Forever Night

To hear and sing the with’ring soul 

A song of lonesome longing 

Lost in wond’ring the empty forest 

Of loathsome melancholy 

 

To rise and fall in hopeless faith 

Befelled by endless echoing

Of stars who once shone brightest 

Their ancient lights beckoning 

 

But oh the trees their dark’ning leaves 

Left by springs green thriving 

Shade from view the friendly moon

And all that’s with it shining 

 

A weeping tale whose tears do trail

Meanders through Forever Night

Romantic stories torment the mind--"

doomed, it never takes flight 

 

It’s silver wings could sail the wind 

If only it would humbly ask 

When sun fades and day dims 

In pride, it’s anchored to Forever Night

 

Upon the breeze of nightly melodies 

It whispers to the air 

A lonely moan of pitiful longings 

The ear can scarcely bear 

 

Upon the leaves of ghastly trees 

The moon does gleam through shadow 

And dying lights from heavenly bodies 

Fake life in an elderly sky

 

Reviews

[emipoemi]

I'm sensing some Wordsworth, Frost, and Dickinson in this piece - a wondrous blend mixed with your own voice, and you pull off the occasional nonrhyming stanzas fantastically!. You have musicality issues in some places and in others you have spelling errors (or the error is that you used the wrong homonym - eg: "bear" is the word you want, not "bare"). But everything else is absolutely stellar!! Glad to see you're still writing.

[H L Rose]

Thanks! Those poets are definitely from the era I favor in poetry! I am glad you could still hear my own unique voice.

Thank you for the heads up on spelling errors. I would love to hear your thoughts on the musicality. I was looking to break it up in places and wasn't going for a consistent rhythm, but instead wanted to use sporadic changes in syllable stresses in order to emphasis different tones with certain phrases and words.

[emipoemi]

the thing with musicality is that it must be consistent in some way shape or form. if it breaks, the poem kind of breaks with it, so it must be done with cause and intent and fit into the poem as a whole rather than just stick out like a sore thumb, which is how I feel some of these breaking musicality moments do. I'm going to use the last line of Stanza 4 as an example, as, now that I'm aware that it was your intent to break musicality, the breaking here is kind of ok, but at the same time it's jarring. Poetry's music is the voice alone. It has no backing rhythm or bass rhythm for that matter, so it's hard for one voice alone to modulate and perform counterpoint with their voice/lines. The poem rides a wave, and that musicality is that wave. It could extend, it could shorten, but the syllables need to land on necessary beats to keep the wave soaring. if it was intended to be jarring, then ok, but I can tell this poem is far from intending to be jarring. So it would be good to play with this a little more. See where you end up afterwards.

[H L Rose]

I get the beauty of shape and form in musicality and think it works beautifully for some poems, and don't get me wrong, I prefer the modern and classical types of poetry over rule free contemporary poetry, but the beauty of rules is breaking them.

If I was writing a song I would understand your point more, but there is a reason this poem is reminiscent of modern poets not classical poets.

Instead of 7 stanzas that appear like 7 verses in a song that use the same rhythms and notes, I want to infused the natural voice of language with the rules of poetry, not force language into the rules of poetry.

That being said, I respect your advice and know it often bears weight so I will consider and play around with the musicality in this poem.

Thank you for expounding on your advice!

[emipoemi]

Now, don't get me wrong: rules are made to be broken, but one can't break the rules if they don't understand them. The musicality needs to flow through your intentional breaks from it, and must do it seamlessly - that's how you hide them. If those breaks stick out like sore thumbs, the whole poem falls apart despite its beauty. That's all I'm saying. "You master form, you master time" (Glyn Maxwell). As a poet you are a crafter of words in time. If your craft don't work, the time don't flow. That's all there is to it.

[H L Rose]

But I don't intend to hide them. Remember the sixth rule of how not to be a gooey chocolate chip cookie is to lay your raisins on top for the world to see.

And I don't plan on seeing them as a sore thumb either. It isn't that I can't get the line to say what I want in the pattern so I have to hide the lack of musicality like a seam in a dress. I want those patches to be noticeable because they are natural. I know the rules, and I've broken them and don't plan on hiding it.

Take the second stanza for example, "once shown brightest" must stick out in symbolic remembrance of once bright stars that stuck out in the black night sky. I could try and conform the line to fit the musicality or I could enjoy the natural beauty of language which symbolizes the meaning behind the words all on it's own.
Also the following of a distorted musicality after this line whose stresses force the reader to slow their reading of the line makes the disappointment of the sentiment ever more clear. "once shone brightest" acts as a climatic sentiment highlighting disappointment.

Though, I do appreciate your advice and will take it to heart. I plan on experimenting with the musicality and seeing what I come up with.

[emipoemi]

ok, maybe "hide" was the wrong word, I was trying to convey that it fit well into the overall poem, and what it's doing, is all. I didn't quite get that impression during my first read. Like, stick them out, sure, for people to notice, but don't jar them. Don't take them out of the magic and beauty because a line doesn't particularly fit the overall flow. You can def surprise readers in what you're doing, yet that surprise shouldn't take them completely completely out of it all. That's what I'm getting at

[H L Rose]

I get what you're saying. I don't think it is necessarily surprising because the flow is so inconsistent that its inconsistency is consistent... if that makes sense. But I get your point and I always appreciate your willingness to further explain.

[emipoemi]

.....then maybe I'm hearing it wrong, as I only spotted 3-4 lines out of 28 that actually slip, and that's what I'm saying is bring it down. The inconsistency is not as consistent as you believe. Because I think you're think of rhythm. Rhythm is not the same as musicality, though they are similar. Rhythm is synonymous with metre, which can be scanned. Musicality merely flows. You can't scan musicality. So, though your set rhythm may be consistently inconsistent, your overall musicality is sparsely inconsistent, so when those moments appear, it's a bit jarring. That's what I'm getting at.

[H L Rose]

I'm seeing what you mean by musicality v rhythm. That is a good thing for me to be thinking about in any revisions.

While I am considering the difference between the two, would you say I am right that musicality is what contemporary poetry ignores and rhythm is what is focused on by 20th century poets like Langston Hughes?

[emipoemi]

you are pretty much on the mark with that comment. I could very well say so. Especially with contemporary poetry, which is outright s**t (those that are legitimately getting published and winning contests) for that very reason. They have no craft, though they may (and in some cases do) have depth and power. They lack the musicality to really amp up that power to cathartic heights. I haven't read many 20th century folks, but I can say that it was the last age of the rhythmic poets. George Orwell was apparently a poet before he wrote "1984", and he was incredible. He's predominantly a rhymer of rhythmic proportions, but he's amazing.

[H L Rose]

I never considered the difference between rhythm and musicality so thanks for bringing it up. The 20th century and some modern poets before that, make up my favorite genre of poetry.

I have a harder time enjoying today's contemporary poetry, but want to try my best to understand it for what it's worth. It reminds me a bit of story telling sometimes which is a beautiful art.

I really need to read 1984. It's been on my reading list for years.

[emipoemi]

1984 has its merits, and the movie adaptation with John Hurt is great. But Orwell's poetry is amazing!! Such a shame he passed so soon.

[H L Rose]

I'll be checking it out then!