Melting Momo

[Kishijoten]

Melting Momo

So soft and delicious
named after a peach. Momo
is said to make you love me.
Young little Momo the
colour of a orange.
Miss little Momo a size
of a peach...indeed she is
because that's what Momo means.
Momo was one when she
turned pale,
Momo was two
when she was all sweet and
orange.
Momo was all round and
peachy when when she
was six and let alone
she was sweet.
For Momo's face was
too cute they left her
peachy self on the
Peach tree all year long.

 

[Kishijoten]

This isn't even a poem...

It is in my world. There's a lot of ways to write poems and it doesn't matter how short or long it is. It may not ryhme to you but, it is a poem.

 

[Kotone]

This isn't even a poem...

>.<
a poem can be anything!
---
anyways, it was beautiful, but i dont understand what a Momo is xD

 

[Kishijoten]

>.<
a poem can be anything!
---
anyways, it was beautiful, but i dont understand what a Momo is xD

Yup your right. And a Momo is japanese name for peach. A type of fruit.

 

[Spearow]

Didn't you just say in the other thread that you don't think poetry has to adhere to pre-arranged formulas? That the human mind has no limits and shouldn't be restrained in creativity?

Not saying that this poem is like my favorite thing ever - I think it could use some work to be more effective, maybe - but I think that might be the wrong angle to take when dissecting it.

 

[Spearow]

what are the set rules of poetry again?

I was referencing this post, by the way

 

[poopnoodle]

In my opinion, no form of art is bound to structures and regulations. This seems to be how Momo expresses herself, and I appreciate the fact that she's trying despite English not being her first language. Write on, Momo~

 

[Spearow]

I'd say that it's poetry, sure enough. Maybe not the best poetry ever written, but to me it's poetry because it earnestly tries to be. I wouldn't even say it's particularly close to that fine line between poetry and prose. It's vague and distilled enough, with enough "musicality", to be solidly on the poetry side of things, I think.

It doesn't rhyme, or have clear stanzas or a traditional rhythm, I'll give you that. But if all poetry was structured that way, or even meant to be structured in a set number of styles - well, all poetry is not structured that way, just trust me on that.

And honestly, I can understand your dissatisfaction with the piece in question. It's probably far from perfect in most people's eyes, even when taking into account the subjectiveness of poetry critique. I think I can understand where you're coming from as far as lack of cohesiveness, rhythm, etc.

I just think there are better ways to say it than, "This isn't poetry." Not for lack of politeness, but just lack of general helpfulness. Instead, you could say, for instance, "This poem didn't affect me the way I think you intended it to; it would be more effective if you..." And from there you can just give general advice, getting as specific as you feel confident down to rearranging word order and diction.

And of course it's possible that a certain author's style is just not your cup of tea. In that case, I'd say (though obviously you're under no obligation to heed my advice) that it's best to just let it be. Because in that case, there's nothing you can do to help, short of forcing them to write according to your preference, right?

Sorry, and I'm not trying to attack/censor you or really even defend Momo specifically, I'm just making a (very long) suggestion based on how I would want my poetry critiqued.

 

[Spearow]

Take a look at famous poets/writers like Edgar Allan Poe/Stephen King. Do you see them writing like this?

Well, right there: Edgar Allan Poe and Stephen King (the latter of which isn't a poet, so I guess it's kind of apples to oranges in that sense) have wildly different writing styles. But would either one say the other is "wrong" or "not a writer" because they, well, write differently? For that matter, is something not genuine or objectively good if it doesn't resemble something a famous or critically-lauded writer produces?

It could be that, since you say it's okay, that I'm not used to this style; I've never seen it in my entire time as a writer, and I take offense to it.

Here is where your thinking differs from mine, I believe: I just don't really think that there is an absolute, standard, universally accepted definition of poetry. That is to say, it isn't a valid style just because someone says it's "okay" - each style is as valid as the next, in my opinion. Some styles tend to make more poignant, powerful reading for more people, and that's where personal preference and the opportunity for critique come in. It's simply not a question of "is" vs. "is not" when it comes to defining poetry, or most art for that matter.

It's not a terribly common attitude, I think, in something so mutable as art, to think that something you haven't seen before is offensive. You're free to think that way, but I think you'll find it limits your enjoyment of poetry, unless you like reading the same poems over and over - which maybe you do, who I am to judge?

