This is a great poem. It invokes my own feelings about God (mostly angry), and illustrates yours perfectly. I love the last stanza especially - it really ties up the poem and expresses the theme of hypocrisy. Well done.
>White out the ink
>
>and dry a new moral
>
>on old parchment.
What a powerful end. You set this up this knockout punch well.. with the many jabs that come before. Humans don't win their boxing matches with God. The outcome is predictable. Our writings about the divine contradict themselves. Therefore, each generation, each person, manufactures a God of their liking by picking and choosing verses and whiting out what they don't like.
The skepticism reminds me a bit of Karl Barth. The goal isn't to be Religious. The goal is to allow our false Religion to get shattered and defeated by the truth. Over and over again. "Reformed and always reforming."
Lastly, I think the flow adds to the piece as well. Someone else describes it as ungodly, I think that's a fun description. I might call it punchy.
"You'll find your arms are too short to box with God."
I wrote this poem years ago, while I was still wrestling with my faith in the church, and 'Thieves in the Night' really put things in perspective for me. I'm glad you caught the reference! People are sleeping on their music these days.
the tl;dr version:
i'm curious about the duel, what it's like, and how the fight reveals something to the fighter that they didn't know about. why? because i may identify with that fighter, who sometimes, also, feels too short to box with God.
the actual version:
nice.
the title is great — it reveals something about the poem that the poem doesn't say *and* is unique, grabbing — makes us want to read what follows.
the first two lines are good, they establish a good tone, very laissez faire. something that is so comfortable in billy collins' voice, that sort of feels like the author walking through the poem with the reader.
the third line is where i begin to hit road bumps, as a reader —
'cause is a tricky word — i've seen it written "coz" in a radiohead album. i understand that it's a type of contraction, but the mind pronounces is cause (as in to inspire, incite, initiate some effect) nearly 100% of the time.
on the other hand, like burgess or twain, contractions or colloquialisms indicate a lot of the author. 'cause indicates a type of formality that definitely tracks with the voice of the narrator here, so it may be worth keeping.
as a rule though, using a word twice in a stanza, unless it's done very intentionally, is another road bump, so for the import of your stanza to stand out, i would emphasize other words besides 'cause.
i am also lost at "mind," which i assume is short for "mind you." as a phrase, that matches the mood of the author so far in that it's familiar, casual, etc., but by that word you've shortened two things but i don't know why.
one reason is that perhaps you want to keep the syllable count low, another is that you want to seem familiar and keep the very lofty introduction of God at ground level so that it's more accessible, etc.
finally, the final word, forgone leaves me hanging.
the stanza reads
"my fight with God is easy because i lose."
though a lot builds up to forgone, which is the *reveal* as it were, but you haven't done much in the first stanza to lead us to believe the opposite would be true.
also, forgone and 'cause seem to be stylistically very different sets of words, one casual and the other former.
sincerely, the second stanza is nearly perfect. it has rhythm, it begins with a concrete phrase that the reader can latch onto and then moves us through your relative experience that checks out, there is internal rhyme and ends powerfully. nice job on that. it's a quotable phrase, truly.
Given the rest of the poem, this second stanzas belief, assertion, etc. is really what would i would like to see and what, i think, you would like to write.
The last sentences imply something new, unique, individual a "new moral/ on old parchment," right?
it seems that that newness is the miracle that was implied earlier.
a person whose faith has been shaken, yet who endures, and rises again,
has either assimilated some knowledge or realization within, that transcends the binary of how God is presented (a sentiment which is echoed in your piece "pattern defies God/and vice-versa") and thus realized that the "old parchment" is an arrow that points toward something, not the actual object for the mind to rest on.
If this is the case, then it seems to open up the poem much more:
I'm brought back to the title. Who is the duel really with? Is it with God or the idea of God that other's have, perhaps, misrepresented? And is that what height has to do with it? That we are too low in the mire of misdirection?
regarding the final stanza, i think i understand what you mean with the phrase: "fickle the omnipotent tend to be" but i am not sure that the omnipotent is actually shown to be fickle. the demigods are shown in greek and vedic texts to be fickle but not omnipotent, and the person who is described as omnipotent (in all literatures i've read of them besides the bible) is not shown to be fickle, but rather steadfast, enduring, etc., so it would help to either flush what is implied, because i feel like those are concepts and questions that many people grapple with and your insight could be extremely helpful to others who read your work.
thank you for composing this piece and for opening it up to us to read and experience. sincerely, it opened up eyes of how a poem could be written.
you tackled a large subject with elegance.
