Mario De Paz | + Follow Poet |
Prose | + Fav Poem | Comment | Email | Print |

Revisiting My Poems

Reading a post by Alfred Vassallo, I have decided to start a discussion on soupers about the ortodoxy of poems. Vassallo complains that the site is boring because comments are not directed to favour the production of better poems.He is right. A soup must be tasty, this one is too sweet, needs some chili inside. 
So, I revisit now my poems using chili instead of sugar.
I start with the poem Oasis:

A rose blooms silent
In the middle of desert,
Oasis of life.

A thought blooms silent
In the middle of my head,
Oasis of life.

What else than a rose has to bloom in the desert? This is the typical mistake of poems using images which are already old and stinky rumors in poetry. But if one choses the rose, it must be not silent at all: it is a rumorous crash pervading all the desert. Is exploding life!
So, the verses should be

A rose bursts crashing
In the middle of desert
As atomic bomb

The same thing applies to thought. New ideas are not silent at all

A thought bursts crashing
In the middle of my head
As atomic bomb.

Now, let us go back to soupers. It would be profitable if such comments were carried out by soupers not fearing to offend the authors. We must be open to new poetry with chili inside! This prose is a Manifesto for soupers. 

Another poem of mine, greatly commented, is Nine Angels.

Nine dogs in my life
Nine angels looking for love
Gently love giving.

Most dogs in my life
By passing time were stolen
Still angels of love. 

Writing a poem on dogs, most of them being dead during years, it is the best way to drive emotions of readers. This might be a good thing either for the author or for readers but reduces poetry to the simple expression of naive sentiment with simple words. Nothing bad in this if it is not the only thing emerging fro the poem. My poem is very poor, there is no strong feeling and the word "love" is repeatedly used along with "angels". It is OK, my dos are all angels of love, but it is not enough! I played and struggled with them: no trace of this in the poem, only honeyed words without the ferine genuineness of dogs, their paws with claws to put chili in the poem. A terrible discovery. I must change my style. The only thing to save is the passing time stealing life. 
So I write the new version:

Nine dogs in my life
Nine hungry looking for food
A bark their speaking.

Most dogs in my life
By passing time were stolen
Their paws were resting.

This newly revisited poem is far from being perfect, but at least is closer to canine world and, after all, does not ask approval from readers with easy and naive words.
I will continue in my revisiting to my poems, but I would like to use some chili with other soupers too. I do not intend to offend generous poets aiming to help a better world, but I think that good, positive criticism may help people to grow and improve their skills.
Otherwise everybody continues to be autoreferential receiving only approvals even when  they shouldn't. Waiting for comments (also with sulfuric acid inside!)

Copyright © Mario De Paz | Year Posted 2013

Please Login to post a comment

Poet Destroyer A Date: 6/26/2013 10:30:00 PM wow! now that is adding chili, to the bowl... I wish this was posted on a blog so others can view it... well.. I can't be negative.... but, if I have nothing to say... I am more likely to click away.. xox~ LINDA Login to Reply Mario De Paz Date: 6/27/2013 4:23:00 AM Thanks for your positive comment. Your opinion is always welcome, even when you possibly disagree or find poems you do not like. I am ready to accept criticism.

Richard Lamoureux Date: 6/21/2013 6:47:00 AM I agree to a point. I grew up in a critical environment and as a result have an underlying sensitivity to criticism. A site like this has caused me to grow through it's positive comments. My friend Freddie who I trust has offered both types of comments so that has been good. Also constructive comments should be by soup mail as not to embarrass and also done with tact as not to discourage. Login to Reply Richard Lamoureux Date: 6/21/2013 9:13:00 PM I enjoy intelligent reflection and conversation, this certainly qualifies. Have a good night. Mario De Paz Date: 6/21/2013 3:41:00 PM Thank you Richard, you have understood perfectly the meaning of my apparently disruptive message. And I also agree about my nine dogs. The only point is that one should not use too much simple sentiment to have success, but after all use of emotions is not forbidden at all. Richard Lamoureux Date: 6/21/2013 6:51:00 AM I applaud you on this reflective write. I like the first rewrite but if I am honest I don't really care for the second one it lacks any significance and this form does not allow for development of emotion. I think a strong communicator like yourself has a lot more to say about these old and loyal friends. Take care and bring on the Chili!

Duke Beaufort Date: 6/19/2013 5:16:00 PM Self evaluation is the highest order of thinking, sir! And the work you present here is full of it. So, may we continue this dialogue (with many others of course)? The problem you describe has troubled educators and psychologists for a long time. There is not necessarily a good solution. But, the discussion is worth it's weight in gold. Login to Reply

Duke Beaufort Date: 6/19/2013 5:09:00 PM Sometimes, I ignore the criticism I might share because I don't feel that it does much good. It's not my place to evaluate the readiness a fellow poet has to accept it, and the work (when it's bad) documents the poet's status at a particular time. The errors of one are the beauty spots of another. In any case, may I say that your comment on my latest poem was very much appreciated, and I think you are exactly right in what you say. We have to lead by example. You be a smart man! Login to Reply Mario De Paz Date: 6/20/2013 7:29:00 AM Thank you for the very useful comments. Yes, I misspelled "speaking" and I will try to fix it. Thanks. I am completely with you, because I do not intend to judge the poems of other people, I am only willing to help the others to feel better in the site. To encourage is a good thing, but if one sees something he does not like should be able to tell openly his opinion. A good way to see that most visiting the poems do not appreciate is the ratio between the number of visits and the number of comments. To appreciate deeply the work of others it is necessary a good deal of open mind. I try to learn from others

Duke Beaufort Date: 6/19/2013 5:06:00 PM Am I missing something or did you misspell "speaking" in the final version of dog poem? By the way, your prose is excellent, and your discussion brought a huge smile to my face. You have a great sense of humor and human touch. We should be free to tell each other what we think. I do believe, however, that some of us look for the good in each poem and try to encourage the other poets (stroking). I think that by reading each other's work, we learn from each other. I actually like our rules. Login to Reply

Robert Pettit Date: 6/18/2013 10:00:00 PM We all can be more critical, but possibly at the expense of perpetrating animosity. From my own previous experiences on other sites, not everybody agrees with what I state, and acceptance cannot be taken for granted. Login to Reply Mario De Paz Date: 6/19/2013 6:57:00 AM Although for now I limited my criticism to my own poems, I will be probably paying this spontaneous observation about the quality of poems in terms of popularity in the site, but I am only interested in writing and reading. Thank you for the comment which is surely right