And see, everything else you say here, about how the piece feels unfinished and sloppy, is perfectly valid criticism. I think you should say that, and maybe think of specific ways the poem might be changed to be more appealing to you and others.

But again, improvement is a relative concept. It's possible that the author just can't write in any other way than the way she does here, that she can't work the way you want her to. Some people have specific ways in which they express themselves, and anything else might feel dishonest. It's also very possible that she might not know or understand what you want from her: phrases like "this is wrong" and very vague criticisms such as "there's no rhythm" are worthless if you're not sure how to specifically improve on these shortcomings. If it really matters to you that people listen to your advice, I'd recommend being as in-depth as you can possibly be.

And if there seems to be absolutely no way to tweak the poem to your liking without deconstructing it from its very foundation and essentially writing a completely different piece - again, I'd suggest that you leave it be, because in that case there is nothing you can do to help. If it's a poem you just plain don't like based on personal reasons, you might have to accept that and move on. But if it's something you think you can help make better, then by all means give the author as much help as you can provide.

 

[Spearow]

There's a difference between professionally written and child written

Well, I have to say I like child-written better. Have you ever heard of "outsider art"? Sometimes art is nicer when it doesn't know what it is, or what rules it is supposed to follow. It feels less self-conscious. That's personal preference, though. Just because I like innocent, honest, "childish" poetry doesn't mean I'm going to say that someone who writes cynical, detached poetry isn't "good" or "doing it right". They're just different.

I also honestly don't think too much of poetry contests as a measure of a poet's "value" or "skill", only as a fun opportunity to see other people's best work. In the same sense, I don't think being published makes a poet "better" or more qualified to make decisions about what constitutes good poetry than someone who, say, posts their work in a public domain such as the internet.

I'm not saying you can't criticize her poem. I'm saying that if your criticism doesn't clearly give advice on how to improve the poem, the poem will not improve.

Also, I see I can't convince you entirely that poetry isn't a fixed form, which is okay, but I can readily state that the presence of clearly marked stanzas is probably not a qualifier for most professional modern poets and writers. Lots of free verse is written in one continuous stanza, or with subtle shifts within the flow of the poem itself that serve as "line breaks" of sorts. In short, it is generally not considered necessary to have a space between designated chunks of text, although that is certainly an option.

 

[Spearow]

But it isn't where you can make a sloppy Joe

But what in particular makes a poem a Sloppy Joe? that's what i'm trying to get you to tell me/us, basically. And that's what I think constitutes good critique

You say you don't think poetry is a fixed form, okay, I'm willing to believe you. But you continue to state that you have standards for it, or that there are agreed-upon standards that most writers have. What are those standards, and how can they be applied in a manner that isn't static or fixed? I would get what you are saying if the writer of the poem had said she was trying to write a form of poetry that has certain specifications applied to it, but as she's not I just don't see what else she can "fit it to".

 

[Kishijoten]

In my opinion, no form of art is bound to structures and regulations. This seems to be how Momo expresses herself, and I appreciate the fact that she's trying despite English not being her first language. Write on, Momo~

Yes, English wasn't my first langauge and you can't expect me to have perfect English anyways...and of course poems can be expressed..thanks Poopnoodle.
To be fair I'm not going to argue with cookie or Spearow anytime sooner. Yes your both like lecturing me about the "right" way to write poems...but, in my defense I'm just saying whether you like it or not I can write poems in my style. Argument done. Case closed.

 

[Kishijoten]

Uh, I never said there were standards(only to SOME poetry). Okay, here'e how a general basic 1st grade poem starts off:

Roses are red
violets are blue
This is an example
Just to show you.
​

It's like that, don't you see what I mean? And then you actually learn about stanzas and different varieties of poetry and such and you then begin to build upon from that small "Roses are red, violets are blue" foundation, yes? And then it delves into more creative poetry like Diamontes, Haikus, Cinquains, ABCDarians, Sestinas, the such. Whether you like it or not, you can't drop a paragraph for any of them and call it a poem except for ABCDarians, and for that it requires a select order. :|



And whether you like it or not, expect me to be there with my wonderful criticism to get you to write poems the right way. If you thinking you're posting all over this section with what you have now, you're sorely mistaken. :3

Personally, I don't care what anyone else thinks; they can either think your style of writing poems is right or wrong, but I have high standards, and I have every right to uphold to that standard. I know that no one is going to butcher poetry right in my face. Not gonna happen.