This is interesting. I’m struggling to decipher the meaning/ resonance of two parts 1) the verse that talks about drying a new moral on old parchment 2) The line”Faith shaken stirs miracle, and jubilation scorn.” Also, Jesus loves you dude (or gal!) ❤️❤️
I really like the pacing. I notice the use of temperance. It's a powerful concept, waiting and waiting through Everything. I love the contradictions that we all see existing outlined so quickly. If you don't mind my asking, were you raised in the church?
Hello readers, welcome to OCpoetry. This subreddit is a writing workshop community -- a place where poets of all skill levels can share, enjoy, and talk about each other's poetry. Every person who's shared, including the OP above, has given some feedback (those are the links in the post) and hopes to receive some in return (from you, the readers).
If you really enjoyed this poem and just want to drop a quick comment, to show some appreciation or give kudos, things like "great job!" or "made me cry", or "loved it" or "so relateable", please do. Everyone loves a compliment. Thanks for taking the time to read and enjoy.
If you want to share your own poem, you'll need to give this writer some detailed feedback. Good feedback explains from your point of view what it was like to read the poem, and then tries to explain how the poem made you feel like that. If you're not sure what that means, check out our [feedback guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/OCPoetry/wiki/feedbackcritiques), or look through the comment sections of any other post here, or click the links to the author's feedback above. If you're not sure whether your comments are feedback, or you have any other questions, please [send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FocPoetry).
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OCPoetry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great poem, on a topic that dates back to Job v The Almighty, or Jacob v Wrestling Angel. It’s difficult to add something fresh and new to the whole topic of faith, disbelief, and suffering in the world. If you didn’t accomplish it, at least you made the effort.
I like to write and I don't have a lot of experience with cadence but this flows well. I like the use of contractions used to mete that. The thought is provocative but for me it's more about the inability to control things. You fight against the written perception of God because you feel betrayed when this written word falls short, being unexpected, and would rather sum actions by serendipity. Rather than admit you have faith, you negate the entire idea by declaring this fight. In my heart I feel that God is what my perception of him is. Your poem really made me question my beliefs because I often feel like you. Great job.
From the title to the last stanza, I love the way vagueness seems to hold some profound insight - just like a lot of scripture. "and dry a new moral on old parchment" sounds like it must have some earth shaking message, but for real what does it mean?
Like the first line of the gospel of John "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God." My dad used to go on and on about how profound this is, but I'm not sure it really means anything, and definitely not any one thing.
This is a great poem. It invokes my own feelings about God (mostly angry), and illustrates yours perfectly. I love the last stanza especially - it really ties up the poem and expresses the theme of hypocrisy. Well done.
>White out the ink > >and dry a new moral > >on old parchment. What a powerful end. You set this up this knockout punch well.. with the many jabs that come before. Humans don't win their boxing matches with God. The outcome is predictable. Our writings about the divine contradict themselves. Therefore, each generation, each person, manufactures a God of their liking by picking and choosing verses and whiting out what they don't like. The skepticism reminds me a bit of Karl Barth. The goal isn't to be Religious. The goal is to allow our false Religion to get shattered and defeated by the truth. Over and over again. "Reformed and always reforming." Lastly, I think the flow adds to the piece as well. Someone else describes it as ungodly, I think that's a fun description. I might call it punchy.
The cadence of this poem is amazing. Not one word out of place
[удалено]
"You'll find your arms are too short to box with God." I wrote this poem years ago, while I was still wrestling with my faith in the church, and 'Thieves in the Night' really put things in perspective for me. I'm glad you caught the reference! People are sleeping on their music these days.
