[Matt Q]

Jim, Glenn, JB, John, Cameron, David, Yves,

Apologies for such a slow reply. Life has distracted me away from the Sphere recently.

Many thanks for your comments on this. I've posted a revision, which is mostly a reordering and the cutting of a couple of stanzas.

This was a bit of experiment for me, and one which likely hasn't worked as well as it could.

I thought I might explain some what I'm trying to get across here, and then if anyone has the time and inclination, they can let me know if it didn't land.

So, the N is contemplating sending a card to someone he knows who has cancer. The implication being that he has left this quite late. And maybe even won't send it. (It sounds like this part could be clearer)

The N lives in a concrete box. Literally I want this to mean a flat (apartment). But also to imply something like him being imprisoned/isolated. And as Cameron points out, it could also suggest a coffin.

The N loves these two foxes he can see from his window. Idealises them even, but he loves them passively, from afar. His communication with people is perhaps more problematic.

Shannon and Weaver are invoked, the authors of the seminal paper, "A mathematical theory of communication", which addresses among other things, how much of what's sent is actually received.

Jim

Thanks for your reading. Yes, there's no real closure in this one and that is a bit different for me.

Glenn,

As I said above, I'd intended the N is his flat (in a block of flats), but I do like the idea of the N camped out in his bunker, away from other humans and watching the foxes. That works for me too. I like also your reading of "unwrapped". I was aiming to for some ambiguity of what "unwrapped" meant. It could also mean we fall apart, unravel. Or even "we are born unwrapped" and over time acquire more and more layers.

JB,

Your comment on S being a speedbump in the narrative made me wonder what you took the narrative to be. Anyway, it's moved in the revision, maybe that's better? Useful to know that "homeostasis" stood out for you. It did for David too. I'm not sure why you say homeostasis can't be intact (not damaged or impaired in any way; complete), but useful to know that it sounds odd to you. I do like the sonics, though.

John,

If you get a chance, let me know if you think the revision improves things. Or if any of what I've explained above doesn't come across.

Cameron,

I've reversed the first two stanzas as you suggested. And maybe, minus the two baggage stanzas, it's a little tighter? The idea of a dead N is intriguing, though I'm not sure I can make that work in this poem. I did think about it though.

David,

I guess homeostasis just seemed right for the tone. A slightly disconnected N, maybe, describing death in this biological way? I guess also there's a connection between Shannon and Weaver and cybernetics and the focus on homeostasis (W. Ross Ashby, in particular), which likely only exists in the heads of a select few

Yves,

I think you're right about the baggage riff being under-developed, and I think that rather than complicating things further by expanding it, I've cut it.


Thanks again everyone,

Matt

[Mary Meriam]

Hi Matt, I really like the leaps you take here, suggesting homeostasis: "the tendency toward a relatively stable equilibrium between interdependent elements, especially as maintained by physiological processes." Dictionary has different spelling: (British also homoeostasis)

Why not combine cards, foxes, and boxes in one poem? You make it work. The connections remain a mystery, but the feeling is clear. Our minds roam and flit, why shouldn't a poem? There's a ruminating, meditative quality to the poem.

Not sure why you changed "a few days" to "a year." I prefer "a few days", especially since you mention "year" later on. I do prefer how you switched the first two stanzas.

When is it too late
to send a card? –
when the cancer reaches the brain?
At death? A year later?

It’s one thing to see roadkill,
another if you knew it
when its homeostasis was intact

I like how you use specific names here:

Dr Shannon, Dr Weaver, please:
sender or receiver –
who is a card really for?

Not sure why you added "still" - I prefer the original line (and "I am"):

The vixen might be last year’s cub.
The cub is next year’s fox.
And I’m still not the me I used to be.
But let the foxes change
My love will not –

I think you could omit the last stanza. "My love will not" is such a definitive ending. It's beautiful. I agree with your cuts of the other stanzas.

Perhaps it's the box/fox rhyme that holds the poem together for me. Of course "card" doesn't rhyme, and it's the unsolved puzzle of the poem.

[John Riley]

Matt, it's much improved. I appreciate the more open method and can see how it would work best for this poem. The different moving parts don't work absolutely smoothly but I don't know that you want that or should want that. I have a couple of points.

I wonder if "homeostasis" has become a fixation. I read Mary's comment but still wonder if it's one of those things we become fixated on when writing and later realize it doesn't do the job. I'm only asking the question and have no idea if that is accurate.

I'd prefer that the love isn't stated. I sense you want a sort of profound stillness you can get from stating the obvious but the Hemingway in me wonders if the love will be there more if it remains unstated. Yes, it's the old show don't say rule but the reality is that rule is more true than not.

A couple of things that may be in the way, or may not. I like what is happening--the looseness and questioning. I would certainly keep noodling with it.

[James Brancheau]

I like this, Matt, and I think that the revision is an improvement. It seems more focused than the original and it gives me more of the impression that I’m following it, while still leaving the door open to interpretation. I like the voice here and see the poem as very much being framed by that voice, that inquiry regarding card giving—a great light touch to things that are perhaps more serious, like matters of the heart.

If I had any criticism at all, it might be tinkering with that fourth stanza. At first, I was in favor of getting rid of it—the boxes inside boxes seems important to the poem, yes, but also a little less than fresh, imo. But I also love “and yet,/we come unwrapped.” So, hmmm. Perhaps instead of questions, just a statement about this? A statement that perhaps assumes something already at least partially understood by the reader. Perhaps. Not the biggest deal to me, and probably others disagree. But I thought I’d mention it. Anyway, I enjoyed this quite a bit. And I love that close. Nice work and good revising, Matt.

[Matt Q]

Mary, John and James,

Many thanks for commenting on this one, and giving me things to think about. I'm pleased you all seem to think the revision has improved it.

Mary,

I've removed "still". I was trying to accentuate a meaning like, "I'm not myself, I once was, but I've still not recovered", but I think the original line kind of implies that anyway, plus it works better with rest of the stanza.

With "a year later": I kind of want this list to escalate. There are various standards by which one might judge the limits of when to send a card, but from most of these, the moment of death would normally be considered be too late, I think. And in that respect, "a few days later" isn't much different. I see your point on the repetition of "year", so I've tried "a decade".

Not sure about losing the last stanza: I think I want the undercutting/contrasting that it does. I'm not sure if I want a definitive ending. Plus it's part of a trio of stanzas about the card. But I'll definitely think on it.

John,

I guess it seemed to me that the N's proclamation of love for the foxes, rather than simply "telling", is actually "showing" us something about him. Though maybe that doesn't come across. Anyway, maybe there's a version of the poem where the love is explicitly never mentioned and I can still show what I want to show. I'll definitely keep on thinking about how I could make that work.

I'll see how I feel about "homeostasis" when I come back to this. Maybe I'll dislike it then. Currently it doesn't seem problematic to me (though I accept that's not the case for everyone!). Certainly, there's a fair bit of stasis about the N and his life -- or least as I imagine him. Maybe there's a way to draw that out and make it clearer.

James

Interesting point on S5. When I was revising I tried to get rid of it, but it didn't seem to want to leave! Since your comment, I tried cutting the two questions that set up S5. I quite liked the effect. "Body" then seemed more open to be read in the context of a dead body, which (I think) I quite like -- against this, without the set up, it then seems to imply that the N's "concrete box" is his body ... So, hmm. I'll play around with that stanza some more.

Thanks again, all.

best,

Matt