# The Cane Field



## garza

If we can't address one another politely by name, then there's no point, is there?

I have read again the Standing Orders of the House (Poetry Posting Guidelines) and see nothing there that says members may not address one another by name. I understand the reason for the no-name rule in Parliament. Addressing all remarks to the Speaker and referring to another member as, for example, 'the Honourable Member for Cayo South' or 'the Honourable Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries' is supposed to keep the debate from getting personal. 

But we are not in Parliament. And I see nothing wrong with some argument, disagreement, frustration, on a personal level, so long as no one curses another person or uses foul language. All such argument is, ultimately, about 'the work in question'. That's what the disagreement is about. 

Just for spite, I sent 'the work in question' to a Caribbean publishing house yesterday. The reply came this morning. They bought it. I just missed this month's issue of the publication I wanted to see it in, but it should be out next month in both print and on the publication's web site.

So cross me off the list. Cancel my account. Declare me persona non grata, excommunicated, disowned.


----------



## Martin

Hello Garza

This piece reads like an objective run through of a harvest and the following regrowth. You have an interesting theme, yet by describing every little bit of it, the emotion never finds its way. I thought maybe there is an overall metaphor hidden in this, but I didn't even bother to search for it, as everything is too pinned out and doesn't leave much room for my imagination. 
I suggest you try and rewrite this. Stanzas would be good, to match the different prospects or periods, but most importantly, you should practise to implement imagery. 'Show don't tell', are the most preferred remark in this instance. Think that every reader will react differently to poems. It's not your job to give a complete picture of a scene, rather to convey emotions, that the reader will translate on his/her own. 
Many here will suggest you to read more poetry by published poets, and sure that's a good way to get the gist of it, but as this is a work shopping forum, I'd rather you tried and rework this with my above advice. The theme definitely is interesting and holds much potential.

Best,
Martin


----------



## MaggieG

I agree with much of what Martin had to say. You have a piece here that has an exquisite metaphor in it. BUT ...  I think you have hidden it too deeply


----------



## garza

The most common criticism of my poetry is that I bury what I'm actually talking about two layers deep or more. 'The Cane Field' has nothing to do with growing and harvesting sugar cane. There is a just-under-the-surface metaphor of family, but you have to go deeper than that. 

The poem is about the dissolution of society, about teen-aged druggies on the south side of Belize City killing one another, about Garifuna youth losing contact with their heritage.

If you read the poem in Somalia, or Nigeria, or Afghanistan, or Korea, or New York City, the message is the same. The ties that have held human society together are breaking, being broken, by the crab; the complex, un-natural industrial machine that's destroying the planet.

But forget all that. Read the poem again with a mind open to all the connections that are possible. See the cane field, feel the cycle of growth and loss, but see also families torn apart, see communities torn apart, nations, continents, a world torn apart.

And remember that cane does not renew itself forever. The time comes when the old roots no longer support new growth, and the ground must be plowed and new seed planted. So it is with human society. Our old roots have perhaps already lasted through all the cycles of regrowth they can support, and it may be time to plow the ground and plant new seed. 

I know one publisher in the Caribbean who would take this without question just as it is. I may or may not send it. Most of my poems never have any exposure at all. After all, I'm a journalist, a compiler of hard cold fact. A metaphor infested poem dosen't fit the image.


----------



## JosephB

I liked it quite a bit. But growing and harvesting is an often used metaphor for lots of things. Family, love, nurturing, diligence -- you name it. You seem a little frustrated that folks didn't see it as you intended, though. But people see things filtered through there own experience and/or what they know -- so it seems to me, if you want the poem to have a more universal message and appeal, you just might have to make it a little more obvious. Again, I appreciate it for what it is and I'm glad you posted it.


----------



## garza

Thank you, JosephB. Poetry, more than any other form of writing, calls for a collaboration between writer and reader, and while the writer cannot dictate to the reader what the reader is supposed to see or not see in the poem, neither can the reader, with a cursory glance over the words, hope to catch the writer's vision. 

