Autumn

[jobee 10]

Autumn/fall

 

The ground awash with dying leaves,

as dismissive, sleepy, wearisome, trees,

cast them off to flutter down,

and die unwanted on winter's ground.

 

Cold and cheerless the autumn air,

offers nothing to help or care,

huddled together as if for cheer,

but spiteful winds divide and clear.

 

All the browns and ochre’s too,

nature's carpet open to view,

every single shade of green,

as nature's palette reigns supreme.

 

Twigs and branches strewn around,

Magpies search and probe the ground,

foxes peek, search and inquire,

approach and stop as if to admire.

 

Cautiously taking a guarded stance,

ever fearful of man's violence,

The sky above cold and blue,

clouds mixed in a grey and white hue.

 

And then to man we next inquire,

as extra warmth he does require,

all wrapped up in jumpers new.

fearing colds and chills anew.

 

Then the autumn day is done,

giving way to nights kingdom,

a chilly cold and watery sky.

watches nature's foliage die.

 

 

John Bishop

Copyright © - John Bishop - All rights reserved

__________________

[Tallyman 10]

Jobee

 

I think you can probably take the prize for the most threads started in a week on this forum! It's nice to see that you are giving your poetry the chance of a wider audience.

 

As Ron Blanco wrote in another of your threads, you have written so many poems that it would be rude not to make a comment on at least one of them!

 

Poetry is, in my opinion, a very difficult thing to try and pin down. There are 'rules' of sorts, but they are often broken with good effect. In the end, it's how rich a picture the poem conjures that seems to be one way of evaluating it.

 

In the case of your poems, you have clearly spent a great deal of time considering your subject and trying to get to the essence of it. Also, many of your poems are, in a way, potted biographies of people that have meant something to you, and are informative as well as presented in poetic style.

 

For me, poems are meant to be read aloud, and should possess something of a kind of rhythmic, spoken song about them. In this regard, rhythm, metre and rhyme come together to produce something that waxes, wanes, rides along smoothly as it makes its way from speaker to listener.

 

All this is a lengthy way of suggesting that you read your poems out loud to yourself as you write, and try and check that rhythm and flow.

 

For example, this poem reads well. The words you have chosen fit easily together, dovetailing neatly into lines, and because of that it's easy to spot where it doesn't. Take this verse:

 

All the browns and ochre’s too,

nature's carpet open to view,

every single shade of green,

as nature's palette reigns supreme.

 

Read this out loud, and most of it runs smoothly together, until you get to 'open'. It's like a paving stone slightly out of line, and you trip over it, like a poetic speed bump. If you replaced it with a one-syllable word, it has the effect of smoothing out the bump. Substitute 'plain' or 'clear' (or a better word!) and see the difference.

 

This small point applies to much of your poems, although I realise that the historical ones have a stronger narrative imperative which might forgive the odd lapse. Even so, some more thought on choosing words that create the right sort of flow might pay dividends. Having said that, I do also realise that words which appear dissonant or awkward are just as useful if they're there to convey that effect.

 

Keep posting, Jobee, but also review your poems (some of which seem to have been written a while ago), and don't be afraid to revise them if you think some aspect can be improved.

 

Keep it up

[jobee 10]

Tallyman,

 

I am perplexed with poetry.

 

I did pass a course called 'Start Writing Poetry' with the open university.

 

I cannot understand what a poet needs iambic pentametre for.

 

For me its just a gimmick.

 

Just paint a picture is my form.

 

Ted Hughes on here[ Poet Laureate] gives his version of a battlefield.

 

Its nothing like the battlfield I was on. It proves to me that Hughes was

 

never on a battle field.

 

Still perplexed.john

[jobee 10]

All the browns and ochre’s too,

nature's carpet open to view,

every single shade of green,

as nature's palette reigns supreme.

 

But we can open[unroll] a carpet, we dont clear it-perplexed

[Halibut 12]

You're correct in that Hughes never actually fought Jobee - the poem you refer to was a work of his imagination. He was however a countryman and a fisherman and a great observer of nature. Try this one.

 

 

Pike

 

Pike, three inches long, perfect

Pike in all parts, green tigering the gold.

Killers from the egg: the malevolent aged grin.

They dance on the surface among the flies.

 

...continues

 

..............By Ted Hughes

 

 

GL Note:The following ten stanzas were removed for copyright reasons.

[shoeshine 10]

It's one thing exhibiting one's favourite poems/poets, and having them scrutinised favourably or not,Halibut.

 

Anyone can do that.

 

The awkward bit is putting one's own efforts before the Public and facing the music.

 

So ...... we await you parading your personal efforts in the Genre.

 

 

ps .... I'm not holding my breath!

[jobee 10]

Yes, Ted Hughes had a way with words, but this site is about individual efforts and constuctive criticism. Are you going to join in the fun-and it is fun.

[Tallyman 10]

I am perplexed with poetry.

 

I did pass a course called 'Start Writing Poetry' with the open university.

 

I cannot understand what a poet needs iambic pentametre for.

 

For me its just a gimmick.

 

Just paint a picture is my form.

 

Jobee

 

I don't think you need to adhere to iambic pentameter, or any other of the conventions of poetry. However, it is important to understand why they are there, so you can then ignore them with confidence!

