[Glenn Wright]

Robert Frost is supposed to have said something to the effect that writing free verse is like playing handball without a wall or tennis without a net. In my case, writing free verse feels more like doing a trapeze act without a net. I am much more comfortable composing formal, metrical poems, but I’m going to offer a piece of free verse that I have been working on for your consideration.
——————————————

Version 2

Taps

Seven rifles blast three times—
part dance, part prayer, a piece of theater.
The black marble of the mausoleum separates
the quick from the dead,
the feeling from the numb,
the speaking from the dumb,
time from eternity.

Now alone,
I enact my own
ceremony,
pressing my hot face
against the cold, black barrier
that reflects
and will not admit my grief.


——————————————-

Version 1

Taps

Part dance, part prayer,
a piece of theater,
the flag-draped casket
floats in the arms
of six uniformed pallbearers.
The flag is folded to form
a sharp isosceles triangle.
Words are sprinkled over
the many who sit stoic
and the few who weep in disbelief.

The seven rifles blast three times.
The black marble
of the mausoleum
separates the quick from the dead,
the feeling from the numb,
the speaking from the dumb,
time from eternity.
Now, alone, I enact my own
ceremony, pressing my hot face
against the cold, black barrier
that reflects and will not admit my grief.

—————————————————-
Edits for Version 1:
Omit stanza breaks after lines 7 and 14.
Add stanza break after line 10.
L 5-6: . . .pallbearers, /the flag then folded to form > . . .pallbearers./ The flag is folded to form
L 9: the many people who sit stoic > the many who sit stoic
L 10: or wildly weep in disbelief > and the few weeping in woe and disbelief > and the few who woefully weep in disbelief > and the few who weep in disbelief
L 11: Three times the seven rifles blast. > The seven rifles blast three times.
L 15: stands between the quick and the dead. > separates the quick from the dead,
L 16: It separates the feeling from the numb, > the feeling from the numb,

[Carl Copeland]

And I feel much more comfortable commenting on formal poems, so I’ll just pick two small nits in S2. I love “words are sprinkled over” (recalling an Orthodox sprinkler brush), but “the many people” pales beside it, while “wildly weep” seems over the top. I don’t imagine they’re tearing their clothes or rolling in the dust, so how about toning it down a little to something like “sob”? Otherwise, the poem’s wording is admirably precise, and the series of oppositions builds to a striking close. BTW, I can feel the pull of meter in the first lines of S1 and S3 (and rhyme in the latter), but I couldn’t decide whether that was distracting or not.

[Glenn Wright]

Thanks, Carl. Your comments helped me to rethink my intent and try to clarify it. This poem is based on my admittedly fragmentary recollection of two or three military funerals I have attended, including my father’s. The specific events are probably not in the correct order.

In S2, I wanted to divide the mourners into two groups: a larger group of those who check any public display of emotion and a much smaller group who break down in tears. I got to wondering which group were really the disbelievers. Were the stoics in shock or denial, did they have better self-control, did they not know the deceased very well, or had they simply made peace with death? Were the weepers shocked out of their faith, or were they the ones who believed in a God to whom they could complain? The purpose of this dichotomy was to invite the reader to put the speaker in one category or the other. I wanted the “black barrier” in S3L6 to represent both the barrier between the dead and the living and the obstacle to the speaker’s faith, which will not allow him to offer up his grief.

My first draft of this poem was written in two stanzas—the first ending with “disbelief” to rhyme with the last word, “grief.” I moved some things around and decided to make three stanzas of seven lines each to represent the 21-rifle salute. I’m thinking that this might have been a mistake. The two-stanza structure better highlighted the contrast between public and private grief. That’s one of the reasons for my preference for formal verse. Those kinds of difficult decisions are made for you.

I was somewhat seduced by the /w/ alliteration of “wildly weep.” It almost imitates the sound of sobbing, but I see your point that it is too melodramatic. Let me try a couple of adjustments to clarify the scene and tone down the organ music.

