Aw thanks! 💜 I am having a lot of fun writing rhymed poems lately. Never really have before, but yeah, I guess after reading so many I finally got the pleasure of it haha.
Yeah, there's something about that first one. It's difficult to fully parse. Like the line: "oh, kindly old rout." A "rout" as far as I can tell (I'd never heard the word before) means a "crowd" or "gathering" of some kind - so is the "kindly old rout" a "kindly gathering/set/collection of fire-born moods"? So, is he saying that while all things pass, and change, and burn out like the candle, or crumble one day like mountains or trees, that there is a "gathering of fire-born moods" which lasts forever, unchanged? So are these "fire-born moods" like the ancient source/archetypes of feeling, or something? I really feel those lines, but have trouble articulating them. I guess that's the suggestive bit, like his dad said - it defies explanation, and asks you to just feel it. Sorry - just thinking out loud now haha. Thanks again for the lovely comment!
Sorry for the late reply, Dick, but I haven't forgotten about you.
My initial thoughts to the first poem were of (please, don't laugh) the human consciousness. The fire that once brought people together and kindled the evolution of the human mind - once consciousness arrived we can't go back to the prior state. To me the first poem simply states the facts. The revision kind of introduces the egocentric ever presence of human beings. Do we matter in the grand scheme or not?
But the more I read the poems, the more confused I get. I don't know, I can't really pin them down to a fixed idea.
Haha :-) All good, of course! No laughter here at all. I feel like we cam to a real similar conclusion - what else is the "origin of moods" but the consciousness? Makes sense to me anyhow :-) I like your reading of fire too - I hadn't thought about the metaphorical and symbolic aspect - like the fire casting shadows in Plato's cave, and as you say, the campfire we sat around - where we sang songs and poems, and told stories. And yeah - the igniting of a spark of consciousness, etc. Lots of suggestive power there. I like your reading a lot! And I think you're right about the revision - it does have more of the ego in those final few lines. Yeah haha - agree so much - when I went back and re-read them I was like... hmmmm... do I understand anything about what these are saying? So hard to pin down! Which I guess examples his father's advice well :-)
He is considered by many the greatest poet of the 20th century, and Wallace Stevens, if I am correct, once said of him, "You were silly like us." Whatever that meant.
Cheers Luis - the short poems are always the forgotten ones haha, and I have a particular love of the very short poem. Nothing beats it for my tastes. Yeah, he was admired by so many. And I can see why. :-)
You know they both have things I like. I like the rhythm of the first. And since I’m an editor by trade and do have a thing for punctuation, I like the two semicolons. For the second one, he doesn’t need a comma at the first line. I do like it ending with a question though.
Love the critique here. I agree the two semi-colons work really well, but the comma in the second doesn't seem necessary. And yeah - the question-mark in the revision is really good. I think I still prefer the assertive "You pass not away" conceptually however? Interesting! :-)
I participated in a revision workshop with @MayaCPopa today and then this post pops into my sphere. The synchronicity is wondrous. Yeats... ever the teacher!
Ah love that synchronicity! And love Maya's work too - big fan. So, I am curious, which do you prefer? The original, or the later revision? And more importantly, why? :-)
”…Poetry should be addressed to the imagination, not to the understanding; should suggest, not narrate; should be concerned with moods rather than facts.”
Because you preceded the poems with this quote, I was particularly drawn to the 1893 version, which dwelt in the mood. I thought the 1899 revision aimed for greater resolution, making it better suited to those who need things tied up with a bow.
Lovely analysis! I completely agree on both points. Being of the suggestion school myself, I prefer the 1893 version, but there's only a hair in it. :-)
Thanks for the reminder, and a great tribute!
I reread "The Second Coming" this week for the anniversary. Somehow I think it's more relevant now than when it was written.
