|
|
|
print friendly version
|
|
To A Great Poet, Who Died Young. |
|
|
By brook_rivers
|
|
26 February 2006 |
Can anyone guess the poet?!
Hope I have done him justice. You loved her didn’t you?
I know you did.
It wasn’t just love was it?
Your life, work, obsession………….
Did she love you back?
With the same
Intense,
Passion.
Was your love cruel?
A beautiful Lady, without Mercy.
Did you feel rejected?
Oh! ‘Unreflecting love’
I’m sorry you didn’t attain your fulfilment.
In a way it was best, it was best.
Your flame of passion was still burning……
Nothing spoilt the lovely, perfect image of her,
Your love and desire is immortal
now.
Your idealistic vision is unchanged,
Forever.
|
poetry
Written by givitsum (651 comments posted) 26th February 2006 | Sorry brook_rivers, I feel a cannot review your poems as I do your comedy, cos to be honest poems is not my cup of tea.
I must say though, this one doesn't even rhyme!
 | John Keats Eat My Pants.
Written by gerardconnolly (1186 comments posted) 27th February 2006 | God's Brother's Breeks!!
'A beautiful Lady without mercy'... Sounds just like The Wife!?......SANS MERCI AN' NO CODDIN' Yous wouldn't believe th' leatherin' she handed out t' Yer Man when She found out I'd emptied th' week's housekeepin' on Dolly Boy in th' 2.30 over at Ponchastown. The gee was a surefire winner but would yous credit it, ... at th' off th'fancy five legged critter turns round t' th' jockey an' says, 'We'd get round a feck o' a sight faster if some bastard shifted them fences!!' Came in on th' night train! I lost me shirt on th'smartarse nag an' th' other nag decorated th' livin' room wi' me guts!
May God preserve us from the fast talkin' creatures! Amen.
Slainte!
PS Nice poem. Though much I'd know. | thanks guys
Written by brook_rivers (484 comments posted) 27th February 2006 | The poem isn't meant to rhyme, it was meant to be a T.S.Elliot kind of stlye, with emphasis on meaning rather than rythm. I can understand that you cant take the poem seriously though, after meeting my creation of Tanya!  |
Written by B.D. (82 comments posted) 27th February 2006 | It's a really nice poem. I like it & the way you wrote it but I've never read any of T.S. Elliot's work so...good job still, though!!!  |
Written by B.D. (82 comments posted) 27th February 2006 | | I didn't have anything to say but now I do: you spelled something wrong! (sorry) "fulfilment" is spelled "fulfillment"... | Dear brook
Written by givitsum (651 comments posted) 27th February 2006 | Thanks so much for pointing that out
But I still don't know what the poems about
As I said, these poems aren't my cup of tea
I much prefer your com-e-dy
But now that I know, I think it's sublime
Even if the bugger doesn't rhyme
|
Written by amboline (183 comments posted) 1st March 2006 | By and large, I like this. It flows well. I wouldn't really say it was "TS Eliot"-like, but it has a conteporary style that flows well. The only bit I wasn't entirely comfortable with was there's a bit too much of the "poet's voice" in here. It works well in the first couple of lines ("You loved her didn't you? / I know you did"), but later in the poem it's a little intrusive in places ("I'm sorry you didn't attain your fulfilment" is a bit weak - it suggests that you're somehow responsible for his not attaining his fulfilment, which seems unlikely...). Apart from that though, very interesting. With or without rhyme
Oh, and "fulfilment" is a perfectly legitimate spelling. |
Written by brook_rivers (484 comments posted) 2nd March 2006 | thanks for your comments amboline
i was wanting to illustrate the fact that it isn't a rhyming poet and t.s.elliot popped in my head, your quite right its nothing like his poems!
May work on the line you poointed out. I was trying to create the feel that the person 'talking' to keats feels as though they have an intimate relationship by using direct speech.
thanks again for your comments |
Only registered users can rate and write comments.
Please login or register. Powered by AkoComment 2.0! |
Previous item
