Metacognition- Poem

You can look at my other metacognition for how I develop ideas, if you want.

For this poem, I chose the image of a dead lady. I decided to explore the implications of death and how with death makes the already “meaningless enough” (see my previous post, the “best of week”) human experience worthless. Upon death, all things that were so important, all the moments of love, grief are destroyed. Everything is lost.

I’m struggling with the revision process. A lot of the time, I’m not quite sure what to do. I know that in the past, I’ve had “trouble with making the image clear to the reader”. I can see the justification for this, and have tried to make it easier for the reader to “get it”.

However, I’ve always thought that poetry should be more flexible. I understand that at a certain point, the reader has to be able to understand some fundamental things going on in the poem, but once that was accomplished; I’ve liked poetry that allows multiple perceptions. The art of poetry is to capture human experience, emotions in cold writing. Poetry is beautiful when it can relate to anybody. A poem can mirror joy and grief at the same time. Poems are universal. I have never thought poems should be description. Description, in my mind, is the detailed blueprint, while poetry is Rorschach inkblot. It’s like a magic trick. We try to find the solution, but we’re not really looking. We want to be fooled; we want to believe, if only for a second, that there is magic, that there can be love or hate in writing. When poetry is made into a blueprint, I realize that there is no real value, there is no emotion, that there is merely ink on paper and no human whatsoever.