But you are right. I felt a bit frustrated at the first reaction, that the poem seemed to be at attempt at a literal description of cane harvesting. Except to serve as a surface metaphor, the poem has nothing to do with cane farming. 

I have written some lengthy articles about growing various crops, and am presently working on a 'Field Guide to Organic Agriculture in Belize' to go along with a series of videos I'm producing. There is no metaphor involved. From site selection to marketing, my object is to put organic agriculture, including backyard gardening and school gardens, into the Belizean context in a straightforward, easy to understand guide.

But 'The Cane Field' is not a 'Field Guide to Raising Sugar Cane in the Corozal District'. It's about the cycles, not of individual lives, or even the lives of families, though that is a pretty obvious surface metaphor.

My first reply to Martin, which somehow was lost somewhere in cyberspace, included the information that in my opinion 'An Ordinary Evening in New Haven' by Wallace Stevens was the best poem of the 20th Century. It is certainly my favourite. An if you think the poem has anything to do with spending an evening in New Haven, you need to go and read the poem again. Best thing is to read all of Stevens, then come and look at how simple and obvious the metaphorical layers in 'The Cane Field' really are. That was another bit of frustration, the suggestion that I should go and read some poetry. In standard one I could quote great swaths of Shakespeare, and in first form I memorised 'The Waste Land'. 

Anyroad, if the poem has any meaning for you at all, whether or not it's the meaning I intended, than it has served a purpose.


----------



## Pete_C

Garza, here's something to think about. It's an allegory that I have used here before, as well in several other places. I repeat it because it is very fitting in your case.

I had a friend who decided to learn to paint. He practiced his craft and put much effort in. Indeed, he felt that he put in more hours than many so-called successful painters. He knew that hard work and dedication were an essential element, and thus his craft consumed him.

He eventually fell into a style which he declared a style of his own. He painted pictures of horses. These were not your typical horse paintings, and he declared that the horse was a metaphor for various aspects of life, dependent upon the other elements in the picture.

He held a show. A few people came. While I was there offering support, one lady liked what she saw, and asked him how much the large painting of the cow in the burning barn was. He reacted badly, cursing her and her ignorance. It was so obviously a horse, and what did she know about art? Rather than selling the painting and moving on, he told her to fuck herself.

I met a mutual friend a few days later. It seemed that the artist had cancelled his show because nobody could see the message in his paintings. A few people had mentioned that all his paintings included cows. The friend told me that the painter was depressed and drinking heavily. I liked the sound of that so I went to visit him.

Over a bottle of vodka he explained just how ignorant people were, how they gave his paintings little more than a cursory glance and reacted to the images rather than the deeper meaning. After all, the really thick ones thought his horses were cows. He explained how he could simply paint an obvious image, but that there had to be a convergence of thought between the artist and the admirer. He raged about how he – and many other artists – were misunderstood. He argued that people needed to become more intelligent to enjoy and understand his work. The fact that many people thought his horses were cows underlined how little attention they spent on his work.

I tried to explain that people might not be getting what his message was because he wasn't presenting it correctly. He was outraged, and dragged me towards a canvas. With a paint-splattered hand he gesticulated violently to show how the horse, by riding in the cart, was a metaphor for the enforced subservience of women in certain religions.

Here's the thing.

It looked like a cow.


----------



## vangoghsear

I think that the suggestions and Pete_C's metaphor story are pretty accurate.  The change to make this work could be very simple.  Just a few words would need to be added to make the connection clearer.

Here is a possible way:



garza said:


> They stand, clustered,
> circles of descendants
> *a family*
> joined at the roots
> waiting for the crab.


----------



## Nellie

garza said:


> Poetry, more than any other form of writing, calls for a collaboration between writer and reader, and while the writer cannot dictate to the reader what the reader is supposed to see or not see in the poem, neither can the reader, with a cursory glance over the words, hope to catch the writer's vision.


