Hello All,
This is a new poem, and any feedback you have is welcome.
Thanks!
Ethel
This is a new poem, and any feedback you have is welcome.
Thanks!
Ethel
Main
Street
There
were things you just had to survive.
There
were shiny things in your heart.
They
were personal until they weren’t
because
they burst onto the scene singing
because
they made their way onto subway
platforms,
boxcars,
because
they kept on going
even
after the lights went out
in your
little home and on porches
all over
America
so small
you may have imagined them.
Anyway,
for now we’re here
standing
outside in the rain
two
travelers
and what
is it we seek
and who
have we come to know
after
all of these years, knocking?
Hi Ethel! "Main Street" is challenging because it undermines my desire for striking imagery. (This is clearly and merely my own personal preference.) This is an intriguing poem because all the action seems to happen in the prepositions and adverbs. Statements are made, then turned in unexpected ways. There were.. (until)(because)(even after)(for now)(after all)... Until finally, (to me, the'singing' is a tip-off) the poem seems to be addressing its own meaning-making... and the architectonic references to boxcars, platforms, porches, could be metaphors for the structure of language. Each time I read the last line I want to add an 'of' and wonder about the comma-- 'after all these years (,) (of) knocking?' Your poem forces me to dig deeper and question my presuppositions! Thank you :)
ReplyDeleteEthel, this one feels so sure-footed - like an intelligent animal that knows exactly where it's going. I feel a powerful sense of trust - for the voice, the way the poem moves, where it goes - as Vasiliki points out, so much of it is unexpected, unpredictable, but there's a sureness in the statements the poem makes and in the way it speaks that makes me trust it and helps me to rest in its mystery. I also love the way it upends conventional teachings about poetry! - beginning with the large and abstract, and moving into the smaller and specific (platforms, boxcars, porches). The only place I questioned is "two travelers" - what if that line were left out, and the "we" allowed to be unspecified? It's just a wondering - but the line did send me off on a little tangent of questioning (who are the people - who's the other person, besides the speaker, and what's the relationship?) that took me out of the poem. I'm wondering too if a less specific "we" would make the reader feel more included in it - and what would that do to the poem and the experience of reading it? I am curious! Love that it ends with a question, and with the word "knocking," and am also curious what you think of Vasiliki's suggestion. This one is lovely.
ReplyDeleteThanks so much for your comments, Vasiliki and Kasey! I appreciate your careful readings of the poem. The questions/suggestions about the travelers and the ending seem spot on to me, and I'll revisit those spots.
ReplyDeleteI'm captivated by "they were personal until they weren't." That's the opposite trajectory from what I expect - I'm more familiar with things being tolerable until it becomes a lot harder not to take them personally - i.e., things not being personal, until they are. I like the unexpected here. And I can see how the movement in the poem is of these "things" that were interior, and then leave that private space to go out into the world, on Main Street, no less. The poem seems invested in trying to understand what becomes of things once they go out into the world. Structurally, it seems to have two parts, before and after the "Anyway." The first half of the poem seems focused on these unidentified "things," (I think of poems or episodes of personal history); the second half of the poem leaves the things behind and shifts gaze to the two individuals. I don't quite know how to square the two parts. Possible connections seem to be 1) is the you in the first line one of the two travelers, with the speaker? assuming yes and 2) images of travelling in the first half (boxcar, subway) tie in with travelers at the end. One possible reading is that there is a past the travelers are aware of but can't quite make sense of, and traveling, knocking, seeking seems like the best way to go on in the face of uncertainty. Just a thought, hope it is helpful, not trying to tie it all up with a bow! Thanks for the poem.
ReplyDeleteEthel, I must admit my confusion. When I see the word "survive" in the first line, then a few lines down, find the word "boxcar", my mind immediately thinks: Holocaust trains. And that despite the title, and homes and porches -- all references to cozy Americana. A few more lines down, there is "rain", and finally "knocking". I am afraid I am completely misreading this poem. I do love the way it moves through its own landscape -- as Kasey said, sure-footed -- even though I am not sure where it is going. I also appreciate the economy of words -- it has a beautifully pared-down quality, which adds to its sure-footedness.
ReplyDeleteEthel,
ReplyDeleteI love this poem’s use of statements. The tone is complex and engaging. Have you read Sandra Lim’s work? She uses a lot of statements in her poems in really interesting ways. Something to check out if you’d like. This poem uses paradox/negation/undermining strategies really well (Vasiliki pointed this out in her comments). I also think that the two travelers was a moment that opened more questions, but I really enjoyed that shift to a specific set of figures.
What if you did something like this? Turning the image into a simile might help.
Anyway, for now we’re here
standing outside in the rain
like two travelers
and what is it we seek
Thanks for this great poem.
Shannon