending all of my time at work doing revisions, so hopefully I'll have some up here, as well. Can we call it revision day?

[Troggy]

I'm quite the fan of the whole ghost/specter image and its metaphoric properties. A few years ago, I actually started a series of poems that was influenced by reading a lot of Oliver Sacks and listening to a lot of Ghosts & Vodka (I freakin' love the spirits/spirit thing going on there), and amassed about 8 or 9 poems of it; unfortunately, it's sort of dead in the water now, and I haven't really given it the time of day in the past 2 years.

I definitely agree that it can be interesting matter. Not to mention almost all the words for ghosts are AWESOME. I don't think that is a coincidence. Apparition, Specter, Ghost, Ghoul, Phantom, Banshee, etc etc, I just used Word Thesaurus to get some of those haha. But they are totally money words in poetry.

I'm actually planning on spending all of my time at work doing revisions, so hopefully I'll have some up here, as well. Can we call it revision day?

Sounds good dude, I am hopefully getting out of work early today so I will probably have some time. I just need to remember to bring the updated copy of my piece home with me today so I can work it.

[bootsydan]

However, they are interesting to me because they are not necessarily in the voice of the speaker. They could be general knowledge kinds of words, commonalities. That's the point of the italics, that this subconcious chant is taking place while the speaker recalls these experiences. I guess it depends on how you interpret it, though.

Ah ok. I didn't interpret it this way.

So to answer your comment, I could probably come up with 'better', but I'm not sure if I want to. What would you think if I dropped the last 3 lines and changed the title? Would it still work for you in terms of the ideas and the message?

To me dropping the last 3 lines and changing the title would go against the point of the whole piece, would it not? I mean, the last 3 lines are what really make the messages and themes clear. You may get away without them, but as I said before, I get the impression that would be going against what you wanted to try and achieve with this.



Which line are you referring to? The line with Specters or the like with 'ghost'? I know ghosts are done all the time, but that is because they are almost a universal infatuation.

I was referring to the line with 'ghost' in it. To me it's completely unoriginal - but that could just be my personal opinion.

[Troggy]

Ah ok. I didn't interpret it this way.

Guess I didn't quite do my job, then, but I can't really spell that out. I think as it is right now I am OK with how much it reveals, but I may change my mind later.

To me dropping the last 3 lines and changing the title would go against the point of the whole piece, would it not? I mean, the last 3 lines are what really make the messages and themes clear. You may get away without them, but as I said before, I get the impression that would be going against what you wanted to try and achieve with this.

You're exactly right, that's why I gave you a hard time about what you said about those lines. They are essential, and I think they are kind of charming how easily you can read through them. The rest of the poem is so image heavy, you have to step carefully through it.

I was referring to the line with 'ghost' in it. To me it's completely unoriginal - but that could just be my personal opinion.

I'll agree that it in itself is not original, but for the most part only originality I can really offer is my combination of different images, isn't it?

Here's an updated version of the piece, with new word choices:

Chant

Rusted radiators hum
through a stark mad winter.
Squads of specters
tap dance,
dance tap on my stomach.
Groans gnaw away at
barren
walls I see you standing
in front of.

My eyes squint at speckles
from an ancient projector,
greying what
I remember of your
savory tones.
Pinks evaporate
from your lips as
a dust swirl billows
through the frame.
I jar the instrument,
desperate for
clarity.

Several times I shut this door
knowing less your
words, more your
pale autumn eyes.
Yet, the familiar creak
has its allure,
as you once did.
I should not have
saved
the film, but at last
my reasons dissolved
in the smothering
sand of an hourglass.

If ever fear,
if ever a ghost
I would miss you, the most.

Better? Worse? More clear? More confusing? Let me know guys. I am still wrestling with the last few lines of the third stanza. It is giving me a lot of grief, I don't want to get too wordy. I want to avoid phrases like 'in spite of' and the like. Thanks for the comments so far everyone!

[fishingthe_sky]

I'm digging the revisions, though I'm still on the fence with what you have going on in the 2nd stanza. The first line of it is good, and I think you're working the sounds well there. It's the three other word changes I'm not sure of. I think lavish falls flat, but it's better than lush. Maybe try to not alliterate with lips (if that's what you were going for)? I think I also prefer swirl to eddy; while swirl was a bit predictable, it had the nice consonance going for it with billows. I don't think eddy pushes quite the same imagery, or it's not as strongly conjured. Jar's ok, no real qualms, but it just didn't click for me. I know what you're trying to say, but there's a certain lack of desperation that I think the speaker performs the action with that's missing from the word.

I still like this, and it's definitely closer to being complete.

Btw, I posted a revision of the one with no title. redmoon hit it 2 seconds after I posted it, so it didn't get a chance to actually look like I posted a revision, but check it out if you get a chance.

[Troggy]

I'm digging the revisions, though I'm still on the fence with what you have going on in the 2nd stanza. The first line of it is good, and I think you're working the sounds well there. It's the three other word changes I'm not sure of. I think lavish falls flat, but it's better than lush. Maybe try to not alliterate with lips (if that's what you were going for)?