 
Garza,

This, too, is my frustration with writing poetry today. What one considers out of date, others still hold on to. And IMO, another problem can be the difference in language across the ocean and even here in America, in the north and south, east and west. Plus, we are all entitled to our own interpretations, what does not flow easily with one writer, may with another. And none of us are mind readers, are we?  Do we know what they are trying to say? So how can we tell another writer how they need to write to get the point across. Maybe that writer doesn't like that particular style of writing or perhaps it doesn't sound right in the piece they're trying to write. So to tell the writer to do more reading of poetry is somewhat of a pre-conceived notion that the writer has never done much reading or writing  of poetry before.


----------



## SilverMoon

Garza, supurb language. I've just read your poem and all the comments. Went back to your poem, reading it with your intent and rated it an A. But this was like cheating for me. I was already armed with much information. I don't know what else I can say here but that my ear took very well to it's entirety.


----------



## Martin

I actually said I'd rather you reworked it. 'Read more poetry' is just what you hear a lot on these forums, so I thought I would address it in advance. Sorry if I was clumsy, I think it might have come off a little rude then...

And as well, I did suspect an overall metaphor, but implied that the piece didn't invite a search for it. I haven't much more to add really: the piece lends very little to the imagination, and so it doesn't really matter how open my mind is, as all the imagery is way too precise. Why I actually would call it descriptions rather than imagery. 

At least I hope you'll give the critique some thought...


----------



## garza

Pete C - Before you put me in the category of your painter friend, please note what I said just ahead of your reply.

'Poetry, more than any other form of writing, calls for a collaboration between writer and reader, and while the writer cannot dictate to the reader what the reader is supposed to see or not see in the poem, neither can the reader, with a cursory glance over the words, hope to catch the writer's vision....if the poem has any meaning for you at all, whether or not it's the meaning I intended, than it has served a purpose.'

I was frustrated by Martin's first response because he seemed to have missed entirely the fact that the entire poem is metaphor and has nothing to do with harvesting cane. Frustrated, and a bit amused, but certainly not angry. 

vangoghsear - Such a change would destroy the sense of community. A village is not one family, even if all are related.

Nellie - Yes, I still hold on to a style that others consider out of date. That style has served me well for many years, and in its prose non-fiction form has kept me well fed, decently clothed, and comfortably housed for well over half a century. I do not know what IMO is, so I'm maybe missing a point, but I can tell you that in my part of America, Central America, the great variety of human cultural expression can cause misunderstanding. Belize has a population of just over 300 thousand people. We have more than half a dozen ethnic groups and a dozen languages. We manage to understand one another most of the time, but much of the time it's a struggle. So even though you and I both read, write, and speak English, we each bring a totally different set of experiences. A friend from Orange Walk was coming to see me and called to ask how to find my house once he was in the village. 'There's a crab in the yard', I told him. That's all I needed to say. 

SilverMoon - Thank you. Your words are all the payment I need. Please don't tell any publishers I said that.

Martin - As with all my writing, the poem was reworked over a period of about two weeks. I tell people, 'I don't write, I re-write', and it's true. Whether the final result satisfies everyone or justifies the effort put into it is often in question, but as a general rule once I have laid a piece out for anyone else to see, it is finished and I move on to something else. 

You say the piece 'lends very little to the imagination' and that the imagery is too precise. Now stop and think of all the poems you've read that are very precise in detail, and yet are extended metaphors. One  brilliant example is Frost's 'Death of the Hired Man'. It's pure narrative, loaded with precise detail, yet, surely, you can not say it's about the death of one old man. In fact, everything Frost ever wrote was layers deep in meaning. Stevens' style is altogether different and is, for me, more powerful. Opening up a Stevens poem is like peeling an infinite onion.

Your piece on Afghanistan is excellent, by the way.


----------



## Martin

Garza, in my very first reply I said that I suspected an overall metaphor, so that point I certainly didn't miss! As you already seemed to know from others, you have buried it too deep. As a metaphor, this piece could be about the creation of the universe. There's no hint as to where you are going.