 

You could argue Picasso's later painting style was gimmicky, and not to everyone's taste, but he knew very well the conventions of art, and could produce a thoroughly realistic and perfectly conventional picture if he wanted to. The same applies to Lowry - if you've seen some of his beautiful sketches, you'll know that his art wasn't all about 'matchstick men'.

 

As you say, your form is to 'just paint a picture', and that's a fine approach. My point is that as you paint your poem, your words are your colours, and the way they sound are your brush strokes. The combination of those words, the sound patterns they make, the images they conjure, are what makes your 'picture'. All I was suggesting in my previous post was that you examine the words you're using, the way they fit together, and the effect their combination has on the reader.

 

This isn't about Iambic Pentameter or the need to adopt any other particular convention, but it is about finding the rhythm within the lines and using the words to produce the right response in the reader, and of course that's not just about finding words that rhyme.

 

If you'll forgive me the slightly facetious example of an old Monty Python sketch, where the discussion was about the difference between 'woody' words and 'tinny' words. Try saying 'caribou', 'umbrella' (or even 'Mantaspook' ) out loud, and they have what could be called a 'woody' flavour - long and low. Contrast that with the 'tinny' sounds of 'sit', 'tight' or 'pick' and you might see what they meant. I know it's silly, but it gives one pause to think about the way the sound of a word helps to convey a mood, one which might enhance the word's actual meaning or even work against it to produce a conflict.

 

To use an example which might have a connection with your own experience, take the word 'war'. To me, it's a 'woody' word, it's the start of the words 'warm' and 'warmth', and it almost conjures up a comfortable, cosseted feeling. On the other hand, the word 'battle' is 'tinny' to me, and evokes conflict. My point is that a poet might use 'battle' when they want the sound of the word to enhance its meaning, but they might use 'war' when they want to convey a more complex image, where the meaning of the word is 'conflict', but the sound of the word evokes feelings of 'duty', 'the greater good', 'the comfort of a noble cause'.

 

But perhaps that's just me! Please take or leave these comments as you see fit

 

(By the way, on a matter of housekeeping, please don't feel that you need to quote someone else's post entirely if it's not necessary - it helps to keep the thread a bit more readable! Thanks)

[jobee 10]

Jobee

 

I don't think you need to adhere to iambic pentameter, or any other of the conventions of poetry. However, it is important to understand why they are there, so you can then ignore them with confidence!

 

You could argue Picasso's later painting style was gimmicky, and not to everyone's taste, but he knew very well the conventions of art, and could produce a thoroughly realistic and perfectly conventional picture if he wanted to. The same applies to Lowry - if you've seen some of his beautiful sketches, you'll know that his art wasn't all about 'matchstick men'.

 

As you say, your form is to 'just paint a picture', and that's a fine approach. My point is that as you paint your poem, your words are your colours, and the way they sound are your brush strokes. The combination of those words, the sound patterns they make, the images they conjure, are what makes your 'picture'. All I was suggesting in my previous post was that you examine the words you're using, the way they fit together, and the effect their combination has on the reader.

 

This isn't about Iambic Pentameter or the need to adopt any other particular convention, but it is about finding the rhythm within the lines and using the words to produce the right response in the reader, and of course that's not just about finding words that rhyme.

 

If you'll forgive me the slightly facetious example of an old Monty Python sketch, where the discussion was about the difference between 'woody' words and 'tinny' words. Try saying 'caribou', 'umbrella' (or even 'Mantaspook' ) out loud, and they have what could be called a 'woody' flavour - long and low. Contrast that with the 'tinny' sounds of 'sit', 'tight' or 'pick' and you might see what they meant. I know it's silly, but it gives one pause to think about the way the sound of a word helps to convey a mood, one which might enhance the word's actual meaning or even work against it to produce a conflict.

 

To use an example which might have a connection with your own experience, take the word 'war'. To me, it's a 'woody' word, it's the start of the words 'warm' and 'warmth', and it almost conjures up a comfortable, cosseted feeling. On the other hand, the word 'battle' is 'tinny' to me, and evokes conflict. My point is that a poet might use 'battle' when they want the sound of the word to enhance its meaning, but they might use 'war' when they want to convey a more complex image, where the meaning of the word is 'conflict', but the sound of the word evokes feelings of 'duty', 'the greater good', 'the comfort of a noble cause'.

 

But perhaps that's just me! Please take or leave these comments as you see fit

 

(By the way, on a matter of housekeeping, please don't feel that you need to quote someone else's post entirely if it's not necessary - it helps to keep the thread a bit more readable! Thanks)

 

Thank you Tallyman, I have cut and pasted your comments and saved them, you made me think, j

[Tallyman 10]

No, thank you, Jobee, for not dismissing my ramblings out of hand. You have the advantage, in that you are writing the poetry. I don't have the skill in that department, so hats off to you, and please post some more

[pattricia 574]

Yes, Jobees poems are very good.

[jobee 10]

Thank you Tallyman, I have cut and pasted your comments and saved them, you made me think, j

 

All the browns and ochre’s too, 1

nature's carpet open to view,

every single shade of green,

as nature's palette reigns supreme

 

All the browns and ochre’s too, 2

nature's carpet there to view,

every single shade of green,

as nature's palette reigns supreme

 

Any better Tallyman.j