I think the problem with the pink adjective is that the word I want to use there is 'lush', or 'lavish'...the alliteration was not intentional here. That is the right meaning, maybe I still need to finger through some synonyms, but this is the one part of the poem where any kind of color is meant to surface (besides grey), and while pink is almost good enough on its own, I wanted something spring-like, something to stand out. Unfortunately, most of the other synonyms are too growthy (abundant, fertile, etc). Maybe I need to search for a different meaning, we'll see.

I think I also prefer swirl to eddy; while swirl was a bit predictable, it had the nice consonance going for it with billows. I don't think eddy pushes quite the same imagery, or it's not as strongly conjured. Jar's ok, no real qualms, but it just didn't click for me. I know what you're trying to say, but there's a certain lack of desperation that I think the speaker performs the action with that's missing from the word.

Swirl is fine with me, really. I don't mind using a few common words here and there. I think when you are reading a bad piece and you see something like that, it really jumps out at you. If the piece is pretty good, though, you might be OK with it. I don't know, maybe I'll keep swirls for now.

It's true, jar isn't as desperate. However, that is the first thing people do with a lot of machines. If it isn't working, just give it a good smack and maybe it'll fix it, haha. I think i come out an say desperate right after it though, so although this may be a bit lazy on my part, it may be alright. I like jar better than pummel, because i never liked pummel.

Btw, I posted a revision of the one with no title. redmoon hit it 2 seconds after I posted it, so it didn't get a chance to actually look like I posted a revision, but check it out if you get a chance.

Sure thing FTS, I'll head over there when I get a chance.

[fishingthe_sky]

I think the problem with the pink adjective is that the word I want to use there is 'lush', or 'lavish'...the alliteration was not intentional here. That is the right meaning, maybe I still need to finger through some synonyms, but this is the one part of the poem where any kind of color is meant to surface (besides grey), and while pink is almost good enough on its own, I wanted something spring-like, something to stand out. Unfortunately, most of the other synonyms are too growthy (abundant, fertile, etc). Maybe I need to search for a different meaning, we'll see.
Yeah, I see the problem there. I've been reading it without the adjective though, and it might work without any adjective at all. There's something sort of understatedly powerful in "pinks evaporate/ from your lips." It actually sets up a nice contrast to the grey without trying to assert itself as somehow more important than the grey. It also projects a stronger image: instead of having lush/lavish pinks evaporate, which would mean that only the more prominent and extravagant pinks were disappearing, having just pinks evaporate means that all of the pink is disappearing, which seems to work better with the overall idea of the poem, at least in my opinion.

Swirl is fine with me, really. I don't mind using a few common words here and there. I think when you are reading a bad piece and you see something like that, it really jumps out at you. If the piece is pretty good, though, you might be OK with it. I don't know, maybe I'll keep swirls for now.
Yeah, I think swirl is fine enough to stay here, too. Really, the fact that you have billows here makes it ok and almost appropriate because of the sonic qualities of the line.

It's true, jar isn't as desperate. However, that is the first thing people do with a lot of machines. If it isn't working, just give it a good smack and maybe it'll fix it, haha. I think i come out an say desperate right after it though, so although this may be a bit lazy on my part, it may be alright. I like jar better than pummel, because i never liked pummel.
Jar>pummel. How about rap? I'm sure plenty of people will think you're meaning hip-hop, but it's actually a great word for what you're going for. I think jar connotes either an aural disturbance or an emotional one before it connotes any sort of physical action.

[Troggy]

Yeah, I see the problem there. I've been reading it without the adjective though, and it might work without any adjective at all. There's something sort of understatedly powerful in "pinks evaporate/ from your lips." It actually sets up a nice contrast to the grey without trying to assert itself as somehow more important than the grey. It also projects a stronger image: instead of having lush/lavish pinks evaporate, which would mean that only the more prominent and extravagant pinks were disappearing, having just pinks evaporate means that all of the pink is disappearing, which seems to work better with the overall idea of the poem, at least in my opinion.

Good call, that certainly makes things easier. I find this a bit funny, since in one of your poems you used no less than 4 adjectives to describe one tree, haha. But yeah good points, 'pink' is a pretty intense color.

Yeah, I think swirl is fine enough to stay here, too. Really, the fact that you have billows here makes it ok and almost appropriate because of the sonic qualities of the line.

Boom baby! I like when the original plan turns out to be better than it seemed. ;D

Jar>pummel. How about rap? I'm sure plenty of people will think you're meaning hip-hop, but it's actually a great word for what you're going for. I think jar connotes either an aural disturbance or an emotional one before it connotes any sort of physical action.

I will continue to think about this one. We both understand the action I am going for here, I guess capturing it most efficiently is the issue.

I'll update Post #12 with the rerevisions.

[fishingthe_sky]

Good call, that certainly makes things easier. I find this a bit funny, since in one of your poems you used no less than 4 adjectives to describe one tree, haha. But yeah good points, 'pink' is a pretty intense color.

I'll update Post #12 with the rerevisions.
Yeah, I know I've been guilty of being an abusive adjective user, but I've learned from my mistakes, and you should too.

Looking forward to version 1.2

[Troggy]

Yeah, I know I've been guilty of being an abusive adjective user, but I've learned from my mistakes, and you should too.

Looking forward to version 1.2

I may already be at 1.2, haha. I changed eddy back to swirls, and dropped the adjective before pink. Next version may have a 'jar' replacement.