Regarding the imagery or descriptions, let me exemplify a bit with some of your lines: 

_Bundled, but no longer connected,_ (bundled would be sufficient, or at least something less implying than "no longer connected")
_tossed high to the waiting truck._ (this is okay I think except from "waiting", it's rather obvious it is waiting isn't it?)
_The field where dawn 
found the proud stand of cane -_ (again okay, you give the cane personality)
_The field now cut holds only stubble._ (that's usually what a cut field does! So this is where my imagination would like to do the work itself.)
_But the roots live._ (This could be okay, as an emphasis, yet the next 5-6 lines explicitly explain the regrowth, so again, no room for imagination.)

I hope you see better now what I mean. Also note, that these forums are for improving and not just showcasing your pieces. If you don't want to receive critique, please let us know, so me and others don't spend our time writing comments to your work.

Thanks for your compliment regarding the Afghanistan piece.


----------



## StephenMcG

I really like the refrain 'waiting for the crab'. I think it holds the poem together, cements it if you like. It creates an satirical tone, a commentary on the society, of life. And after-all, you say you're a journalist, which I suppose is what you do, although maybe in 'cold fact' usually, but it's commentary all the same.

The cycles can be almost tiring, not to read, but the sense of the approaching outcome. The inevitable strain. 

Good work.


----------



## garza

Martin - Please do not stop writing comments about my work. The critiques are valuable, though it would be a rare thing for me to change a work already 'published' in any sense of the word. Once I push it out the door, it has to make it on its own, though I do enjoy discussing it with others, hearing their comments and suggestions. Those comments and suggestions are filed away for future use. That file is pretty big now. I started the collection about 55 years ago and your comments are the latest additions. The start of that file came about in this way:


When I was 14 a neighbour suggested I start sending articles and pictures to the two local newspapers, one a typical small town daily, the other a weekly that was more magazine than newspaper. I laughed at the idea, but the neighbour pointed out that I had a Speed Graphic camera (bought in a pawn shop for 25 dollars) and a typewriter (Underwood, ca.1925 bought in a pawn shop for ten dollars) and he knew I was constantly writing and taking pictures. 


He pointed out that the newspapers would not send a reporter to cover a camping trip by my Scout troop or a flower show by my mother's garden club, but if a story with picture landed on the editor's desk on a slow news day he would probably use it. 


So I did, and both papers began to use what I sent. Then they started paying me. Not much, but it was enough to show me the future. I haven't worked since.


After I'd been sending in stories for about six months the editor of the daily called me to come see him. 'How old are you?' he said. 'Just turned 15,' I said. 'You are a teen-ager who has started trying to write like a college professor. Stop it. Just tell the story. Now go home. I'm busy.' And that was my introduction to literary criticism and the beginning of my file of comments on what I write. I went back to just telling the story, and have tried not to deviate from that for the past 55 years. Comments leveled at one piece of writing have a way of influencing the next piece I write. I like to think that at age 70 I continue to be capable of learning, so that's why I say not to stop with the critiques of what I write.


Now the editor's advice to ''just tell the story' is the best possible advice for the kind of writing that has kept me well fed all these years. It's not so good for fiction, and it's no good at all, in my opinion, for poetry. Poetry, even narrative poetry, should do more, much more, than tell a story. 


As regards 'The Cane Field', you say that 'As a metaphor, this piece could be about the creation of the universe.' Now you've nailed it. The dissolution and regrowth of family, of community, of the wider society, of, yes, of the physical universe; when you peel the onion all the way down, that's where you end. As you peel, you should pause along the way and think of your personal relationships, your family, neighbours, each stage of the widening circle that surrounds each of us. 


Then you get specific.


'Bundled, but no longer connected, (bundled would be sufficient, or at least something less implying than "no longer connected")' 
Objects may be bundled with or without the bit of string that might, however loosely, bind them together. Here I did want the image to be precise, unambiguous. The individual stalk of cane is alienated, no longer a part of any larger entity. Think of yourself pushing your way through the crowd on a busy city sidewalk. Maybe in front of Brodies on Albert Street at Christmas time. You and those around you are 'bundled, but no longer connected'. 


tossed high to the waiting truck. (this is okay I think except from "waiting", it's rather obvious it is waiting isn't it?)
I wanted a four-beat line here as a sort of drum-roll signaling major transition. The 'waiting' not only re-enforces the meaning, but provides the extra beat I needed.


