literature

W3 Series: Fish in the Sky

Deviation Actions

SutureHQ's avatar
By
Published:
458 Views

Literature Text

Since the beginning of suture, the goal has always been to aid aspiring writers and poets to learn to focus their work into something that transcends simple "expressing one's self". One might claim that such an endeavor is "the blind leading the blind" in a community such as DeviantArt, due to the "amateur" nature of those involved. It is true, most of us involved don't have any kind of awe-inspiring credentials as to the validity of our criticism of much of the work submitted to DA -- except for one thing: Our work.

I challenge anyone to peruse the galleries of those involved with Suture and not come to the conclusion that, although we may not be officially recognized jack-asses, we do at least have a certain understanding that is useful to the community.

To that effect, a call was placed for some of us to produce an in-depth discussion on the "behind the scenes" of one of our pieces -- I chose a piece of mine written a few weeks ago called "Fish in the Sky".

First the poem -
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Fish in the Sky

There are fish in the sky, this murky fog-ridden heap of forever
balanced so neatly in the fingertips of trees,
there are fish and they dart away within the edges of perception
move the air around them as if it were nothing
as if it were something other than oppressive weight
to burden shoulders long since bent in the strain of things.

There are motes of energy speeding like trains in the nether
telling lines of the history of things, the future they see
tiny motes to delineate the moments of movement and regression
and they kiss each other, kiss the world with loving
lips so ravenous that life after life devoured is unable to sate
the ever-present and passionate calling of uncultured dreams.

What is it, little fishes, that holds you so? What suspends you?
What balances and ties the bonds from this one to that one -
allows you to breathe the energy singing songs around you,
like so many bees keeping up the keening wail of the sun,

waiting to banish the clouds...

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[Background]

When I sit down to write things, I don't always have a goal or a direction. More often than not, I simply have an overwhelming feeling of desperately needing to say something. As I was growing up, my family often liked to joke that I came into this world with something to say, and I usually didn't care if anyone was interested in listening - perhaps there is some merit in that.

Oddly though, most of the time my work is done in very short vignettes. Why is this? I'm not quite sure. I always have all these big goals and intentions for things but when I get to writing them, everything compacts itself and I find that I am finished, and they are short.

This piece is no Different. At the time I was dealing with a great many issues (as everyone is) but what plagued me more than the issues itself, was that I had suddenly found myself in rejection of the concept of "should be", or perhaps more aptly the concept of goals, of progression, of movement itself (figuratively speaking of course).

It seemed to me that my subconsciousness was playing traitor and taking all these things that I saw happening around me and then creating these vast illusions for me to pursue, often to my own detriment.

Think The Secret Life of Walter Mitty in a way. I found myself constantly locked in a network of daydreams that, oddly enough, I found succor in. Almost as if I had chosen the blue pill after all, and some part of me had no problem with that.

[Technique]
(symbols and meaning)

So why fish? Because the concept of fish swimming in the sky is ridiculous. It is an aberration to the way that things work in reality. I wanted an image that was obvious, but at the same time was subtle enough to convey that "dreamy" sense of reality in which I found myself entrenched. At the same time I wanted to parallel two "worlds" that weren't necessarily "our world" so that the reader (and myself) could take a step back and observe how things played off each other without bringing all the baggage of our own reality. So I juxtaposed the "world" of water and the "world" of air – I made fish into birds. Because that, in essence, is what I was trying to do with myself on a subconscious level, turn a fish into a bird.

The first stanza deals with the dreams: the things we present to ourselves, that we reach for and follow. To me, the concept of "should be" is an aberration to reality. Perhaps I have been reading too much Terry Goodkind, but I have made into my own personal mantra his statement: "The first law of reason is what exists, exists; what is, is; and from this irreducible bedrock principle all knowledge is built."

The second stanza however deals with how the "dreams" sustain themselves - They feed off potential. Rather like a vampire "should" takes the lifeblood of the life around us (potential) and leeches off it, changes it into something unholy and unreal. So I tried to create a rather benign sort of image at the first of the stanza (rather like a friendly will 'o the wisp floating around) that changes into something altogether different and potentially lethal, due to its interaction with our psyche and our love of what "should" be.

Then, in the third stanza I took these two concepts and interjected myself – at the exact point I was when I was writing this. A baffled and altogether desperate soul waiting for the deux-ex-machina, or at least a glimpse behind the scenes.

And finally the last line is a prayer (or mantra perhaps) that there is resolution to be found in the understanding of how this sort of existence happens, even if there is little one can directly do about it. Almost as if by realizing that one is dreaming, one dispels the siren song of that dream and the hold it has upon ourselves.

