Stupor

A short work, but one that made it`s mark.

Ras

Re: # 2
You are right. The lines could have been...
It was more of my doing
Than yours.

The use of `rather` makes the immediately following line rudimentary.

Zed:

This is a nice short poem.

Some unsolicited advice---- if you don`t want it stop reading this now----.


The seventh line is superfluous. Let me re-phrase---- how does writing ``Than yours,`` adds to the nuance or enhances the thought?

In creative writing, specially verse, one must carefully scrutinise every word. It must be done ruthlessly till any further deletion results in altering the meaning, intent or spirit.

Would appreciate input from others too.

regards

To me, everyone sounds like a doctor. This one is probably a post-call resident.

Adeel.

I know the feeling. Trust me! I know the feeling.

Hmmm...can relate. I wonder though. Why did you choose to title your poem ``Stupor``? Am I missing the point?

Une poeme tragique avec une coeur bon! Le rue d` vie c`est une rue glacis!

8 wonderful lines. Loved Glass as well.

Re Ferozk: Wonder when you will actually say something that is not mired in self importance and devoted to self-display.

Re: temporal.

You question the rationale of the seventh line.

Well for one, it adds a lot of emphasis on the eight line which would be missing if the seventh line was omitted. Yes, i agree that it is in a way redundant but then, that i poetry.... when redundancy adds flavour and emphasis, i am all for it.

in the same note one could question the rationality of ``yesterday`` in the last line. I would think that adds more redundancy than the seventh line. And actually the poem rhymes better without the last word. But then, viva poetic freedom.....

Rishi

Osama:

You say ``eight wonderful lines``. Perhaps you can comment on the superfluousness of the seventh line that I have commented on earlier?

To recall, if the seventh line is deleted, it would in no way, form or shape take away even an iota from the essence.

regards

Rishi:

``Yesterday`` in the last line is redundant. Agreed.

Redundancy in poetry? Big time disagreement there. Brevity is the soul of expression.

regards

Re: # 11
See... there are several other things that need to be corrected.
For example...
It should be
... that was I
Not
... that was me.

Interesting points, Temporal, Rishi. But I think one has to be careful when defining redundancy especially in verse.

You seem to imply ``redundant = not communicating any further information``. So for example the last yesterday becomes redundant because we already know it was yesterday (from line 1). But the last yesterday resonates wonderfully with the first line. It also adds a new rhythm. Try saying the last line with a long pause before the yesterday - it has a nice, trailing echo effect. It also gives a sense of fixation by the poet on yesterday. It gives that broken record feeling - someone dwelling on an apparently trivial (but in fact significant) 10 seconds that happened ... yesterday. At the same time ``yesterday`` is only mentioned twice in the poem - most amateurs would have emphasized the importance of ``yesterday`` to the protagonist by repeating it more often (Yesterday I saw you... yeterday I pulled down... etc. )


Again, one could argue, Zed could have said ``that was me`` instead of ``Yes, that was me``. But, again, the Yes has a place - in setting a reflective mood and a melancholy, wistful tone. Look not just at the overall content encoding but at the emotion, rhythm and perspective each word or phrase adds.

A similar argument applies to the ``than yours``. I think Rishi points it out correctly that this line strengthens the punch of the last line - and the last line HAS a punch. You don`t realize until then that the poet was completely ignored and what the title stupor refers to (beautiful title BTW, because it could refer to the pretend stupor the poet puts on, or the actual stupor that the beloved seems to be in with regards to the poet).

BTW, its a bit ironical that we are having this discussion about redundancy on this particular piece :). I dont think I have seen such brevity on part of any of our contributors. But in general I agree with Temporal. Brevity is very hard to achieve and VERY desirable in all expression and invariablt lacking from most writing. (and my great failing :)) I also think its great that we getting into style versus content - a huge missing component from the interactions on Chowk`s creative writing entries.

PS: I love the fact that the poem is so short and in its length mirrors the extremely brief encounter. And much like the encounter, it is extremely potent, belying its brevity and to the uninitiated eye, its triviality.

Zed is a find.

Re: Osama Ahmed post # 7

Parquoi mon ami? Je suis un homme politique....Qu`est c`t`as dans la tete? Je parle qu`est c`t`as dans moi la tete!!

(translation: Why my friend? I am a political man....What is on your mind? I speak what is in my mind!!)

Khan:

Now, this is what I will term a find on the Chowk---another poetic, stylistic soul! And I mean this sincerely.

Substance is very important but one must never overlook style. Total agreement.

The d in ``walked`` forces the reader to a dead stop, you gather speed with `right past (just the slightest pause) me``. That is why I find the last yesterday just a little misfit.

Despite your explanation, I am not comfortable with ``than yours``----perhaps it is me!

Words should be scuplted with utmost care!

regards

Zed:

Very effective! simple, short and beautiful. You should write more often.

---Rehan