[Susan McLean]

IOU (revised)

There is no I or U in love;
.....however, there's an O.
O Love, what do I owe?

...................................You know.
.....Or do not choose to know.


IOU

There is no I or U in love;
however, there's an O.
O Love, what do I owe?

....................................--You know.
Or do not choose to know.

Revisions:
L4 added dash
added a stanza break between L3 and L4

[Max Goodman]

Lovely.

FWIW, on first reading, my expectations conditioned, I imagine, by similar light verse and the cleverness here, the last line sounded like a rebuke. But of course it is a further compliment.

[Susan McLean]

Max, I was a little puzzled by your response. I did intend a possible rebuke in the reply, which I would paraphrase "Either you already know or you prefer not to know because you don't wish to pay it."

Susan

[Max Goodman]

Ah!

What I missed until your message is that there are two speakers. I see now that the italicization of the last line and a foot, and the division over two lines of line three indicate that the italicized words are spoken by the person addressed in the rest of the poem. As my confused and confusing previous message shows, the content was pulling me toward that reading despite my missing those things. Thanks for clarifying.

[Julie Steiner]

Hi, Susan!

Since italics are asked to do double duty in this poem, indicating both letters/words and also a change in speaker, I think an em dash instead of, or in addition to, the dropped line will help to clarify the latter.

The dropped line + italics might have been enough of a clue in former generations, but modern readers so rarely encounter those (in these days of online publications, whose editors often struggle with typography beyond the basics) that if you don't want the clutter of quotation marks, an em dash might be just the ticket.

[Susan McLean]

Thanks, Julie, I have added a dash to L4. I hope that helps to point the reader to the change in speaker.

Susan

[Hilary Biehl]

Susan, I think the dash definitely helps clarify that there is a new speaker. I love how compact this poem is, like an actual IOU note.

[Jim Ramsey]

Hi Susan,

I still think there's more work to do in showing the change of speaker. It is such a key component that it should not be puzzling in any way. I wonder whether the dashes to introduce dialogue as used by James Joyce and Cormac McCarthy would work.

All the best,
Jim

*coming back to clarify that I mean a more extensive use than already suggested by Julie and seconded by Hilary. maybe something like this and maybe even getting the implied "U" actually in use by the second speaker in some way:

IOU

——There is no I or U in love;
however, there's an O...
O Love, what do I owe?

——Yo(u) know—or do not
choose to know.

[Susan McLean]

Jim, I have tried adding a stanza break between the two speakers.

Susan

[Alex Pepple]

Hello, Susan,

Popular style guides—such as The Chicago Manual of Style—generally advise against using an em dash to begin a sentence, as in:

—You know.

Dashes are typically used mid-sentence for parenthetical or interruptive purposes. For that reason, I’d suggest avoiding it here.

Instead, if you’re aiming to indicate a shift in speaker or tone, stanza indentation can communicate that more effectively. For example:

There is no I or U in love;
however, there's an O.
O Love, what do I owe?

                                 You know.
      Or do not choose to know.

That might preserve the intimacy while also clarifying the structure.

I realize that with your poetic license, you can throw the rules out of the window, including styling ones. Still, I believe it's likelier you'll achieve consensus of interpretation by readers and editors with standard conventions than through the vagaries of uncommon and non-standard presentation.

Just my two cents—but I hope something here is helpful!

Cheers,
…Alex