Well fine...I suppose I can't stop you from insulting my poems but, if your willing to correct me so much rather than insulting me that it's wrong wrong wrong why not teach me? If your that concern about the way I write poetry.

 

[Abnegation]

Okay, let me just jump in here and shout my opinion on the poem and not the replies.
Momo, I've read all of the poems you've uploaded and I have the same opinion on each of them. To me this poem just shouts dool. The poem has no flow and I feel myself having to read back to understand what has just been written. in fact I'll put this into two arguements, a professional point of view and the arguement that poetry isn't limited and that you can do whatever you like.

Before I get into emotion, story and such, let me take into account the grammer and techniques etc.

1. Firstly, there are many many grammerical errors. Let me just take the first few lines for example.

   
   
   So soft and delicious
   named after a peach. Momo
   is said to make you love me.
   Young little Momo the
   colour of a orange.
   Miss little Momo a size
   of a peach...indeed she is
   because that's what Momo means.

   I cant understand most of this. "A orange" should be changed to "And orange". When displaying a word begining with another vowel or a word with a vowl sounding prefix you must put "an". That grammarical error destroyed all flow. Even though it was completely lacking in flow any way, which will be my next point.
2. Flow... There is none. Think about reading this poem out loud. In fact I've done a recording to show you how mixed up the flow is. You have scentences that just go on and on without punctuation. Stop and take a breath, dont rush through the poem.
3. Lyrically your choice of words are pretty basic and dont go well together.
4. There are no techinques, which is your choice but it makes a poem extremely basic and empty. All this is, is a free verse poem with little punctuation, no techniques, grammatical errors as well as no flow. I dont know what this is about A peach on a tree? An orange? A person? I have no idea. I'm sorry to say but it's so unclear, you may say poetry is written at the writers own basis, and they can do what they like. Which is okay, but when someone else reads it and the poem makes little sense with the errors that I mentioned above, it really turns the reader off.

Now, I'll just take this from a not so serious and a less in depth view.

1. You could say that poetry has no boundries. Which it doesn't But in saying that, it needs to be interesting for the reader. Now you may say that you dont write poems for other people, but then why upload them, you're going to get opinions on them. You're going to have it reviewed. To attract good reviews your poem will need some appealing aspect to it. Where as this poem is far from technical or reader friendly. Poetry is an expression of a writers emotions. But in futre show us those emotions and not a block of text. Try some techniques. I would start with a Shakespearean sonnet.

But yeah. Looking at above comments, I wouldn't bash Cookie for giving a little C & C. He does have a strong point even when poetry doesn't have limits.

 

[Kishijoten]

If you didn't ignore my advice everytime I gave them.

I wouldn't ignore it if you weren't so insulting. I mean I be glad to take your "poem advice".

 

[Abnegation]

I wouldn't ignore it if you weren't so insulting. I mean I be glad to take your "poem advice".

He hasn't insulted you. You just haven't taken critique well. YOu've gotta take the good with the bad, sadly it was more bad.
Try doing some of the suggestions that were in my post. Right now, most of your poetry is quite unprofessional and bland.

 

[Kishijoten]

He hasn't insulted you. You just haven't taken critique well. YOu've gotta take the good with the bad, sadly it was more bad.
Try doing some of the suggestions that were in my post. Right now, most of your poetry is quite unprofessional and bland.

Well he hasn't insulted me "yet" alright I'll try some of your suggestion on my next poem.

 

[Abnegation]

Well he hasn't insulted me "yet" alright I'll try some of your suggestion on my next poem.

Well if he hasn't insulted you then dont say he did. You're going to take some harsh critique as a poet, hell my first poem went something like,
"The black and white cat
He was very fat" etc. etc.
Just know the difference between a review and a generic insult. But anyway, that is niether here nor there, so about you future poems. As I say, try to add depth and techniques. If you dont know any, then look them up on google. Don't rush a poem either. I've written poems that have taken me weeks, maybe months to write where as I could write a short story in 3 days. Just because a poem is short it doesn't been it only takes a few minutes to write. If you read a poem by for example Robert Frost, a very popular and suceeded poet, you will see depth in his poems.

If you don't mind, I'll just pick out a poem by him and show you what went into it, just so that you may have some influence when writing your next poems

The Tuft Of Flowers

I went to turn the grass once after one
Who mowed it in the dew before the sun.

The dew was gone that made his blade so keen
Before I came to view the levelled scene.

I looked for him behind an isle of trees;
I listened for his whetstone on the breeze.