[James Brancheau]

Hi Glenn- Initially I wasn't convinced that you needed the first stanza, though I liked the first line and that the casket floats. After a little more thought, it may help that the stanza establishes the performance to it, that sense of theater. Also, the poem sneaked up on me generally, which kind of makes me want to hold off suggesting big cuts.

One reason I may have been slow to appreciate some things about this poem is that much of it came off as reportage and a bit telly in places. The first stanza seems to be particularly in that vein. (Also, the second and third atanzas are significantly more musical, which I enjoyed.)

But I'm starting to appreciate your approach here, partly because the close is so satisfying and brings much or all of the whole together for me. Love what you do with "admit" here. Clever, emotional, and it rings true. To me at least. Nice work.

[Jim Moonan]

.
Good poems get better with repeated readings, like this one does. It's polished free-verse. You're poetically ambidextrous : )

Unlike James, it didn't take me repeated readings to appreciate the powerful opening stanza. It launches the poem into a rhythm and cadence I usually associate with formal metrical verse — something that is oddly appropriate, given the subject: The voice is formal, the feelings sombre, but at times worn on your sleeve. The formality of the situation and the solemnness of it almost collide with the free-verse interpretation of it, but with the help of carefully chosen words, rhythm and rhyme it coheres beautifully.

I wonder whether you need "woeful" as a descriptor of "weeping".

There is some interesting line breaks that you make good use of in order to maintain a halting rhythm.

The final line is a mic-drop line. Wow.

.

[Glenn Wright]

James and Jim, thanks so much for your thoughtful input.

James, I thought that the telliest part of the poem was naming the emotions “disbelief” and “grief.” My main goal was to invite the reader to consider the effect of grief on faith. In my experience, faith is like a bone that grief fractures. If you survive and heal, the bone becomes stronger than it was before. This poem doesn’t tell whether the speaker’s faith survives or not.

Jim, both you and Carl pointed out that S2L3 feels overwrought. As much as I wanted to keep the /w/ alliteration, I think you’re right that SNL notwithstanding, sometimes there is just too much cowbell. “Woefully” is axed.

I’d be interested in your thoughts on whether to keep the 3-stanza structure or to go back to the 2-stanza structure with the first stanza ending with “disbelief.” I’m also thinking about cutting “then” from S1L6. I thought that the “then” was needed to signal the time gap between the flag covering the casket and being folded, but maybe I’m not giving the reader enough credit. I also wondered if the /f/ alliteration in S1 was too intrusive. Your thoughts?

I really appreciate your expert advice and magnanimous encouragement.
Glenn

[John Boddie]

Glenn -

Presenting this as a scene in a play is a strong framework for the poem. Readers will instantly recognize the actors and the script as ones they have seen before. Your two edits thus far have been good ones.

With all that said, the first three lines of S3, at least to my ear, unravel the good work that leads up to them. The numb/dumb rhyme comes across as forced and the mention of eternity is a significant stretch from an intense but local moment.

After a friend's father was buried at Arlington, he talked about it as driving home the fact that he never knew his father as a soldier, only as a father, and that the whole ceremony seemed detached from the reality he had experienced.

The close of the poem establishes a deep relation between the speaker and the buried. it needs to embrace that relationship instead of wandering off into poetry ether.

Give this some time to rest and then come back to it.

JB

[Glenn Wright]