The field where dawn found the proud stand of cane - (again okay, you give the cane personality)
No personality intended. If it came across that way, that is a weakness of the line. 'Proud' as used here is in the sense of the fourth definition in Oxford's Concise, '4.(of a thing) imposing, splendid'  Some other word, stately, perhaps, would have been better.


The field now cut holds only stubble. (that's usually what a cut field does! So this is where my imagination would like to do the work itself.)
Well, not necessarilly. Whether there is stubble depends on the kind of crop and the cultural practises of the farmer. In this case, the stubble is meant as, yes, a precise image to contrast with the 'proud stand of cane'. I hit you in the face with the image, and leave the meaning hiding there amidst the stubby remains. But in this case I can't see that the meaning was hidden very well.


But the roots live. (This could be okay, as an emphasis, yet the next 5-6 lines explicitly explain the regrowth, so again, no room for imagination.)
Sugar cane is a funny sort of crop. You plant corn, the seed germinates, the plant grows, you harvest, plow the field, and plant again next season. Sugar cane only needs to be replanted every six or eight seasons. Very soon after harvest you can walk through a cane field and see the grass blades (remember that cane is a grass) sprouting in a circle around the centre of each root cluster.  


Never think that your critiques are not welcomed by me. All your comments are kept and used, though, as I say, rarely applied to a piece already declared finished. Or dead, whichever you choose.


Poetry has never played a part in my earning a living. Most of the poems I've had published have been in the pages of the little literary magazines. For each poem published in 'Backabush Review' I get two free copies of the magazine. I think you know what I mean, and I'm sure you've been there.


Essays on rural development and magazine articles on the sins of the Three Sisters (WTO, IMF, WB) are for bread and butter, though they too are fun to write, while poetry is mostly for the pure enjoyment of seeing how words can work together, something I've been fascinated by for over 60 years. I've been fortunate in being able to put that fascination to good use, so I've never had to work for a living. .


----------



## StephenMcG

Garza. I love the anecdote about the editor calling you in and telling you to 'stop!' writing like a college professor. Very funny, but quite melancholy in the sense that as a 15 year old with such foresight and ambition, to have your cover blown so boldly must have been a bit disappointing for a short while? But more importantly, it was a positive thing, and got you on track to where you are now.

When you say you haven't had to work, do you mean that you enjoy your 'job' so much, that you don't consider it work?

By the way, that's the largest response I think I've ever seen on any forum!


----------



## garza

StephenMcG - Thanks. The 'waiting for the crab' bit was the spark for the poem. A field near the village was scheduled to be cut, and the crew had their crab parked in front of my house. I passed by the field early that morning, saw the cane standing, and thought, 'just waiting for the crab'.

I apologise for the extra line feeds above. For some reason when I copy and paste here from Notepad it all ends up in one big block, so I have to add the extra line feeds. I never use word processors for writing. 

I do everything in Notepad or Vim, depending on whether I'm on a Windows machine or a Linux machine.  Publishers have secretaries who are good at running word processors. That's their job. I  just want to write.

And there was no cover to blow. On the advice of my father I delivered my first stories and photos in person so there would be no mistake later about my age. Also I needed to sign up for Social Security withholding. 

Writing is not work. Anyone who says it is is not a writer. Putting words together to see how they look is something I started doing soon after my mother taught me to read so I wouldn't bug her to read me the Sunday comics. Unfortunately the teachers in the early grades where I went to school equated near sightedness with feeble mindedness, so while the other kids were reading 'Dick and Jane' I was reading Jack London and Albert Payson Terhune, but keeping it a secret because the teachers would have been angry. That's another very long story.


