Skip to main content Help Control Panel

Shakespeare's Monkeys

Infinite Monkeys. Infinite Typewriters.

More in ~A Love~

~A Love~

<< Previous Next >>

I agree about the third stanza.  but I think the first two lines need work as well, if only to get this sonnet rolling with a little more momentum.  meaning, I have to pause and really think about the grammatical construct there, when I should really be propelled into the meat of the poem.  maybe it would be as simple as a comma after "slain".  otherwise, the meter is pretty consistent, even though I have to stop and make sure I emphasize the second syllable of "under" (line 12) instead of the first as would be more natural to my way of speaking.  which might just be my way of speaking. but what really needs work throughout is to find ways to make some of the grammar less, um, convoluted.  I think your sentence structures are mostly legit, but sometimes just sprinkling a straight forward sentence here and there throughout a poem like this helps the reader to keep it flowing when they read.  in other words, don't let other aspects of the writing take a back seat to the demands of the form. In many places, this poem feels like you've found solutions to satisfying the form, but the solutions make it unnecessarily difficult to read.

So, not a bad sonnet at all - if all that matters is meeting the criteria of a sonnet.  But what makes a sonnet a terrific form for a poem is the way it serves as a structural tool for making a poem rise above ordinary language.  In other words, as far as I'm concerned, the form is only a tool, not an end in itself. An opinion with which others here would likely disagree. But still, I think this poem needs greater attention to the grammar, while still meeting the strict criteria of a sonnet. Again, as a sonnet, not bad. As a poem though, it needs work.

by Derma Kaput on Nov. 2 2009