More Fuel for the Fire

[0xDEADCAFE]

Pumping Gas
July 2005

This shabby little fellow joins me
on my island of concrete.

He seems so puny
beside my well-heeled shoes.
He's naked but for his feathers,
and so light and flimsy,
like a rag doll chased here
by a bullying breeze.

I shift in my stone-washed jeans,
waiting for my tank to fill.
I check my 17-jewel watch,
smooth my 100% cotton shirt,
and think
what a poor chap,
all bare-toed and scraping for crumbs.

But he does not tarry as long as I.
He looks up,
leaps into the air,
and soars away,
an arrow from my heart.

In moments,
he escapes my earthbound sight,
and leaves me far below,
pumping gas,
and yearning to follow.

[Snowglare]

Hah, owned.

[The Last Melon]

Excellent! I don't have any complaints about this.

[RevenantsKnight]

Good to see more from you, 0xDEADCAFE.

This was an enjoyable read, as far as I’m concerned, and I definitely liked the idea of this poem. Nature does indeed have its own wonder to claim, and I think that comes across well here. In terms of what might use some changing, I didn’t really see much, other than the fact that this uses full sentences broken up over lines. I’m not sure if it was intentional or not, but I’d say that it makes it feel a little more formal than I expected; it’s not exactly a major issue, but there are probably some bits and pieces you could cut if you wanted to try and tighten this up. Some specific comments:


He's naked but for his feathers,
and so light and flimsy,
like a rag doll chased here
by a bullying breeze.

As mentioned, the fact that you’re using full, correct sentences broken up over lines makes this feel a little stiff to me. An example of that is “He’s” in the first line; while it definitely should be there grammatically, it may sound more like a thought or a spoken remark and probably still be clear who you meant if you removed it here. Also, it seems to put more emphasis on the image itself, at least to me. Other possible words you could remove are the first “and” in the second line and “like” in the third, though deleting the former might actually change the meaning instead (I’m definitely shooting from the hip here.)


I check my 17-jewel watch,
smooth my 100% cotton shirt,

Maybe it’s just me, but that was an interesting contrast; “100% cotton” is common enough to not really mean anything to me, while a 17-jewel watch screams stupidly obscene riches. I might try to switch one of these out for something else so that they’re more on the same level.


and think

I might cut this line entirely, because it’s evident that the narrator either thinks or speaks the next part, and I don’t know if that distinction really matters in this case.


pumping gas,
and yearning to follow.

I might cut the “and” here so that these two ideas sit perfectly parallel with each other (if that made any sense.) That could just be me, though.

Overall, I thought this was a good read, and though there are a few things that I think could be worth changing, they’re minor issues and could be just fine as is anyway. Thanks for posting!

[0xDEADCAFE]

Hah, owned.
Hah, yourself. I never thought of it quite that succinctly, but now that you mention it, yes, ownage indeed.



Excellent! I don't have any complaints about this.
Excellent! No complaints about your lack of same! Ha ha ha! I own!




ENTER THE SLAYER...



Good to see more from you, 0xDEADCAFE. Uh... hello to you too, uh, Mr. Knight. Heh. It's, uh , certainly good to... what are you doing with that keyboard... n-n-no, don't, it's not human! For the love of... NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!


This was an enjoyable read,
Oh! (Ahem.) Well, please continue, kind sir...


Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....
Really? Oh, do tell... (yawn)


/END OF THE PULLING OF MR. KNIGHT'S LEG




Hey Rev, good to hear from you. Forgive my teasing, but you do set people off from time to time, don't you? Without further ado, on to your very constructive comments...



