[Trevor Conway]

A plant will draw you from its neighbourhood of soil,
bind you with water
to build its sugars.

Deep in the earth, pressure has blackened you.
Men have danced as you spewed
in tarry fountains from dusty ground,
as though night was giddily leaking into day.

And they sniffed you like a pile of coins,
blind to the years that bled you.

You lurk in bones and blood,
in xylem and phloem,
scurrying legs,
watchful eyes.

I smell you as I walk,
concealed in swaying grass.
You’re even there
in the window of a jewellery shop,
winking from a bed of gold.

I’ve prodded you onto a page,
led you on in curious shapes.

A fifth of my body is you,

standing,

thinking,

breathing in,

breathing out.

[Jim Ramsey]

Hi Trevor,

This is interesting and has some good lines. You've covered most of the bases (is that baseball idiom used in the UK?) including soil, tar, oil, diamonds, flesh and plants, drawing instruments, but you've left out use as filtering material in air and water purifiers (and probably a few more given the element's apparent promiscuity.) Oops...I've got to go. I hope to come back, especially if I have any ideas for improvements, which are not obvious to me at the moment.

All the best,
Jim

[Joe Crocker]

I hope this isn't too much of a technical quibble but...

A plant will draw you from its neighbourhood of soil,
bind you with water
to build its sugars.

No. My understanding is that plants use atmospheric Carbon in the form of Carbon Dioxide, to build sugars through photosynthesis.

[James Midgley]

A fly-by add-on to what Joe said -- you could change the gist from carbon to nitrogen, since decaying creatures do indeed provide it for plants. It wouldn't feel quite as visceral, though (and would no longer tie in with the others carbons refs).

Might fungi be a better candidate for the intermediary carbon-break-down process?

[Joe Crocker]

Originally Posted by James Midgley

A fly-by add-on to what Joe said -- you could change the gist from carbon to nitrogen, since decaying creatures do indeed provide it for plants. It wouldn't feel quite as visceral, though (and would no longer tie in with the others carbons refs).

Might fungi be a better candidate for the intermediary carbon-break-down process?

Or you could replace "soil" with "air"

[Glenn Wright]

Hi, Trevor—

The advantage of Joe’s suggestion to replace “soil” with “air” is that it makes the poem circle back at the end to the carbon dioxide in the air.

If you wished, you could develop the idea that carbon dioxide is building up in the atmosphere, contributing to global warming.

Just a thought.

Glenn

[Trevor Conway]

Hi everyone,

Thanks for the feedback on this. Yes, I guess air makes more sense, though I think some small amount of carbon is derived from soil too. I could change it to air or simply leave it at neighbourhood. Thanks for spotting it.

And yes, Glenn, global warming is certainly an option I'll look into pursuing. I tried to write a poem about global warming/climate change a few months back, but I couldn't get it to work.

Cheers, ya'll.

Trevor

[James Midgley]

Hi Trevor,

Responding to the poem more broadly -- my concern is that this might aptly be summarised as 'there is a lot of carbon everywhere'. There are some pleasing expressions, but they don't build to much and I'm not sure what kind of emotional or conceptual stake I'm supposed to find.

This might sound frustratingly similar to my response to your wildebeest poem, in which case -- my apologies.

[Trevor Conway]

Hi James,

Thanks for your input on this, and I see no problem with repeating the same feedback across different poems, as it points to patterns of writing, and I'm sure we all have different patterns going on in our writing, whether for better or worse.

I wouldn't say this is a poem where there's an emotional stake involved, but maybe a conceptual one. Poems can sometimes try to do too much (and I've often been guilty of that in my poetry). I saw this as a relatively simple poem of description based on the theme that carbon is so plentiful and essential. The flipside of trying not to overload the poem/do too much is to leave the reader with a sense that the poem is flat or lacking in an obvious purpose, which I take is the impression you got from it.

I'll keep that concern in mind when revising to see if I need to give it an extra level of something. Maybe Glenn's idea about global warming would serve the purpose.

Thanks again for your feedback. It's great to get it.

Trevor

Originally Posted by James Midgley

Hi Trevor,

Responding to the poem more broadly -- my concern is that this might aptly be summarised as 'there is a lot of carbon everywhere'. There are some pleasing expressions, but they don't build to much and I'm not sure what kind of emotional or conceptual stake I'm supposed to find.

This might sound frustratingly similar to my response to your wildebeest poem, in which case -- my apologies.

[Jayne Osborn]

Hi Trevor,

I like the anthropomorphism of this, and its refreshing originality.

I haven't got a lot to add, other than giving my vote for ending L1 with "neighbourhood".

(I don't remember being taught about "xylem and phloem" in GCE Biology, but I enjoyed finding out what they are.)

Jayne