Hi Tamsin, the first one is my favourite. I think the opening repetitive structure works really well. Yes, I think the middle section goes a bit astray, but it largely gets on track again at the end. I’d be inclined to think of them as two entirely separate poems. So there’s no reason the second one couldn’t be worked on too. I seem to recall there was a classical poet (Horace?) who put every poem he wrote in his desk for six years after writing it. Only then did he look at it again to decide what was worth keeping/ what needed revision - pretty extreme, for sure, but it shows what can be done. Btw. I think writing political poetry is especially difficult, because it tends to become partisan and so miss the nuance of life (and poetry). We have a general election coming up in the UK in about a month and closer to the time I’m intending to put out a “political” (but not party political) poem - you can tell me then if you think (on these terms or any other) I’ve succeeded or failed!! 🙂
I really dislike the first, it veered over the pond and into tRumpism far too easily. I’ve tried putting the two together now. But it’s not my genre. Maybe I’ll like one of the 3 in 6 years time too.
In my opinion, these are two completely different poems (just linked by the original word/title). I have a hard time talking about American politics because the fact that D.T. was our country's president and may be again makes me feel like crying and screaming into a pillow at the same time. But I love poems that address the very real awfulness that is our current system. It's here, it's frightening, and we need to talk about it and point out the madness.
The second poem resonates for me because I get caught in my brain and have a hard time starting certain things. It felt like it had a broader meaning than revision, which I like.
I've been thinking about revision a lot and wondering if the previous version (in my case only) was simply the best I could do at the time. Later, maybe because of time and also circumstances changing, a different version (a better version?) can come out.
Yes, I agree 2 completely different poems in the end, held together only by the original prompt. I just couldn’t ‘save’ the first version, couldn’t see a way to make it actually work. And that’s what the 2nd poem was about. It will be saved though as it was an exercise in itself. DT and our Tory government are just awful. It all beggars belief. Maybe I might manage to write about it at some point.
I love looking at your revisions, so pleased you add the links so I can go look.
Like Margaret Ann, I see these as two distinct poems, and I think each adds context to the other. I'm wondering if they might be combined in some way (if you decide to do more with it)? This part really came alive for me: "Armchair socialists sigh and drink/Their free trade wine/Sitting in gentle suburbia in 100 year old houses" You convey so much there about what is in these lines: "So I don’t do the thing today/And I probably won’t do it tomorrow either./I didn’t do the thing."
Hi Tamsin, the first one is my favourite. I think the opening repetitive structure works really well. Yes, I think the middle section goes a bit astray, but it largely gets on track again at the end. I’d be inclined to think of them as two entirely separate poems. So there’s no reason the second one couldn’t be worked on too. I seem to recall there was a classical poet (Horace?) who put every poem he wrote in his desk for six years after writing it. Only then did he look at it again to decide what was worth keeping/ what needed revision - pretty extreme, for sure, but it shows what can be done. Btw. I think writing political poetry is especially difficult, because it tends to become partisan and so miss the nuance of life (and poetry). We have a general election coming up in the UK in about a month and closer to the time I’m intending to put out a “political” (but not party political) poem - you can tell me then if you think (on these terms or any other) I’ve succeeded or failed!! 🙂
I really dislike the first, it veered over the pond and into tRumpism far too easily. I’ve tried putting the two together now. But it’s not my genre. Maybe I’ll like one of the 3 in 6 years time too.
In my opinion, these are two completely different poems (just linked by the original word/title). I have a hard time talking about American politics because the fact that D.T. was our country's president and may be again makes me feel like crying and screaming into a pillow at the same time. But I love poems that address the very real awfulness that is our current system. It's here, it's frightening, and we need to talk about it and point out the madness.
The second poem resonates for me because I get caught in my brain and have a hard time starting certain things. It felt like it had a broader meaning than revision, which I like.
I've been thinking about revision a lot and wondering if the previous version (in my case only) was simply the best I could do at the time. Later, maybe because of time and also circumstances changing, a different version (a better version?) can come out.
Yes, I agree 2 completely different poems in the end, held together only by the original prompt. I just couldn’t ‘save’ the first version, couldn’t see a way to make it actually work. And that’s what the 2nd poem was about. It will be saved though as it was an exercise in itself. DT and our Tory government are just awful. It all beggars belief. Maybe I might manage to write about it at some point.
I love looking at your revisions, so pleased you add the links so I can go look.
I was feeling lazy this morning and almost didn’t add the link for my previous version, but then I thought of you :).
I’ve written several political poems but they don’t go anywhere. More of a rage/grief exercise for me.
A house of 5 adults all thinking the same way here, so we rant about it all almost daily. Thank goodness, cos it gets the angst out.
Like Margaret Ann, I see these as two distinct poems, and I think each adds context to the other. I'm wondering if they might be combined in some way (if you decide to do more with it)? This part really came alive for me: "Armchair socialists sigh and drink/Their free trade wine/Sitting in gentle suburbia in 100 year old houses" You convey so much there about what is in these lines: "So I don’t do the thing today/And I probably won’t do it tomorrow either./I didn’t do the thing."
Oo, an interesting concept. Might try that.
Democracy is threatened by mistaken beliefs,
common sense abandoned wilfully, carelessly,
seditious alternatives garnered without thought,
bought, traded, and swapped on a whim.
And armchair socialists, sitting in gentle suburbia
in 100 year old heritage houses, do nothing:
sigh and drink their free trade wine
comfortably settled but bemoaning
how the world has changed.
But they don’t do anything today
and probably won’t do it tomorrow either.
They won’t do a thing.