----------



## Pete_C

I can't help but feel that given the content of your last reply, that you might have missed a few of the points made here. Whilst you might like to think that the "reader" needs to delve deep into your work and mine its hidden depths, that's not the case. The writer merely points the way and the reader will, if interested, discover what's there. However, you cannot confuse an inability to get beneath the obvious layers with a lack of desire to. In the first case, if a reader cannot fathom out the depths, then the writer has failed. If they have no desire to look for those depths, the writer has also failed.

You are - by way of your answers - seemingly under the impression that you have buried your message too deeply. I disagree. I think that actually the message is so vague as to be applicable to a variety of subjects. The circle of growth, termination, regrowth has been done to death with subjects such as love, life, friendship, family, sex, religion, enlightment, through to the comedic values of numerous interpretations on the "circle of life". 

That your contains many of the stereotypical images associated with this makes it less remarkable and increasingly vague. The cane grows up, the men cut it down, and like their lives the regrowth etc.. I could take this piece and convince anyone that the metaphor was for a hundred and one different things, and the reality is that it could be all or none of them. By you telling us what it means and then insinuating that we've somehow stumbled from the darkness of our ignorance doesn't make it a better poem.

Anyhow, I did note your comment that you have no intention of changing it, and as there are other writers here who might prefer some time spent on their work, I'll leave you to it and shan't trouble you further.


----------



## garza

PeteC - At the risk of being rude, allow me to repeat, again, how I feel about poetry.

'_Poetry, more than any other form of writing, calls for a collaboration between writer and reader, and while the writer cannot dictate to the reader what the reader is supposed to see or not see in the poem, neither can the reader, with a cursory glance over the words, hope to catch the writer's vision....if the poem has any meaning for you at all, whether or not it's the meaning I intended, than it has served a purpose.' 

_The writer, I say, '_cannot dictate to the reader what the reader is supposed to see or not see in the poem...'_ So while I may say 'I meant this' or 'I used these words for this reason', that does not, cannot, dictate to you, bringing to the poem your own experiences, attitudes, and cultural adjustments, what you are supposed to see or what the poem is supposed to mean for you. 

The images used in 'The Cane Field' were deliberately chosen as ones having exactly the kind of much-used identification you seem to deplore. Well, the fact is that the themes of birth, growth, death, and rebirth are so common in much writing simply because those themes are central to our understanding of our place as individuals in the larger context of the community, the world, the universe. Remember what Ciardi said - '_Like words, images possess both denotation and connotation: they denote certain sensory (usually visual) identifications and they connote an emotional aura. Like words, therefore, images tend to fall into overtone themes united by either their denotations or their connotations._' (How Does a Poem Mean p. 865 - one of my old high school resources)  

You have, perhaps overlooked or misread much of what I have written here. You are offended because I do not immediately make suggested changes. As I have said, once I push a piece out the door, it's on it's own. The suggestions, comments, criticisms, others offer here will, in one way or another, affect what I write in the future. I see many ways to make 'The Cane Field' a better poem, but the poem is what it is as it stands. 

If you do not wish to offer critiques of what I write on that basis, then I'm sorry. I enjoy seeing what I have written through the eyes of others. Whether they get the same 'meaning' as I intended is a good subject for discussion, and that's why I'm here. 

The only time I hope for unalloyed approval of my writing is when I send a piece to a publisher, who signals that approval with a cheque sent to my agent


----------



## Martin

I'm sorry Garza, I don't think you have any good points. I can only urge you to lower your defense and listen to the critiques. I really hope you figure out what some of us are talking about, given the amount of kindness your poem already has received.

And honestly, your piling of critiques doesn't concern me much. If you change your attitude, about actually changing posted poems, let me know, otherwise I as well shall refrain from spending time reading and commenting your work again.

Best,


----------



## garza

Martin - I did not understand when I started posting here that I was obligated to constantly change what I have written to suit anyone who says 'change this, change that'. You don't believe it's possible to simply discuss the poem? I do take to heart all that is said, but I don't like fiddling with a piece once it's out there. Maybe a word or two, but nothing that changes the essential nature of what is already written. 

