A Classical Example / c&c / PJR

[Chuck Lysaght]

Doggerel.

[Chuck Lysaght]

A Peter J. Ross sock?

[Gwyneth]

On 24/05/13 02:20, Peter J Ross wrote:

> A Classical Example
> -------------------

Hi Peter,

This is one of the most hermetic pieces of yours that I've read.
Not only do I not recognise most of the references, but I find little
pleasure in the sounds and general effect.

Reading closely to try and do a c&c may reveal more, so I'll attempt it:
>
> Speaking of Helen (not the girl we know
> but she, the original resonant piece whose charms
> burned topless towers) is stale.

This opening may not be grammatically correct, but it is one of the
easiest parts to understand.

I like "the original resonant piece whose charms/ burned topless
towers", but fear that I mainly like it because it reminds me of
something in one of my own poems where I mention Dana� and the Tower of
Brass. There's really nothing in the wording that's similar, so I think
it's just the effect of the meter... and now I've focused on a tiny bit
of your poem and read and re-read and read again, I finally begin to
hear the meter, which escaped me earlier when I was stumbling over the
grammar and sense. This makes reading the rest a lot easier, though it
doesn't seem to help me extract much more meaning.

> Some her uniqueness lose; lose homeseek joy
> when strong, lose valour nervous, lose long tombs
> bothwise. Better her stab and hurl.

"bothwise" is too Tweedledum & Tweedledee.

Whatever it means, I like "Better her stab and hurl." a lot. But it does
remind of Hughes' "Nothing but bounce and stab" which is no help whatsoever.

> Not our grim job of work to involve herein
> loud Zoilus, brave as a twisting fox at best,
> laurel stewer of old;

I had to look up Zoilus.

"brave as a twisting fox" is nice. (At least it's nice if you mean "not
very brave".)

I'm not at all sure what laurel stewing has to do with anything. But I
am encouraged to think of laurel wreaths, of course, and since /laurel/
is the Spanish for bay (the leaves originally used for the wreaths, I
gather) it goes rather well with stews, but I don't think that helps much.

> no, no; we'll bard it, ride the applause we won;
> describe we goldfraught gales from the arid West
> that cowfaced goddesses despoiled.

"we'll bard it" sounds Welsh.
"goldfraught gales from the arid West" is nice.

My mind has taken "fraught" and "ride the applause" to conjure frigates
on the high seas.

"won" sitting just above "West" brings thoughts of cowboys in as a
distraction.

The full rhyme of "best" and "West" has me going back and checking all
the end words and marvelling at the fine control, which I've noticed
previously in your poems. (I don't necessarily like it, but I do
recognise and marvel at it!)
>
> She none the less obliging, were she cloned
> (a hair to embody Helen) same were done
> as bloodplague petulance ere.

Can you actually read "bloodplague petulance" without it turning into a
gargle?
It sounds very Lady McBeth-ish.

"a hair to embody" is neat for cloning.

> Homuncule, slight as Faust's, today were bound
> to sing "...zieht uns hinan."

Nothing. Not even having looked up the quotation.

> But that's all one
> to us mortals. Facts being facts, we're square

I wonder if 'square' was another element that had me conjuring frigates
earlier on.

>
> not to evade this Helenthought, this dream
> (our longdead sharers many; sent to obsess us
> her streetwalk); and whose brothers
> in ancient tales swap livings, of the same
> egg made. We think thus, and our desperate glosses
> are drained, by Zeus! down garglegutters.
>
"this Helenthought" and "drained [...] down garglegutters" are about the
only things here that appeal in any way.

Well, I've reached the end and have a marginally better understanding
than I had when I had simply read it. But it still isn't coming together
into any kind of coherent text. I could probably repeat the exercise and
produce some kind of overall meaning, but there isn't enough here that I
like to make me want to do so.

Thanks for posting,

g.

>
>
> PJR, 2000-02-22, revised 2013-05-24,
> probably not previously posted to Usenet.
>

[Will Dockery]

Loud Zoilus wrote:
>
> it takes *months* before a newcomer to AAPC comes
> to be regarded as vermin. Newcomers who post critiques will be
> welcomed with warm enthusiasm.

Yet another nice addition to a proposed revised Usenet Poetry FAQ.