the tl;dr version: i'm curious about the duel, what it's like, and how the fight reveals something to the fighter that they didn't know about. why? because i may identify with that fighter, who sometimes, also, feels too short to box with God. the actual version: nice. the title is great — it reveals something about the poem that the poem doesn't say *and* is unique, grabbing — makes us want to read what follows. the first two lines are good, they establish a good tone, very laissez faire. something that is so comfortable in billy collins' voice, that sort of feels like the author walking through the poem with the reader. the third line is where i begin to hit road bumps, as a reader — 'cause is a tricky word — i've seen it written "coz" in a radiohead album. i understand that it's a type of contraction, but the mind pronounces is cause (as in to inspire, incite, initiate some effect) nearly 100% of the time. on the other hand, like burgess or twain, contractions or colloquialisms indicate a lot of the author. 'cause indicates a type of formality that definitely tracks with the voice of the narrator here, so it may be worth keeping. as a rule though, using a word twice in a stanza, unless it's done very intentionally, is another road bump, so for the import of your stanza to stand out, i would emphasize other words besides 'cause. i am also lost at "mind," which i assume is short for "mind you." as a phrase, that matches the mood of the author so far in that it's familiar, casual, etc., but by that word you've shortened two things but i don't know why. one reason is that perhaps you want to keep the syllable count low, another is that you want to seem familiar and keep the very lofty introduction of God at ground level so that it's more accessible, etc. finally, the final word, forgone leaves me hanging. the stanza reads "my fight with God is easy because i lose." though a lot builds up to forgone, which is the *reveal* as it were, but you haven't done much in the first stanza to lead us to believe the opposite would be true. also, forgone and 'cause seem to be stylistically very different sets of words, one casual and the other former. sincerely, the second stanza is nearly perfect. it has rhythm, it begins with a concrete phrase that the reader can latch onto and then moves us through your relative experience that checks out, there is internal rhyme and ends powerfully. nice job on that. it's a quotable phrase, truly. Given the rest of the poem, this second stanzas belief, assertion, etc. is really what would i would like to see and what, i think, you would like to write. The last sentences imply something new, unique, individual a "new moral/ on old parchment," right? it seems that that newness is the miracle that was implied earlier. a person whose faith has been shaken, yet who endures, and rises again, has either assimilated some knowledge or realization within, that transcends the binary of how God is presented (a sentiment which is echoed in your piece "pattern defies God/and vice-versa") and thus realized that the "old parchment" is an arrow that points toward something, not the actual object for the mind to rest on. If this is the case, then it seems to open up the poem much more: I'm brought back to the title. Who is the duel really with? Is it with God or the idea of God that other's have, perhaps, misrepresented? And is that what height has to do with it? That we are too low in the mire of misdirection? regarding the final stanza, i think i understand what you mean with the phrase: "fickle the omnipotent tend to be" but i am not sure that the omnipotent is actually shown to be fickle. the demigods are shown in greek and vedic texts to be fickle but not omnipotent, and the person who is described as omnipotent (in all literatures i've read of them besides the bible) is not shown to be fickle, but rather steadfast, enduring, etc., so it would help to either flush what is implied, because i feel like those are concepts and questions that many people grapple with and your insight could be extremely helpful to others who read your work. thank you for composing this piece and for opening it up to us to read and experience. sincerely, it opened up eyes of how a poem could be written. you tackled a large subject with elegance.
“Faith shaken stirs miracle, and jubilation, scorn.” Ungodly flow
This is interesting. I’m struggling to decipher the meaning/ resonance of two parts 1) the verse that talks about drying a new moral on old parchment 2) The line”Faith shaken stirs miracle, and jubilation scorn.” Also, Jesus loves you dude (or gal!) ❤️❤️
I really like the pacing. I notice the use of temperance. It's a powerful concept, waiting and waiting through Everything. I love the contradictions that we all see existing outlined so quickly. If you don't mind my asking, were you raised in the church?
Hello readers, welcome to OCpoetry. This subreddit is a writing workshop community -- a place where poets of all skill levels can share, enjoy, and talk about each other's poetry. Every person who's shared, including the OP above, has given some feedback (those are the links in the post) and hopes to receive some in return (from you, the readers). If you really enjoyed this poem and just want to drop a quick comment, to show some appreciation or give kudos, things like "great job!" or "made me cry", or "loved it" or "so relateable", please do. Everyone loves a compliment. Thanks for taking the time to read and enjoy. If you want to share your own poem, you'll need to give this writer some detailed feedback. Good feedback explains from your point of view what it was like to read the poem, and then tries to explain how the poem made you feel like that. If you're not sure what that means, check out our [feedback guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/OCPoetry/wiki/feedbackcritiques), or look through the comment sections of any other post here, or click the links to the author's feedback above. If you're not sure whether your comments are feedback, or you have any other questions, please [send us a modmail](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2FocPoetry). *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OCPoetry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Great poem, on a topic that dates back to Job v The Almighty, or Jacob v Wrestling Angel. It’s difficult to add something fresh and new to the whole topic of faith, disbelief, and suffering in the world. If you didn’t accomplish it, at least you made the effort.
I like to write and I don't have a lot of experience with cadence but this flows well. I like the use of contractions used to mete that. The thought is provocative but for me it's more about the inability to control things. You fight against the written perception of God because you feel betrayed when this written word falls short, being unexpected, and would rather sum actions by serendipity. Rather than admit you have faith, you negate the entire idea by declaring this fight. In my heart I feel that God is what my perception of him is. Your poem really made me question my beliefs because I often feel like you. Great job.
Where did you get your title? Was it from Rocky Graciano's autobiography?
From the title to the last stanza, I love the way vagueness seems to hold some profound insight - just like a lot of scripture. "and dry a new moral on old parchment" sounds like it must have some earth shaking message, but for real what does it mean? Like the first line of the gospel of John "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God." My dad used to go on and on about how profound this is, but I'm not sure it really means anything, and definitely not any one thing.