But he had gone his way, the grass all mown,
And I must be, as he had been,--alone,

`As all must be,' I said within my heart,
`Whether they work together or apart.'

But as I said it, swift there passed me by
On noiseless wing a 'wildered butterfly,

Seeking with memories grown dim o'er night
Some resting flower of yesterday's delight.

And once I marked his flight go round and round,
As where some flower lay withering on the ground.

And then he flew as far as eye could see,
And then on tremulous wing came back to me.

I thought of questions that have no reply,
And would have turned to toss the grass to dry;

But he turned first, and led my eye to look
At a tall tuft of flowers beside a brook,

A leaping tongue of bloom the scythe had spared
Beside a reedy brook the scythe had bared.

I left my place to know them by their name,
Finding them butterfly weed when I came.

The mower in the dew had loved them thus,
By leaving them to flourish, not for us,

Nor yet to draw one thought of ours to him.
But from sheer morning gladness at the brim.

The butterfly and I had lit upon,
Nevertheless, a message from the dawn,

That made me hear the wakening birds around,
And hear his long scythe whispering to the ground,

And feel a spirit kindred to my own;
So that henceforth I worked no more alone;

But glad with him, I worked as with his aid,
And weary, sought at noon with him the shade;

And dreaming, as it were, held brotherly speech
With one whose thought I had not hoped to reach.

`Men work together,' I told him from the heart,
`Whether they work together or apart.'

Now, whilst reading, an uneducated reader or someone who takes a blind eye to poetry, all they would see is a rhyming poem written about a bunch of flowers in a field. Correct?
Well, this poem is a wonderfull example of how in depth poetrt can be. It tells a story. In this poem the writer is illustranting his maian character as a man who is going down to a field in which his neighbour has recently cut. he is planning on turning the grass so that it may dry in the sun to help his nieghbour; Keep in mind that both men are farmers. The man in the poem hopes to see his neighbour in the field so that they may work together. But to no avvail as he is gone. Eventually the man notices a butterfly who leads him to the tuft of flowers which are amongst a brook, un-cut, unlike the grass and the other flowers. He comes to the conclusion that the mower (the other man), has left them there due to thier beauty. The man also sees the beauty and now feels that sudden connection between himself and the mower. So even though the mower was not there when he aarrived, he now feels some connection. So once the man had reached that connection, he felt he was no longer working alone "So that henseforth I worked no more alone". So the man works on as if he has the aid of the mower and even when he takes his lunch break, he imangines them sharing a laugh and a joke etc. "And weary sought with him, at noon in the shade." The last image Frost gives in this poem is the fact that ultimately, we're all alone. No matter how well someone knows you, they will not know you the way you know yourself. So only you can know the true you, and that is what Frost is portraying in the final lines of this poem.
"`Men work together,' I told him from the heart,
`Whether they work together or apart.'"

The next thing I'd like to point out, is his tecniques. You can plainly see the use of rhyming. But a not so obvious tchniques, again to the blind eye, would be his use of "Iambic Pentameter", this is a form of meter or rhythm often used in poetry, a very structured poem might use it. Iambic pentameter is the use of 10 syllables per line, fist being short, next being long. Like this -U-U-U-U-U-. Or in word form (I'll just repeat my words to make it simple) "A long a long a long a long a long". You can see a proper example throughout the poem.
So without going into too much depth of a different poem, I was just pointing out how a poem could really be a lot more than just words. So this poem for example, is written in iambic pentameter, it has a story to tell and a clear, meaningfull one at that as well as lots of other techniques and morals. This is just a brief introduction. But do you now see how depth can often make a poem more interesting? I for one found the story Frost told to be quite fantastic.
Although many people found it to be a "Nature poem" it is in fact a poem about the human condition and about how they might act and how they care and how they show emotion. This is shown through the indirect connection between the man in the poem and frost. I'll also mention that painting a picture for the reader is also a good idea, this is called imagery. By painting a picture I mean, use words to describe a person, place or thing that will give the reader a strong image of what it must be like and therefore, creating imagery. Imagery is a powerfull tool in poetry and it's something you should implement into some of your poems. Again though, I would recommend looking up some techniques and such to make your poem have a lot more depth. At the moment your poems are lacking quality and are quite basic, so there is room for improvement, which will come if you study the art and take it one step at a time.

 

[Kishijoten]

Alright I think I get the idea of what a poem is.