why does the last line, "it is time," have to be there? i don't like it. "it is time it were time" is not much stronger. i question the necessity of these two lines. they're too heavy handed for me, and don't do anything interesting. they're flat and feel like add ons and they're lame. get that shit outta here.
the part of the poem i'm really digging is the line "we sleep like wine in the conches." that's beautiful. this image is completely invented; something i've never seen before or thought of, and yet when i read that line it's totally there. i can see the stillness, heaviness, thickness of the sleep. it's a perfect example of something abstract grounded in a concrete image. it works so well. it's especially nice because of the line that follows it: "like the sea in the moon's blood ray." i'm a really big fan of the double-simile when it's done right, and in this case i really think it is. the sea picks up on the conch, and the moon's blood ray picks up on the color of the wine. but, even though these two images "match" in a way, they are images of different things. in the second one, i see the sea still at night in the light of the moon. sometimes the moon is red? right? doesn't that happen? i'm not sure, but even if not, there's still something matchy-matchy about the sea under a blood ray and a pool of wine inside a conch shell. it's working.
No comments:
Post a Comment