[Poem] Carrier Pigeon

[Rob King]

So it seems like there's a bit of poetry-posting and criticism going on around these parts. If I could get some thoughts and/or criticism on this, it would be greatly appreciated. I'm not particularly married to the title either.

Carrier Pigeon
Oh, Carrier Pigeon, won't you take them away!
All these sweet nothings that I'm too far to say,
For while I'm still absent I just need her to hear
That each night I dream of when again I'll be near

In the afternoon hours she will pass by my door,
Quite nearly forget that I dwell there no more.
Then down you'll come, pigeon, and she'll read my note
And her eyes will light up from the words that I wrote.

For my feet, they may wander, but my heart does not roam.
Though I've stayed in many houses, with her is my home.
Her arms are my kingdom. I'll return there someday,
'Till then, pigeon, bring her my love, while I'm away.

That day I come back I will take up her hands
And tell her the stories of a hundred far lands.
Then away like a whirlwind, I will take her with me!
On that day, my dear pigeon, you too will be free.

[PCT]

Honestly, it felt il like it could have been written by anybody. It doesn't really seem very distinct. Let go of the rhyme and just say what you want to.

Cue Poet Critic:

Non curo. Si metrum non habet, non est poema.

The basic writing advice:
2nd draft = 1st draft less 10% words.
Read aloud.
Rewrite.

[Gothomo]

I 100% agree with B.T.

I had a rhyming phase when I was in high school and tossed away the concept when I realized how overused of a literary device it is when it comes to poetry. With free-verse you can do anything.

Rhyming ultimately restricts what you can say and this poem shows that. Your rhyme scheme is very simple and comes off as sing-songy.

[Rob King]

Thanks for the thoughts, both of you.

Upfront, I'll just declare that I'm not willing to compromise on a rhyme scheme for this one. It might be quite un-contemporary of me, but I've always approached unrestricted free verse with a slightly emperor's-new-clothes attitude. There are circumstances where being naked is acceptable and right, but other times the robes are appropriate, or a suit of armor, or for god's sakes at least pants. Other musings and circumstances have led me to write unrestrictedly in free verse, but these particular thoughts are more comfortable clad in at least a rhyme scheme. I only barely convinced it to leave my notebook without a forced meter.

Goth, where did it feel particularly restricted to you? Are there any particular features (excluding the rhyme scheme) which make it feel confined? And any other forumite who might stumble here I'd welcome other input as well, particularly from a lyrical angle in light of Goth's comment about it's sing-songy-ness.

[PCT]

Thanks for the thoughts, both of you.

Upfront, I'll just declare that I'm not willing to compromise on a rhyme scheme for this one. It might be quite un-contemporary of me, but I've always approached unrestricted free verse with a slightly emperor's-new-clothes attitude.

That would be a great policy if it routinely produced work that has emotional impact for others, however slight. To counter: I've always thought that good writing happens when you focus on what you want to say, (the message, or meaning,) not the structure and form.

[Gilman Chatsworth]

Use your expression the way you want to express. However, be forewarned, the route you're taking is riddled with sentimentality and cliché. It takes a really astounding piece of work to shake off the burden of the sentiment and cheese that usually comes with this type of work, since its usually burdened by the form, shape, rhyme, etc.

Which is why people usually just don't go that way. As far as your personal work goes, I really don't have much to say. It reminds me of a lot of stuff I've read before. Though the sentiment is sweet, I think you could hit something more real and essential.

Which comes back to me thinking that the form and scheme is what is getting in the way.

[Rob King]

To counter: I've always thought that good writing happens when you focus on what you want to say, (the message, or meaning,) not the structure and form.

It's strange to have that underscored for me: I have had the conversation numerous times about how (to me) the majority of art's merit is in how it communicates an idea, so it's strange to discover myself on the other side of the supposed divide.

But wouldn't you acknowledge that sometimes a structure and form helps better deliver a message? Or is it all free verse, all the time for you? What I mean to ask is if you see any use for poetry that adheres to a discernible structure? Are sonnets so much garbage, for example? This is mostly a matter of curiosity at this point, but I thought I would ask.

---------- Post added at 07:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:18 PM ----------

Use your expression the way you want to express. However, be forewarned, the route you're taking is riddled with sentimentality and cliché. It takes a really astounding piece of work to shake off the burden of the sentiment and cheese that usually comes with this type of work, since its usually burdened by the form, shape, rhyme, etc.

I might never get there, but that's certainly where I'm trying to go. While I have no intention to write structured poetry exclusively, it is an ability which I appreciate in some of my favorite poets, and an skill that I desire to develop for myself.