poemranker ::Or Outward by MacFrantic

DetailsThe poem, its numbers, and the conversation.

Triolet № 131101

Or Outward

by MacFrantic

Member since 2003 · Posted 15 Sep 2005 · Edited 7 Apr 2006 · 14 comments

Vagaries in dispassionate red Or outward sounds the bell A monument to furies' spell Vagaries in dispassionate red Fragile storms eclipse your head Speak your name and know it well Vagaries in dispassionate red Or outward sounds the bell

Rate it

0 is the worst, 10 the best. Pick a number, add a comment if you like, then send it. Keys: 0–9 pick, Enter sends.

mean 5.50 weighted 5.06 rank 6749 views 261 View voting details →

4 votes so far. Yours would make 5.4 votes so far

14 comments

[5] Dovina 8-Apr-06/11:49 AM Reply
I'd personally prefer that when you edit a poem, you do not delete the comments.

This falls flat for me. Too vague.
[n/a] MacFrantic › Dovina 8-Apr-06/12:23 PM Reply
There were no comments. So, I'm gald you personally prefered to leave one.
[5] Dovina › MacFrantic 8-Apr-06/4:54 PM Reply
Your poem has 84 hits! With all those people reading it, nobody left a comment? I believe you, but I think it's sad. Those 84 people had some opoinion, even if it was as bland as mine. Unless, of course, someone is twiddling the hit counter at some student union.

This is not a bad poem. It shows that you thought about something and put effort into the presentation. I said it was vague, not because you use that word in the poem, but because I really cannot figure out what you are saying. What is dispationate red, for example? How does a bell sound outward? Does not the sound of all bells move outward? How is this bell different? What do the fragile storms represent, and how do they eclipse someone's head? Do the storms speak his/her name?
[n/a] MacFrantic › Dovina 8-Apr-06/6:49 PM Reply
I, as many others do, believe that the questions you ask only lend themselves to your conclusion about what the poem means. It doesn't matter what I think about the poem, truly.
[8] Ranger 9-Apr-06/9:20 AM Reply
"furies'", is this "fury's" or are furies a type of creature? That's the only grammatical crit I have with this, it reads well and, yes, is vague but it really did leave me desperate to find a meaning to it. It feels as though there is a message, or something like that, hidden just beneath the words. In all honesty, the whole thing sounds like it's a code or a series of anagrams for something.
I'll have to return to this if I'm going to find a meaning. My brain is fried right now.
[n/a] MacFrantic › Ranger 9-Apr-06/9:52 AM Reply
The Furies were mythical Greek goddesses who were basically the original "Avengers." I thought capitalization would throw off the rhythm a bit. I hope this unfries your brain a bit. I think knowing this helps interpretation of the poem a lot.
[n/a] zodiac › MacFrantic 9-Apr-06/11:19 AM Reply
I don't know what's worse, you explaining The Furies, or the fact that nobody knew about them.
[n/a] MacFrantic › zodiac 9-Apr-06/12:19 PM Reply
Oh, get off your high horse, you're losing oxygen to the head.
[n/a] zodiac › MacFrantic 9-Apr-06/12:26 PM Reply
For what it's worth, you need to capitalize Furies'.
[n/a] MacFrantic › zodiac 9-Apr-06/12:57 PM Reply
Maybe you should have read my previous comment when I explained why I didn't.
[n/a] zodiac › MacFrantic 9-Apr-06/1:03 PM Reply
I did. I don't see how capitalizing a word throws off the rhythm. A reader who reads a capitalized word differently is ignorant and unworthy of your poem.
[n/a] MacFrantic › zodiac 9-Apr-06/6:27 PM Reply
Visual rhythm. I didn't want the aesthetics of the poem to be thrown off even a little bit. I had to sacrifice a bit of grammar to do so. Last I checked, intentional grammar flaws aren't frowned upon.
[n/a] zodiac › MacFrantic 9-Apr-06/6:31 PM Reply
By whom?
[7] ecargo › MacFrantic 10-Apr-06/7:34 AM Reply
Yes, they are. I frown on "intentional grammar flaws" even more than the other kind. ;)

If you capped Furies, I'd've known what you meant without the explanation. Capping them wouldn't have thrown anything off, really. I thought you meant "fury's spell," which would have worked, by the way. Maybe even better.

That aside, I don't get much sense from this. Now, if something is interesting enough, I don't always care if I get it (I like Dental Panic's stuff a great deal, for example, and half the time I'm damned if I know what he or she is talking about), but I don't think you quite hit the mark here.