Quote:
Originally Posted by Eadha Deora
good point!!!
but then my rhyme scheme would be screwed up and "eyes of sea" was what I woke up with from a dream .... also, poetry should make you say "WHAT?" and go back and re-read and try to figure it out. If you could read everything all in one flow and take it all in, I think the poet must have been pretty shallow.
|
If your intention was to make people re-read, or think deeply about what you meant by that particular line, then that is totally fine, and of course that's completely up to you as the author of the poem. I just found the word "of" confusing personally (I think "like" would have fit better, as it compares, rather than states it is made up 'of' sea), and I'm not totally convinced that I would have seen your meaning had you not explained it to me. Just my opinion. All in all I thought it was a solid poem by a solid poet (you).
I do disagree with this though:
"If you could read everything all in one flow and take it all in, I think the poet must have been pretty shallow"
I think there are plenty of good poems that are not shallow, for example: Annabel Lee by Edgar Allen Poe... it is a complex poem, it flows really well, and it can be understood with ONE reading. So I think cryptic meanings is completely optional to the poet, and doesn't necessarily make them shallow. Cryptic meanings definitely have their place, particularly in abstract poetry... but generally speaking there are plenty of good poems on both sides... none of which I would consider shallow.
