For poets who want unrestricted constructive criticism. This is NOT a vanity workshop. If you do not want your poem seriously critiqued, do not post here. Constructive criticism only. PLEASE Only Post One Poem a Day!!!
4/23/2016 6:55:08 PM
Anthony Guccia
Posts: 5
|
I just wrote a poem, I am calling, "The Illusion of "Free-Will". I will take suggestions for a better title, if anyone has a suggestion. The poem came together pretty easily, however, I had trouble, as I often do, with the final stanza, and its conclusion. I added another stanza, removed it, added it, removed it.... changed some lines in the existing final stanza... I am unsure if I am finished, and if the poem comes full circle, with a proper conclusion. Please any and all advice would be appreciated. I am an amateur, so I will take the criticism without offense.
What of "Free-Will," of which the prophets foretold?
A cruel little lie, bore of simple human design,
are our minds even capable, of the power to choose?
Or, are we blind sheep, being herded by the flock,
wrangled all together, just to be finally led astray?
Humankind seems to crave its own subjugation!
Of Religion, For Government, In our feeble little minds.
Freedom simply an illusion, another comforting lie,
Each generation complacent of their forefather's status quo.
Power firmly remains, with the few perched at the top.
The Bourgeoisie become Earth's largest congregation.
Even after centuries, not the slightest shift of balance.
Question their authority, get quickly stricken down.
"Destiny," their creation, to keep us silent and contained,
nothing remains left to the luxury of chance or fate.
Billions now brainwashed, mindless and obedient drones,
enslaved to do their bidding, our Government's mules.
Even God didn't foresee, how far we would fall.
Blindly praising institutions constructed by fellow man,
forgetting his firm warning, not to worship false idols.
Man bows to the Government, its holiest of incarnations.
Regardless their definition, they all share the blame,
from out-of-date Monarchies, to refined Democracies.
All Function reliant, on man's unquestioned allegiance.
The consequence of opposition, capital punishment,
Yet, countless remain quiet and vigilant.
Coup d'etat and revolution, tools of a forgotten past.
Our future now more uncertain, then ever before.
A millennium of suffering, bounded by servitude,
Man it seems, will inevitably rule itself into submission.
Man alone granted freedom from a prior destined fate,
God's one and only creation, blessed of inherent "Free-Will."
Appreciation long forgot, now boastful and full of arrogance,
forsaking, the very essence of our human existence.
Taking for granted, even the gift of life in it self.
Our lives spent as slaves, to God's born of flesh and blood,
voluntarily submitting, to every Politician's new command.
Society's first rulers, who our ancestors surrendered control,
remain ruling still, bringing even evolution to a sudden halt.
The Great Human civilization continues into its decline.
Man's final hope, lay beyond the grasp our mortal reach,
gone until, God reclaims his authority, as sole ruler of man.
Will then glory be restored to our failed attempt at a Utopic land?
Or due divine justice, will our final judgment now commence?
edited by Bigtone066 on 4/23/2016
edited by Bigtone066 on 4/23/2016
edited by Bigtone066 on 4/23/2016
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
4/27/2016 9:12:24 AM
Andrea Edwards
Posts: 5
|
Hey BigTone066,
So I can see why you're having a problem with the last stanza of this poem. It's not a different tone of voice, it's just different content. What you do well in the poem is keeping the same syncopation and following through with that all the way to the end. Despite adding, taking away, adding stanzas, I can't really see that while reading the poem. That means you're good at editing your poetry too.
As for the challenge of the stanza, try taking it out of a questioning tone for the last line. In general practice it's my opinion that if you want people to question you, then give them a declarative sentence and let them come back saying "No! You're not right, what about --" and I think that'll give you the reaction you're looking for without feeding them a question themselves.
I think there might be some other things you could work on in this poem too though, and I think if you worked on those things you might find a better way to end it, so I'm going to include them in the review.
First off, I think you got off topic near the middle of the poem, either that or your topic switched. You call this "The Illusion of Free-Will" but is that really what this poem is trying to say? I feel like your poem, in the end, came together talking about the falsehood of God in day to day life and the way the government has replaced God for many people. That being said, I don't think you ever really get into an argument about how free will is an illusion.
You talk about how destiny is a creation of government, but if they're creating destiny then that is the illusion, not free will, so which is it? Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't really see free will vs destiny a continuum between the two. There are some that might argue that even within destiny there is a little bit of free will about how you get there, but in the end, the same things are going to happen but that's an accepted part of what destiny means.
