Congratulations.

I love the way you have included the word very on the last line of the first verse to really lose what ever momentum of rhythm you generated. The second verse could easliy have been written by an 11 year old girl. The third verse benefits from having to really think whether the words can rhyme and maintain any semblence of rhythm. The sentiment contained is absolutely awful. Fourth: rhyming skills of a paraplegic. Fifth: written in the style that yoda speaks to young skywalker it is. In general - if I were your nana I would have shaken you to death as an infant.

First verse, first line two uses of the word me really helps distinguish your work as that of a disabled. Guessing that in the second verse the word should be "your days here are long" even so that would be bile. Third verse, last line, for someone you love so much you are being very forceful in telling her never to question. However as this device has been used to expedite another terribly childish rhyme you are excused. Where to start on the fourth? well probably best to ask you to read it back and see how extremely poorly it conveys anything other than you are mentally crippled. Fifth - although rhyme is not essential or even necessary for poetry, it is important to be consistant if you are seeking an AABB rhyming structure. Diva and Mamosita rhyme as easliy as wheeledchair and food pipe. In general: why do you continue to write poems?

In my country, people actually do throw acid at other people's faces. It's just not a very cool image.

Good, but a problem with tenses - "You said we’d go" in first sentence, then "Drive your red truck" in the second. Then back to "I'd" in the third.

The last two lines change from contemplative to didactic. That is if you mean "Be cause." If that's what you want to do, and I hope is is not, then transition needed.

with polishing, it will be superb. some notes: the wordplay with the two drawns works but seems slightly incongruous with the poem's dreamlike tone b/c it's such an overt rhetorical display. also, "pitch", as in to throw, is incongruous with the arrow metaphor. one does not throw arrows.

lacks any clarity. significant grammar errors. as an exercise, next time write a poem with as much linguistic precision as you can manage. also make sure the architecture and the idea of the poem are clearly envisioned in your mind before you write. (it would therefore behoove you to avoid spontaneous composition at this time and until your technique is better developed.) your current style is terribly muddy and makes communication with the reader impossible. only digress from the above method when you are sure your foundation is sound enough to allow for the exploration of your personal style. good luck.

It was ace before, this I think is a step backwards. Words like slackened (the drawing of an arrow is not a process of slackening anyway) and loosed are too imprecise.

The dogs don't love humans can be taken two ways: (i) That dogs are only in it for the reward and any attachment is to the reward and not the person and (ii) That dogs unlike humans have no consciousness and therefore do not 'love' or 'like' or 'be'. There is also the old Bernie Skinner adage that the question is not do animals think but do we. Is what humans call love qualitatively different from simple behaviourism of animals. Anyway whichever view you take, it is important I believe that you make the poem 'slant'.

I thoroughly, thoroughly enjoyed this. It does need lots and lots of tightening up, particularly in the last half; given your posting history I'm sure you already realize that and intend to do so. In the first third you've got lots of great syncopation in the language which you kind of ease up on later, which is disappointing. The repeated images are great, but the structure of the repetition is disappointing in it's randomness. Perhaps consider structuring the repetitions to a greater degree, as a scaffolding for the stream of consciousness. The astute reader will realize they're being set up for the final repetition; make that sense of set up even stronger. jars: "if they’ve got them but a beer otherwise," -- it's an aside, so it needs to be punctuated as an aside "to that Mexican fisherman" -- somehow the specificity jars for me, coming as it does in the midst of a riot of images jumbled together in a way that is evocatively latin. Just say "a" fisherman. You're going to personify him later anyway. The next part of this sentence is difficult to parse, interrupting the flow. I dunno...perhaps "who upon seeing [or, who when he saw] the white parachute of the first parasailer he had ever seen mistook it,..." The final clause of this sentence rocks. It's just damn good, because of it's synergy with the image of urchins hanging from the church bell rope. Why don't you break after it? And then break again after "But his boat was heading south." Just a suggestion -- type it out that way and see how it looks to you. "a complementary touch of silver to the plastic treasure chest," blech. "a flash of silver complementing the plastic treasure chest" or "a touch of silver for the plastic treasure chest" or "a complementary flash of silver FOR the plastic treasure chest" "...its bed, the fishing village..." jars because the second part seems like an independent clause at first glance. "it's bed in...", or "...to it's bed, to the..." "to have its light scattered..." "to have" seems unnecessary. Then I felt the need for more repetition: "the moon on which he does not focus his eyes directly" "parasailers rather than to fisherman" -- the "rather" is unnecessary & jarring "And if you don’t focus or notice the three-dimensional contours..." hard to parse. Either a comma after focus, or repeating "don't" would fix it. "...left for a really cheap room..." really is REALLY jarring. try "dirt" or something or just no extra adjective at all, it's unnecessary. The beginning image repeated at the end is necessary & perfect, but its raison d'etre is perhaps a little weak. "...as time itself issued..." blah. Why not bring back a boy hanging from a rope here, ringing the bells -- keep it concrete...underlying meaning is abundantly present throughout the poem, no need for overt abstractions.

My utensils of creation comprise: A laminated guff buttock injected with tramp pellets A doily-flavoured groin-operated dwarf foetus disguised as a beardtronic ultrabum harvester An unspeakably disappointing spoon coated in vicar discharge A pneumatic fatally abnormal hobo sausage injected with vicar concentrate -10-

It is good to write without the restraints of grammar. After doing so, it is good to read what what you have written as someone else might, just to see if it is clear. Ususlly, clarity and grammar go together, but not always. I think this is clear

I thought this poem was very nice. Since I'm starting to read your works, it will serve to get me in the poetic mood for the rest of them. Good job; true and rhythmic.

Yet another true musing, expressed well. (5 is average, btw; 8 is between average and super awesome)

Ah, such a downer poem. I wish it were longer, but the form is good. I wish I could make acrostics that were clever...

ooh, this one is is delightfully deep. Definitely nine material =P. It flows very well too.

whoa! The first 2 lines don't really make sense to me, but I absolutely love the rest of the poem

COWARDS! ALL OF YOU COWARDS NOT TO VOTE ON MY MASTERPIECE!!!!!!!!! FOOLS! OR PERHAPS YOU FEEL YOURSELVES TOO WEAK TO JUDGE THE WORK OF A -- MASTER --.

Clever rhyme stategy. I don't want to be identified with zodiac's rude ranting all over you last poem but this poem may read better if there was a concession to grammar? anyway I think as it stands it's worth an eight of anybody's votes.