god'swife31 Jan 2006

I wish i could understand this philosophy. Are you saying that in their quest for purity( a poem without any unproductive lines), the imagists are taking the narrow view? If they would not be so precise and allow themselves to poetically wander to the point of actually opposing some statement within the poem, that the poem would be better for it?

As for the this poem I think it's quite good. Though it weakens in the third and fourth stanzas. This whole thing about having an idea and creating the poem to fit the idea seems to be the opposite of what the imagists were attempting. I thought the imagists illustrated their experiences allowing meaning to emerge out of the images.

Now I've confused myself.

It's ironic that lines I love in this poem could be considered imagist.

'But still' seems inappropriate since in the first stanza you use

'...noise
of the urban morning...'

The birds, footsteps and most especially the traffic are urban noises, so the but still looks like your going to reflect on the comparative peace and quiet.

The duck image is brilliant. did you invent it?