there is no such thing
as a formal declaration of joy.
Here is the handshake broken
by laughter's hammer,
the procedure ripped--thrown
from the thunderous height
of the Speaker's chair
and the cheering of the public galleries
(they've never thrown roses before).
There is the Sargent-at-Arms, dismissed
to return with coffee
and a copy of the Republic
(for all the diry jokes).
There are the bells summoning
the assembling House
to speak of the beautiful children
of the Opposition;
and later,
when the lights are dimmed
and the movie put on,
the distribution of candy
among the multicolored sleeping bags.
Do comment! Also, people I have high-fived in Parliament so far:
- The hon. Peter Milliken, Speaker of the House of Commons
- Bill Young, Parliamentary librarian
- The hon. Michael Ignatieff
- The hon. Stéphane Dion
- The hon. Bob Rae
- The Right Honourable Jean Chrétien
Also--how is publication going? How does one get a copy? When and where are we officially doing this? Are we under Creative Commons? All questions to be answered.
3 comments:
The first stanza led me to believe this was a poem of rebellion and disillusion. Clearly, I was superpumped when I got the next stanza.
The parts in parantheses makes me feel like you're editorializing. It threw me off and upon reading the piece without them, I realized that they were definitely the cause of the throw off of the 3rd stanza.
The final stanza was brilliant. You narrowed politics down to be being reminiscent of elementary school trips to the movies. I quite enjoyed that bit.
I laughed outloud at the last stanza Bernard, have you read this to any politicians? you should. Try and High five regular non politicians who work on Parliament hill and post their names as well.
I found that the tone of this poem was very inconsistent and I think it was the main thing throwing me off all throughout. Because in and of themselves, each stanza was really interesting and well written, but I felt as though they didn't match together in a coherent narrative although it shared the same thematic string.
I really like the first stanza a lot and I think that you could do a lot with it if you had a different poem following it. Maybe it's just because I'm reading Brave New World right now, but it gave me that feeling of a futuristic dystopian society like in that novel, or 1984 esque. I also like the way you broke the lines in that instance, it worked particularly effectively.
In the second stanza, the first two lines stuck out for me. I still can't decide whether or not I like it or find the imagery of a concrete hammer paired with intangible laughter too inconsistent to follow as proper imagery. But they did catch my attention, and whether or not it's strong or weak, it's still an interesting moment.
The next five lines really reminded me of Kafka's The Trial though - and once again, this stanza could work so much better in a separate poem because there's such a distinct feeling to it that it could work much better if it weren't supposed to be a part of the rest of the piece.
I loved the humour of the third stanza in the parentheses, but like Mike said, they seemed out of place. Perhaps, however, in a more black-humoured poem, it would work. I enjoyed the fact that reading dirty jokes was then followed by speaking of "the beautiful children / of the Opposition". It was a really great way to show corruption just oozing out of the politics corrupting the youth and the future generations.
And, of course, the last stanza is great, although following the previous stanzas (well, perhaps not the third [although even then it's not the best], but certainly the other two), it doesn't seem as though it's a fitting ending to what you're trying to get across. I was left confused as to the overall message, if there was supposed to be one, and what it was I was meant to take away in particular - there wasn't any resonance for me, which is a shame considering the quality of the writing and the images I had while reading.
Post a Comment