I'd rather write a new piece and incorporate (steal, if you prefer) your ideas in something fresh, not something hacked over. I do not want to fool around with 'The Cane Field' any more. I have new poems, new essays I'm writing, and to spend too much time on yesterday's work is not profitable. That is especially true of poetry, which is more hobby than serious writing.

All of your comments, all of the comments I have received on this site, are in a 'Feedback' folder. There are hundreds of pages in that folder from all sorts of sources, from publishers and prime ministers to taximen and farmers. And now you are there too. Those comments are taken as guides for the future. 

I live by writing. I have made my way in the world by writing. I have taught writing in a university classroom and in numerous workshops and seminars. You say I have no good points. Does that mean I have wasted 55 years of my life fooling myself, and others, into believing I can write? Does that mean I have no writing ability at all? Should I tell the Minister of Agriculture not to incorporate the 34 page report I turned in last week in his recommendations to cabinet because you say I have no good points, so how dare I prepare reports that will influence government policy? 

Have you actually read and tried to understand my responses in this thread? Did it anger you that I answered your objections to some lines in 'The Cane Field' point by point, and did not automatically agree with you?  In fact, I wonder if you have actually read my posts at all, either in this thread or in any other.

I'm sorry. I did not mean to rant. Obviously I have misunderstood the purpose of this forum. I did not know eveyone is supposed to be an editor. I apologise for walking into the wrong room. 

If I have no good points, then best thing I just go.


----------



## JosephB

Garza, most people post here because they want feedback. Sometimes that comes in the form of suggesting a minor rewrite. Whether or not you want to take the suggestion on board is up to you. You're not "obligated" to do anything. If you don't agree, you can simply acknowledge and thank the person who's taken the time to read and comment -- and then move on.


----------



## Martin

When I say you have no good points, I'm only concerned with your poem. We've tried very hard now to make you see some of its faults, and as Joseph says, you don't need to change it, just acknowledge our critiques instead of trying to justify your work all the time. It seems to me it is you who want us to change our opinions. We're just straight up honest and don't think you've written a good poem. However we believe it can be fixed to the better, and personally I believe that listening to the people, then trying to fix it, repost and get new critique, you would improve way more, than by filing these words along with hundreds of pages...

But yes, if you will not work on your pieces, except from changing a word or two, I do believe it is the wrong room you've stepped in to. But to each his own...


----------



## garza

Martin - A few last words, then I'll be on my way. And let me say at the top that I regret this has to end this way. I admire your writing, and would not dream of suggesting you make any substantive changes, though I might suggest some points to keep in mind for later.

I do hope you will read this all the way through to get a better understanding of where I'm coming from.

You are looking at yesterday. I've always looked at tomorrow. Reworking some lines I did last week is futile. Better I keep the criticisms for future reference. 

If there is nothing good about yesterday's poem, then skip it and move on. Poking at a dead dog will not make it live.

My explanations you take as efforts to 'justify' the piece. My explanations are, rather, just that. Explanations of why I used words the way I did, explanations of the way I was thinking at the time. Perhaps next time I'll be thinking differently. Perhaps your comments will influence the way I think, the way I write, next time. That's looking ahead, not back.

Probably my biggest mistake was putting any poetry on the site at all. I'm not a poet. I write articles and essays. I prepare reports for NGO's and government agencies. I write non-fiction books that are published by those same agencies, funded by grants from EU, FAO, etc. I am at present preparing 'A Field Guide to Organic Agriculture in Belize', funded by FAO. There are 13 chapters beginning with land selection and ending with marketing. For each of the 13 chapters I am preparing a five-minute video that will be used by agriculture extension officers, school teachers, and home gardeners. That's the kind of writing I do. 