As mentioned, the fact that you’re using full, correct sentences broken up over lines makes this feel a little stiff to me. An example of that is “He’s” in the first line; while it definitely should be there grammatically, it may sound more like a thought or a spoken remark and probably still be clear who you meant if you removed it here. Also, it seems to put more emphasis on the image itself, at least to me. Other possible words you could remove are the first “and” in the second line and “like” in the third, though deleting the former might actually change the meaning instead (I’m definitely shooting from the hip here.)I have to admit I didn't give a lot of thought to form as I was writing this. It sure is a series of correct sentences. And I think I see what you mean. Just for the sake of discussion, let me rewrite a bit of my own poem if it does not offend the sensibilities of the peanut gallery:


So puny beside my well-heeled shoes
Naked but for his feathers
So light and flimsy
A rag doll chased here by a bullying breeze.


Is this something like what you meant? I have to admit it does seem a bit more elegant, more poetic, if you will. But, without taking credit for being very deliberate about it, I think I prefer the more casual sentence structure of the original. Somehow I see this line coming across better as the spontaneous thoughts of the pumper. I would rather have it sound almost accidental than well-crafted, but I take your point.



Maybe it’s just me, but that was an interesting contrast; “100% cotton” is common enough to not really mean anything to me, while a 17-jewel watch screams stupidly obscene riches. I might try to switch one of these out for something else so that they’re more on the same level. I have this old mechanical watch that has "17 JEWELS" printed on it between the the 8 and the 4. Trust me, it was not an expensive watch--well, not lavishly expensive. I think that phrase refers to the use of quartz or some hard minerals inside the gears to provide precision and durability. I thought this was a fairly common description, but now that you mention it, it may be too obscure a reference in this day of $5 electronic watches.

Having said all that, I definitely was using material wealth to contrast the bird and the human, although not with the intent of conjuring visions of the crown jewels in the reader's mind. Incidentally, I used the 17 and the 100% in that sentence for a similar purpose; there's something very human and very un-animal-like about numbers, no?



I might cut this line entirely, because it’s evident that the narrator either thinks or speaks the next part, and I don’t know if that distinction really matters in this case.

I might cut the “and” here so that these two ideas sit perfectly parallel with each other (if that made any sense.) That could just be me, though. Again, I can see your point entirely. The extra connectives and punctuation deprives this presentation of a certain poetic elegance. I can see both changes, in general, but not for this poem. Going back to my comments above, I like the accidental nature of this, like spontaneous impressions leaking out, like this person is barely aware of their own thoughts. I don't think it is a stretch to image them exiting the poem slightly surprised, rather reflective, and as Snowglare was so good to point out, totally owned!

Thanks all. I very much enjoyed your comments.

[The Last Melon]

Whoa, what? It's a bird? That suddenly makes it so much better! I thought it was just a scruffy little man that metaphorically flew up into the air! Now it's...whoa! The quality just multiplied by a factor of ten! At least!


But, without taking credit for being very deliberate about it, I think I prefer the more casual sentence structure of the original.

I as well.

[Snowglare]

Oh, hah. I thought it was a man (a super man), too, though on second reading it's clearly meant to be a bird. And I agree it's better that way. Something about the semi-murky description being of mundane events rather than of an unexpected flying man adds resonance. Like the difference between a power fantasy and a strange truth.

[RevenantsKnight]

THE SLAYER APPLAUDS...

I found it amusing, anyway, so I don't mind. Say, does that mean my criticism is art because it inspired you to write this? :grin:


Is this something like what you meant?

More or less. Funny, though...the adherence to grammatical rules struck me as overly formal. "Casual" is probably near the bottom of the list in terms of adjectives I'd use for that wording (somewhere between "explosive" and "minty fresh," or thereabouts.) Either way, it's still a good read.

And for what it's worth, I was certain it was a bird from "feathers." You are now free to revise your previous statement that it was a bird to make me look like a moron. :laugh:

[0xDEADCAFE]

And for what it's worth, I was certain it was a bird from "feathers." You are now free to revise your previous statement that it was a bird to make me look like a moron. :laugh: As appealing as that prospect is, Rev... I must admit, it is totally a bird. In fact, I was at first bewildered at how anyone could think anything but that, and yes the word morons might have even crossed my mind, but then I remembered where I was. :rolleyes:

[Disco-neck Ted]

Do NOT change this. Excellent bit of work. It reminds me of my favorite Don Marquis poem (writing as Archie the cockroach), "The Lesson of the Moth".