Always a pleasure! Ohhh - I haven't read that one. Will go have a gander. :-)
I'm with you and Kim on this, the first version feels more suggestive. And I absolutely love your poem, Dick. 🖤
Aw thanks! 💜 I am having a lot of fun writing rhymed poems lately. Never really have before, but yeah, I guess after reading so many I finally got the pleasure of it haha.
Yeah, there's something about that first one. It's difficult to fully parse. Like the line: "oh, kindly old rout." A "rout" as far as I can tell (I'd never heard the word before) means a "crowd" or "gathering" of some kind - so is the "kindly old rout" a "kindly gathering/set/collection of fire-born moods"? So, is he saying that while all things pass, and change, and burn out like the candle, or crumble one day like mountains or trees, that there is a "gathering of fire-born moods" which lasts forever, unchanged? So are these "fire-born moods" like the ancient source/archetypes of feeling, or something? I really feel those lines, but have trouble articulating them. I guess that's the suggestive bit, like his dad said - it defies explanation, and asks you to just feel it. Sorry - just thinking out loud now haha. Thanks again for the lovely comment!
Feel free to rhyme and think out loud as much as you want. I'm all eyes and ears!
:-) How did you read those final lines?
Sorry for the late reply, Dick, but I haven't forgotten about you.
My initial thoughts to the first poem were of (please, don't laugh) the human consciousness. The fire that once brought people together and kindled the evolution of the human mind - once consciousness arrived we can't go back to the prior state. To me the first poem simply states the facts. The revision kind of introduces the egocentric ever presence of human beings. Do we matter in the grand scheme or not?
But the more I read the poems, the more confused I get. I don't know, I can't really pin them down to a fixed idea.
Haha :-) All good, of course! No laughter here at all. I feel like we cam to a real similar conclusion - what else is the "origin of moods" but the consciousness? Makes sense to me anyhow :-) I like your reading of fire too - I hadn't thought about the metaphorical and symbolic aspect - like the fire casting shadows in Plato's cave, and as you say, the campfire we sat around - where we sang songs and poems, and told stories. And yeah - the igniting of a spark of consciousness, etc. Lots of suggestive power there. I like your reading a lot! And I think you're right about the revision - it does have more of the ego in those final few lines. Yeah haha - agree so much - when I went back and re-read them I was like... hmmmm... do I understand anything about what these are saying? So hard to pin down! Which I guess examples his father's advice well :-)
We could go on talking about this forever it seems :)
He is considered by many the greatest poet of the 20th century, and Wallace Stevens, if I am correct, once said of him, "You were silly like us." Whatever that meant.
I greatly enjoyed these short poems here.
Cheers Luis - the short poems are always the forgotten ones haha, and I have a particular love of the very short poem. Nothing beats it for my tastes. Yeah, he was admired by so many. And I can see why. :-)
You know they both have things I like. I like the rhythm of the first. And since I’m an editor by trade and do have a thing for punctuation, I like the two semicolons. For the second one, he doesn’t need a comma at the first line. I do like it ending with a question though.
Love the critique here. I agree the two semi-colons work really well, but the comma in the second doesn't seem necessary. And yeah - the question-mark in the revision is really good. I think I still prefer the assertive "You pass not away" conceptually however? Interesting! :-)
I participated in a revision workshop with @MayaCPopa today and then this post pops into my sphere. The synchronicity is wondrous. Yeats... ever the teacher!
Ah love that synchronicity! And love Maya's work too - big fan. So, I am curious, which do you prefer? The original, or the later revision? And more importantly, why? :-)
”…Poetry should be addressed to the imagination, not to the understanding; should suggest, not narrate; should be concerned with moods rather than facts.”
Because you preceded the poems with this quote, I was particularly drawn to the 1893 version, which dwelt in the mood. I thought the 1899 revision aimed for greater resolution, making it better suited to those who need things tied up with a bow.
Lovely analysis! I completely agree on both points. Being of the suggestion school myself, I prefer the 1893 version, but there's only a hair in it. :-)