Writing poetry, or attempting to write poetry, is playtime. I am not a poet and do not take very seriously my efforts at writing poetry. Perhaps had I submitted a report I wrote recently on the future of sugar production in Belize, given the present attitude of the European Union, the response would have been more favourable. But that's assuming anyone here would have cared to read such a report. Instead I submitted a poem, or attempted poem based on a universal theme and inspired by the thought, on passing a cane field, that the cane was, according to the note I made at the time, 'just standing there, just waiting for the crab'. I took a bit of time over this one, more than usual. Most of the time I pop out poems, or alleged poems, on the spot. 

Take for example my first reply to Firebird's 'Hands'. You probably think it is of no value at all, and probably you are correct, but it's typical of what I do. The poem, or alleged poem, was composed as fast as I could type, born fully formed as I read Firebird's poem. It's what in broadcasting is called a 'throwaway', a line quickly thought of to fit the moment and as quickly discarded when the moment has passed.

I doubt you've made it this far. I am accustomed to turning out three or four thousand words in a day, so these replies of a few hundred words represent very little effort. Don't get me started on integrated farming systems. I'll be here all day.

Again I apologise for walking into the wrong room. I assume that you, too, as well as Pete_C, make your living writing. If you are in the creative writing side of it, fiction and poetry, then you no doubt make a great deal more money than I do writing books about rural development and the effect of economic globalisation on the lives of people in developing countries. 

With that I will wish you a good day. Sorry to have troubled you.


----------



## vangoghsear

garza said:


> Martin - A few last words, then I'll be on my way. And let me say at the top that I regret this has to end this way.



We don't want you to leave.  It's obvious there is talent in your writing or else none of us would have committed much time towards this thread.

I asked a friend to act as a dramaturg for a play I am working on.  He said he would do it, but he said this would be the hard part for me:  I could not defend my writing during the process.  I agreed and he was right, it was hard, but in the end I realized that the actual play material I should keep was just basically an idea buried in the middle of the other play.  As a result I am rewriting the entire piece.

I am glad to hear that you store criticisms to apply to future work.  That's fine, but the best way to respond here then is just to say "thanks for the comments.  I'll think about them."  And leave the piece alone.

In future readings of your poetry (and I hope you will continue to post) I will just leave general impressions as I think they will probably be of the most use to you.

My general impression of this piece is that it is a well written metaphor that succeeds on one level, but comes off so concrete that we cannot see beneath that level.  I still think a couple of word changes can fix it, but I also think you have the capability to do that if you choose to.


----------



## garza

vangoghsear - Thanks. I think I'll hang around because there is some good material in the posts here. But I doubt I'll post any more poetry. My reputation over the years has been built on either straightforward reporting beginning in newspapers and continuing through radio, tv, magazines, and books, or analysis. 

So watch out for me in the other forums, and please do offer comments. I may even try some fiction again, as I started to four years ago when I first joined. But poetry? I'll leave that to you fellows who have talent in that direction and who take it seriously. I'll keep writing poems every day. It's good practise. But I'll keep them to myself and after they've aged a bit I'll hit 'delete'. 

Even if I had any poetic talent, it would be sadly out of date. Consider that my favourite poet continues to be Stevens. I always keep three books within arms reach: 'The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Modern English', 'Fowler's Modern English Usage' 3rd edition edited by Burchfield, and 'Wallace Stevens: Collected Poetry and Prose'. I never tire of 'An Ordinary Evening in New Haven', my favourite Stevens poem, or the more popularly acclaimed 'The Emperor of Ice Cream' and 'The Idea of Order at Key West'. By the way, in writing 'The Cane Field' I looked up 'The Load of Sugar Cane' and wished that I could create imagery on that level.

But thanks again. I'll just lurk here in the corner and keep my mouth shut for a while.


----------



## Foxee

All posts beyond this point are to be about the work in question only, please. Any further remarks aimed at other posters will be deleted.

Thank you,

~Foxee


----------



## Foxee

garza, I'm not sure you ever saw my PM. Please do check your private messages.

For now, as there seems to be no interest in discussing The Cane Field but only in discussing other members of the forum or actions of the staff, I'm locking this thread.

Any further communication can be carried out in PM until an arrangement is reached. thank you.


----------