Btw, did you re-write this and have Snow back-post it somewhere along the way? I'm a little mystified by the superman interpretation. True, at lines one and two, I'm thinking that a raggedy squeegee-guy was getting ready to put the touch on a suit, but at line five that idea comes into question and at line eight it's obvious you are talking about a little bird. Nice, NICE contrast between the insubstantial breeze-bullied waif and the "solid citizen". But what is really important here, the Lexus and Rolex, or the ability to shoot mortgageless through the sky? Woo-hoo!

If you did want to change this around, then minor tweaks could be good, but there is the danger of losing perspective and making it into something else. Minimal modifications would be the key, imho. I like half the changes in the re-written verse you submitted, where "he's" gets dropped, but not the elimination of "He seems".

If there is a place that could use a tiny bit of work, imho, re-ordering the third verse might smooth it a little and make achieving parallelism easier. Right now he shifts in his jeans while his tank is filling. This necessitates ending that sentence and beginning another one so he can check his watch (repeating 'I', which could be eliminated). So, without putting anything there you didn't already write:


Waiting for my tank to fill
I shift in my stone-washed jeans
check my 17-jewel watch
smooth my 100% cotton shirt
and think,
what a poor chap
all bare-toed and scraping for crumbs.

And unless the repetition of 'my' is intentional, it would be a simple matter to remove a few instances. For what it is worth, keep the "and think" line. I like the way he (you) barely distracts himself from his material existence long enough to glance at the bird. "And think" makes his momentary departure that much stronger.


Good show! I'm cheering.

[Snowglare]

Btw, did you re-write this and have Snow back-post it somewhere along the way? I'm a little mystified by the superman interpretation.

No, no, I just suck at the reading. Superheroes on the brain, read too fast the first time, molded it into what I wanted to see.

[0xDEADCAFE]

Do NOT change this. Excellent bit of work. It reminds me of my favorite Don Marquis poem (writing as Archie the cockroach), "The Lesson of the Moth".
I'm not planning any changes. Not because I believe it's perfect as much as I doubt my ability to tinker in a constructive way. I like this poem and am determined to, first, do no harm.

As you said:
If you did want to change this around, then minor tweaks could be good, but there is the danger of losing perspective and making it into something else.



If there is a place that could use a tiny bit of work, imho, re-ordering the third verse might smooth it a little and make achieving parallelism easier. Right now he shifts in his jeans while his tank is filling. This necessitates ending that sentence and beginning another one so he can check his watch (repeating 'I', which could be eliminated). So, without putting anything there you didn't already write: Is it a cop-out to say I want it to be plain rather than elegant? For example, after this line:


I shift in my stone-washed jeans,
waiting for my tank to fill.

I picture something like the equivalent of a gas-station tumble weed blowing by, maybe a discarded two-liter pop bottle, you know? I almost think I should have made it a separate paragraph. Ideally, I'd like to capture the feeling of a pause in time. Nothing happening. Just waiting. Like, picture an old western movie wherein some plain fellow is jes' leanin' against a fence, doin' nothin', and when he looks up there's just the desert with the tumbleweeds blowing by. "An empty head among dry spaces."


For what it is worth, keep the "and think" line. I like the way he (you) barely distracts himself from his material existence long enough to glance at the bird. "And think" makes his momentary departure that much stronger. Yes. Same idea. Trying to give. Some pause to it. Thinking...


Good show! I'm cheering. I'm chirping! (I seem to be doing well with birds lately. Y-e-s... That's it! I must think... more birds... Squawk! SQUAWK!)

Thanks very much for your comments, Ted.