(form and syntax)

Form more often than not shows up in my work for one reason and one reason only – to act as a guidepost as to where I'm trying to get the reader to look.

This particular piece isn't really that stringent when it comes to form but it does follow some general guidelines. First off, alliteration. I nearly always use alliteration to emphasize the lines that I think are most important. The first stanza has one such instance (although, admittedly, weak) in the first line. "Fish", "fog", "forever" - what I was trying to do here is establish the core image and theme of that particular stanza – this sort of impenetrable fog of reality full of dreams swimming around.

In the second stanza it comes in the third line. Also the thematic point of the stanza - "motes", "moments", "movement"...the idea is to establish this sort of potential in all things as well as mark the point at which that potential begins to change into something else, something more sinister.

And then you'll notice I sort of "watered down" that concept afterward in the following by using a dash of alliteration as well as repetition to give the subconscious concept of an ellipsis - "kiss – kiss" ..."loving lips - life after life". The intent (although now that I think about it, kind of grasping) is that the reader could get a feel that the second part of the stanza takes a different tone than the first...in essence, to throw the red flag that there is some sort of "change" going on here. I realize the inherent paradox of trying to get someone's attention in a subtle way...but, meh, it is what it is.

I had a problem with punctuation in the way this ends. I wanted the concept to sort of trail off (which is why I used an ellipsis) because that's kind of what I felt myself doing – asking questions to which I had no answer, and sort of just trudging along anyway, hoping that the knowledge that I was susceptible to dreams would be aegis enough to shield me from them but not really confident in that hope. Obviously though, that should end in a question mark grammatically – which may or may not be important to some poets, but I spent a lot of university courses learning about the essence of communication (and punctuation is an invaluable tool to that end) so I'm a big fan of being as clear as I can without sacrificing meaning. So I ask forgiveness on that point, it was a rock and a hard place.

One other kind of comical (and snide) tidbit of information about this piece's form. You will notice the stanzas go in a 6-6-4-1 format. There is a reason for that, although it is a rather base and vindictive one. 6641 was the last 4 digits of the telephone number of the most recent woman (in the continuing queue) to walk out of my life at the time this was written. This piece went through several edits, and during one of them I did that consciously, but kind of just at random. Why? I don't know...and I'm not normally one to be "that guy" that lashes out at people for choosing steps in life that make them better – but, meh, there you have it. :-P

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In closing, I really hope that this doesn't come off as pretentious. That isn't our aim. When we've tried to do this sort of thing in the past, there was a certain amount of resistance within a particular faction that felt that analysis of a work should never be done "from the horse's mouth" so to speak. To an extent I agree with that sentiment, in that I would hate to believe that I boxed someone into an interpretation and disallowed them to fully experience (and therefore fully understand) the piece and themselves.

We're trying to establish to the community the sort of craft that goes into this monster that we call expression. We're also trying to develop a rapport with the community that perhaps we really DO know something that is useful to them. With that in mind, I hope this helps...even if the help be small.
W3 Series

(Writers writing about writing)
© 2010 - 2024 manadrake
Comments1
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
3-legged-dog's avatar
Very cool. I really enjoyed this. The poetry is very good, and the metaphors immediately brought imagery to mind with an entire scene. At first I thought it was odd that someone would choose their own work to "discuss." But I quickly convicted myself of ignorance prior to investigation. I don't think this is pretentious at all. You are not offering a critique. You are discussing the poem, the inspiration, some of the meaning, the form and rhythm. I think that background works really well with this piece. I think some of the romantics should have done this. Though I don't always think we need to know the true meaning behind a work, because often poetry and art stimulate different interpretations in people based on their world view, experiences, and situation at the time. But at other times it very nice to see what the author had in mind.

I think many of my poems and likely those of other poets, are glazed over because the metaphor or imagery doesn't resonate with the reader for several possible reasons. The poems appears to have a tone the reader does not like (cynicism, optimism, pessimism, etc.), but seeing the background of the work might allow the reader to appreciate it in a different light. Also, and maybe I speak only for myself here, but deep emotion can lead to an intense, almost frantic construction of a poem in order to express the emotion, resulting in complex metaphors and/or a poem that is difficult to interpret. If the piece fails to evoke a response from the audience, it will not be appreciated fully.

So am I saying that we should do this for every poem we write? Not at all. But I do find it refreshing and very interesting. I am very happy I stayed to read the entire discussion. Thanks for posting.