You also talk about chance and fate. Those two things basically mean destiny to me in their own ways. Chance provides the room for free will, when destiny leaves things up to chance, but fate is basically saying it'll happen how it was supposed to happen, which, put together, makes destiny. So, I'm not exactly sure what you're arguing for here because you seem to be arguing against Free Will in the title, and the first stanza, but destiny later.
That makes the poem a little more confusing and hard to summarize because I don't think the poem ever really draws out a solid point.
The last thing I'd like to point out is that you're writing this from a very detached perspective. There's a lot of animosity here that I can feel when I read the words, but they're put into the poem in such a way that I'm not exactly sympathizing with it. Because you don't go into details or show examples, even though you have this very essay-oriented poem [which I like that style], you're losing me as an audience to my own thoughts and arguments. The heavy biases in this poem make it difficult to really get into understanding what is being argued against and what is just disliked through the narrative.
Suggestions about how to fix it will follow.
Basically, I think you're going to have to start with deciding what you really want to argue here. If you want to say free will is nonexistent, then don't talk about destiny being a creation of the government. I'm getting that from the third stanza by the way. Once that's taken out or made the main point of your argument, you'll have to do some rebuilding and actually speak positively about the other choice. Either that, or make that third choice, the one you/your speaker believe(s) to be true, obvious and that should be your concluding stanza.
I think if you do that, you're going to have a poem that really starts to get a bit of a polish, but you're still going to have some work to do. After that, I think the only thing that's left is to decide about style for presentation, but that's not what you're asking about, so I'l just leave it as is.
I really hope this helps you see what I'm seeing. If it doesn't, feel free to drop me a line or ask me, and I'll try again.
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
4/27/2016 10:44:57 PM
Bob Atkinson
Posts: 294
|
Anthony, this is amazing. We're thinking the same thoughts:
All Possible Combinations
- by - BobAtkinson
what if a plan got devised
to allow us infinity of combinations
in everything we do, everything we see
total rational computations
would we not in our ineptitude
have capability to disagree
would we then amuse creators
by conflicting local scenes
tragic as this thought may seem
to us this open ended world
carries duty preserved in hearts
to multi flags unfurl
we state out in an open play book
our feelings we do shout
so everyone hears our name
or name of our cause profound
an all knowing leader of our pack
who knows, tells only truth
gives us purpose to expound
in ways a bit uncouth
but then this amusement carries far
beyond what's sane, rational
if our leader's full of dip
and in reality's super bashful
who can tell us truth here folks
who stands for a good path
who carries us to a quiet future
not revolting by taking us back
back to when barbarity
set life's center stage
back before we co-operated to
help each other survive unscathed
ways of peaceful progress
where all could reap rewards
not just leaders of our bands
who laugh at life's resolve
resolve to choose which way to go
while not adhering to a saint
which, in reality, was a stupid person
who laughed at our mistakes
nobody knows pure truth on this
blue planet in universe's corner
no way to expound beliefs
which don't benefit the donor
no way to carry forth these dreams
which some seek a greedy find
without jumping on strong backs
of people, yours and mine
so when they tell you they know good truth
tell them “that's impossible my friend”
nobody knows reality
to state that's a mortal sin
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
9/23/2016 11:10:05 PM
Jerome Malenfant
Posts: 26
|
First, I would not put Free Will in quotes; I feel that that weakens the line and/or title.
More importantly, I don't find the argument presented in the poem convincing. For one, there is no "we" here; SOME people choose to be sheep and to follow authority, and some do not. But even then, that is something that they freely choose to do. The question of free will to me is whether our decisions are completely determined by our mental processes, memories, and/or inner desires. Did I really make a free choice to eat that bowl of ice cream? or was my choice determined by which was stronger, the desire to enjoy the ice cream or the desire to loss weight.
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|
10/17/2016 1:03:52 PM
Graphite Drug
Posts: 81
|
I agree with much of Andrea Edwards’s criticism about your piece. What I find obvious about your poem is a gratuitous use of generalization for a standard philosophical argument. Do we have free will or is society in charge? The mistake people make is blaming religion and government. The most challenging poetry begs questions about why people create oppressive governments and religions. Such poems generalize less and point out social details and examples leading to illogical and counterintuitive positions held by majorities or minorities.
edited by graphitedrug on 10/17/2016
edited by graphitedrug on 10/17/2016
|
|
• permalink
• reply with quote
|