Fervent Freedom, iambic, quatrains, abab Options

[jgdittier]

Freedom be as God intended,
Each soul to have and do its will.
And were it so, this world be splendid,
The wish of God would man fulfill.

But domination seems ascendant,
And rulers tend to roguish reigns.
The despot dares to be transcendent,
His subjects safely strapped in reins.

The price of freedom's oft rebellion,
But shedding chains denies the peace.
When badgered bold be God's battalion,
Then evil rulers' reigns shall cease.

How great a boon were there an answer
To evil leaders overthrow.
To body politic, they're cancer.
If you've an answer, let us know.

[JustDaniel]

As is usually the case, Ron, your message in this fine piece is clear, though your initial headless iambs, and your feminine endings that are not followed by headless iambs seem to me to spoil the flow of what you have to say here.

I know that you're showcasing this piece here, but I'd love to see you place it for critique. I think it's a gem with some rough edges that, once polished, could make its light shine brighter.

Always deLighted to read your work, Daniel

[jgdittier]

Dear Daniel,
I'm subject to a severe dilemma!
My style is not in keeping with the modern style as I use poetic license and inversions, elisions, feminine rhymes, caps, couplets and other ploys that once were accepted.
When asked "whom do you write for", I had to think about it and realize the dilemma.
To please the modern world I must reject the elements of poetry I most like and to indulge myself with my own style, I must limit my audience.
MM is a poetry site where many really good poets write and are serious in advancing their skills using the modern mode.
I find it difficult to critique modern style poetry and often it's of little benefit to me to receive critiques based on modern practices.
Just about every outdated practice I continue to use has been mentioned in the past by critiquers who assume I'm trying to write modern style. Thus I take refuge in this forum, not because my
postings are already carefully polished, but because the polishing is likely to please neither of us.
I've said before, I'm either a horse of another color or a black sheep. Maybe I'm alot like Henry Higgens! I've always wondered whether Henry can remain the same old Henry and still win Eliza.
I greatly appreciate your good intentions and your and other's quality critiques of each other's works, but I believe my critiquing to be of value must be with others of like style (if there are any).
Cheers, Ron jgd

[JustDaniel]

Well, just know, Ron...

you ain't a black sheep to me! I love your writing... and your style... and I've always also loved your critiques when you've entered into that arena. You ALWAYS give me something more to think about.

There is much in our writing that shares the same principles... when I'm writing the "old forms"... and no one can really accuse me of worrying about "modern writing"... whatever that is. See? I even use the elipses wrongly!

This forum is NOT for critique, and I hope that you didn't feel I was critiquing you. I was merely stating that I appeciated your work... and I think it might even become better!

I will NEVER demean the influence that you have had upon this site. I think you singlehandedly have given MANY writers here a new appreciation for "old writing"... and I encourage you to continue your tradition -- though I know that you certainly don't need my encouragement to do so. You're gonna do it anyway... and I applaud you for it.

with utmost appreciation and respect, Daniel

[jgdittier]

Dear Daniel,
I am greatly pleased by your response and believe that I've now made it clear where I fit if I do and can continue to post where I think I fit.
I realize that Plato's Pearls is also for well polished works and will attempt polishing more than I have in the past. Truth is that light verse is also for lazy poets.
Those who read here and the few that comment will hopefully satisfy me and will enjoy my style. Those who don't wouldn't anyway.
At the other boards where I've posted the intensity hasn't been as self-improvement oriented as here. I must admit that my interest in verse is more towards fun and humor than purity, even to the ploys of the bards of yore.
Cheers, Ron jgd

[Merlin]

The trouble be – interpretation,
how come he wrote in lingo dead?
Now there’s all this – misrepresentation,
oh what, oh what, was really said?

The monks of old had no computers,
with brush and ink, they wrote each page.
One letter lost, no spelling shooter
and all of history’s left to gauge…

Is there an “R” in “celebration,
and if left out, what happens then?
A modern monk in every nation
makes sure all words are right. Amen.

[JustDaniel]

... if I do and can continue to post where I think I fit.

With ink and brush, please do continue;
we shall be the better for it!

brushin' Lightly, Daniel

[Guest_poeticpiers_*]

a poet must be true to himself first and foremost Styles and fashions change Even poets change as they grow older if notneccessarily wiser
I am happy to read your words.Sometimes I feel that one can be over nice in critique and that producing perfect rhyme and metre etc Destroys the freshness of the original thought ivor

[Aphrodite]

Dear Ron,

This is phenomenal! I love the passion and intent of your expression!
I don't care about meter, just the heart of the poem!

I especially love...

"How great a boon were there an answer
To evil leaders overthrow.
To body politic, they're cancer.
If you've an answer, let us know."

Fantastic and thought-provoking!

Great!

Lindi

[Blank_Canvas]

Ron,
I must have an appreciation for some of the old forms because I found nothing NOT to appreciate in this. I do most heartedly agree that each person who writes poetry must FIRST write to please themselves. How it is interpreted and accepted is as varied as the people who may read it. Be true to self, always.....
As for the message in this poem....right on....
Marcia