Life: not a Fairy-tale

bluejourneyman

Locked away in a
secret room, like
a Jew fleeing from
the Nazis in 1942,
he hides his love.
Living in a secret
world for what seemed
like years he unbolts
the hidden door and
walks into the sunshine.
At first, the sun hurts his
eyes, he is free at
last. Picking up his weapon
he fights for his freedom.
Love exposed to the world
willing to die for his convictions
he presses on. He will never
hide this truth, again.
Many have died for this cause;
He is saddened when he thinks
of the causalities of war.
When love is true, one must
fight for it, like a knight
slaying a dragon for the queen.
He is not the king, but the knight
sworn to protect his queen.
He loves her.

FinsburyParkCarrots

TS Eliot had this concept called the objective correlative: that the mood, or state of mind described in the language of a piece of work should correlate with the objective facts of the world you're trying to create. So, if we're looking at your work to see if it effects a good objective correlative, does the state of mind you're trying to describe warrant a simile comparing a personal plight with the Nazi holocaust?

I'm not saying that writing about the holocaust in poetry is out of bounds, though the Marxist philosopher Theodor Adorno thought that only silence could express its unspeakable horror. But isn't this use of simile a bit excessive?

I must admit that something irks me about this piece:it's called, "Life: not a fairy-tale", but it nonetheless mythologises and reduces the unspeakable horrors of war to a convenient linguistic formula, by equating them with a lyric, romantic trope of heroic love. This isn't the apparent intention of the poem's theme, which is to show love as a struggle against the horrors of the world and not as a fairy-tale idyll. However, that the simile I just mentioned should fall in the same work as

like a knight
slaying a dragon for the queen

undercuts the poem's attempt at anti-romanticism and an expression of modernday, realistic love, by throwing in this commonplace image, that's the epitome of medieval romance.

Adorno said, "After Auschwitz it is barbaric to write poetry". This might be reactionary, just as Vanity Fair was reactionary in saying, in the 9/11, that from thereon, "Irony" was "dead". Now, I disagree, but I think that one does need to think, well, here I have one simile that reduces a world cataclysm to a trope expressing my state of mind; is it appropriate to render this equivalent - as a poetic device which, here, has a particular rhetorical effect - to a simile of romance? And does this romance simile work, when I'm trying to interrogate romanticism?

I'd rethink, and rewrite the similes in this poem. There's a good piece here, which some tweaking and objective, critical thinking will bring out.

Hope my comments have been helpful.

bluejourneyman

I have been in a group of poets
For about six months. They
Have no problem telling me what they
Think of my poetry. I like that, as do I
Welcome your comments with open
Arms. I totally agree with what you said.
I was trying to express a hidden love exposed,
Worth fighting for. The analogy of the Jewish struggle may have
Been extreme. If I have offended others that was not my intent.
The Jewish nation has struggled/fought for their freedom to live and love,
That was the comparison. I feel love is a deep seeded feeling worth fighting and Sometimes dying for. I guess what I was trying to convey is that we are all meant To be free and pursue peace, love and happiness, not to hide from outside sources. However, there are always those
Bastards trying to kill our passion. I hope I addressed your concerns.

FinsburyParkCarrots

No offence taken. I'm trained in academic literary criticism, and I hoped to show that when you use two similes in a piece, they might be said to become structurally equivalent in the role they play in creating the mood or meaning of a piece. This might not be the writer's plan, but the first simile takes on some kind of equivalent function, and, to an extent meaning, in the text. You have to say, hmmm, I've two similes here. Does one undercut the other?

FinsburyParkCarrots

I meant to say, the first and second similes take on some kind of equivalent function there.

bluejourneyman

My favorite book on poetry writing was writen by Lawrence Jay Dessner "How to Write a Poem." I absolutely love this book, moreover, I welcome your thoughts and instructions. Please feel free to pm me on my poetry

Byrnzie

FinsburyParkCarrots wrote:

No offence taken. I'm trained in academic literary criticism, and I hoped to show that when you use two similes in a piece, they might be said to become structurally equivalent in the role they play in creating the mood or meaning of a piece. This might not be the writer's plan, but the first simile takes on some kind of equivalent function, and, to an extent meaning, in the text. You have to say, hmmm, I've two similes here. Does one undercut the other?

And I thought you were just a pretty face! :rolleyes:

deadnote

i need that poem book