Thanks John, for your considered and perceptive comments.
You helped me to see that the 2-stanza structure is a better choice to express what I want to say. I want the reader to consider the dichotomies that death, represented by the black marble wall, creates.
The only advantage of the 3-stanza version is that it creates a word picture of the 7-rifle, 3-volley salute. What I want the reader to really notice are the dichotomies:
pretense/theater vs. sincerity, public vs. private, stoic vs. emotional, living vs. dead, time vs. eternity (in the Platonic sense), hot vs. cold, ritual honors vs warm personal tenderness, faith vs. despair. The 2-stanza structure also makes the black marble wall the unifying focus of the second stanza, which makes the development smoother and clearer, and may solve some of the problems you identified in S3. I want the black marble wall to function on several levels. First and most literally I want it to represent the barrier between the living and the dead. Second, I want it to represent a personified MP with shiny black boots who turns away the grieving speaker and will not let him approach the deceased. The military protocols limit the display of grief and demand a stoic honoring of the memory of the fallen. Third, I want the cold, shiny wall to function as a mirror, reflecting the speaker’s grief back and showing it to him, forcing him to question the relationship that underlies his grief.
It’s funny that “stanza” means “room” in Italian. I feel like I’m remodeling a house.
Let me know what you think about the edits. If they don’t work, I can always go back to what I had. I appreciate your input.
Glenn

[Roger Slater]

A few random notes interlineated.

Originally Posted by Glenn Wright

Robert Frost is supposed to have said something to the effect that writing free verse is like playing handball without a wall or tennis without a net. In my case, writing free verse feels more like doing a trapeze act without a net. I am much more comfortable composing formal, metrical poems, but I’m going to offer a piece of free verse that I have been working on for your consideration.
——————————————-

Taps

Part dance, part prayer,
a piece of theater, I'd omit this line
the flag-draped casket
floats in the arms
of six uniformed pallbearers,
the flag then folded to form "then" seems wrong, or maybe vague. Are you invoking the actual process of folding the flag, or are you telling us that the flag is already folded? If it's the process, I think you need to show it to us more vividly
a sharp isosceles triangle. Maybe omit "sharp", which does very little work here, since we can easily picture the folded flag without the adjective.

Words are sprinkled over
the many who sit stoic
and the few who weep in disbelief.
Three times the seven rifles blast.
The black marble
of the mausoleum
stands between the quick and the dead. I'm thinking maybe "the quick and the dead" is trying too hard and relying too much on a stock phrase. Why not "living and the dead"?

It separates the feeling from the numb, I might end the previous strophe with a period and start here with lower case, omitting "It separates". Don't interrupt your rhythm.
the speaking from the dumb,
time from eternity. Insert stanza break
Now, alone, I enact my own
ceremony, pressing my hot face
against the cold, black barrier
that reflects and will not admit my grief.

—————————————————-
Edits:
S2L2: the many people who sit stoic > the many who sit stoic
S2L3: or wildly weep in disbelief > and the few weeping in woe and disbelief > and the few who woefully weep in disbelief > and the few who weep in disbelief

[Glenn Wright]

Hi, Roger—
I made a few revisions before your post, some of them in line with your suggestions. Let me share my thinking on your critiques.
L2: I wanted to establish the contrast between the ritualized, public, impersonal, stoicism inherent in military funerals and the sincere, private, personal, grief that the speaker expresses at the end. It seems as though the military provides a scripted funeral that encourages the mourners to replace grief with honoring. That’s why I need “theater.”
L6: I agree that “then” needs to go. I replaced it with “is,” which creates a passive voice construction that I’m not completely happy with since I already have “are sprinkled” two lines later, but I think it’s a slight improvement.
L7: I wanted “sharp” to suggest a contrast between the softness of the flag “floating” in the arms of the deceased’s comrades like a comforting blanket, and the hard, cold, mathematically defined military rituals that deny or forbid emotion. I included numbers to reinforce this: “six” pallbearers, “triangle,” “three” times “seven” rifle blasts.
L 11: You didn’t mention it, but I decided that the inverted word order in “Three times the seven rifles blast” was annoying. I replaced it with the more natural, “The seven rifles blast three times,” which has the added bonus of ending with three stressed syllables, imitating the sound of three volleys.
L 14: I chose the antiquated expression “quick and the dead” from the old translation of the Nicene Creed to evoke the ritual-ness of the proceedings.
I had the same feeling you did about interrupting the rhythm/cadence, and my decision to go with 2-stanza structure was how I tried to fix it.
L17: I’m still thinking about the stanza break after line 17.

Thanks for your perceptive comments and for staying with me on this.
Glenn