Scott Devon
When the building ate the plane
I saw a plane in plain sight fly into a butter building.
Honed and droned in like a bloodhound following a finger print stink,
And the building swallowed it, hole, gobbled its load
And
Belched back flames into the blue,
And
I know they’ve been hit before
But this is twisting black.
This is a shatter smack.
The emotion ripped through tear ducts
Travelled through lens and fibre optic flux
And
Breath was held.
Are their more? Are you sure?
And
The people stood straight as it melted
Down and Down and Down
Down into pyroclastic snow
Covering earth, trapping bone.
But I can wind it back, back it winds
Up it goes, watch it again
I can freeze it.
I can see them now.
He has blue eyes, a yellow tie,
A wedding ring,
An Archimedes swing.
They are waving.
They are falling.
They are sunk.
Fri, 18 Jan 2008 05:01 pm
Pete Crompton
Scott
This is good stuff.
some really good couplets here.
It all flows and fits and just begs to be read out.
"I know they’ve been hit before
But this is twisting black.
This is a shatter smack."
class stuff.powerhouse.
reason I like this is the double hit. im always a fan of the 'ack' couplets as I like the way you can flow them.
will we see this baby on the CD launch?
This is good stuff.
some really good couplets here.
It all flows and fits and just begs to be read out.
"I know they’ve been hit before
But this is twisting black.
This is a shatter smack."
class stuff.powerhouse.
reason I like this is the double hit. im always a fan of the 'ack' couplets as I like the way you can flow them.
will we see this baby on the CD launch?
Thu, 7 Feb 2008 12:10 am
<Deleted User>
What a beautiful poem Scott - you capture the sadness so well and our immunity to simply seeing the tragedies of others as our entertainment.
Magi
xxxx
Magi
xxxx
Thu, 7 Feb 2008 03:12 pm
Hi Scott
Good to have you back on the boards. Excellent poem
captures the moment well. Looking forward to hearing it sometime.
Val x
Good to have you back on the boards. Excellent poem
captures the moment well. Looking forward to hearing it sometime.
Val x
Fri, 8 Feb 2008 05:11 pm
I think this is an excellent poem Scott. Some great imagery and use of rhyme to reinforce it. I admire phrases like: <the butter building> and
<bloodhound following a finger print stink>, non-PC suggestive of the perpetrators' perception of US guilt being the motivation behind the attack.
I find chilling the suggestion of our pornographic need to watch the images over and over, and the detail that emphasise the humanity of the victims: blue eyes, yellow tie and wedding ring.
For me, it would end better by removing the last two lines. I find the references to falling and sunk to be overstatements, too 'on the nose' for me. We know they are falling. Better to leave it on: they are waving; it leaves them human and alive. It is more poignant, I feel. Sadly, we know the outcome and don't need it stating.
There is also for me a tiny problem with the title vis-a-vis the content in that if the building ate the plane how come its a butter building? Does the plane eat the building? That would give it a more appropriately David and Goliath sense (small country successfully attacks meg-state)?
Just suggestions. It is excellent though.
<bloodhound following a finger print stink>, non-PC suggestive of the perpetrators' perception of US guilt being the motivation behind the attack.
I find chilling the suggestion of our pornographic need to watch the images over and over, and the detail that emphasise the humanity of the victims: blue eyes, yellow tie and wedding ring.
For me, it would end better by removing the last two lines. I find the references to falling and sunk to be overstatements, too 'on the nose' for me. We know they are falling. Better to leave it on: they are waving; it leaves them human and alive. It is more poignant, I feel. Sadly, we know the outcome and don't need it stating.
There is also for me a tiny problem with the title vis-a-vis the content in that if the building ate the plane how come its a butter building? Does the plane eat the building? That would give it a more appropriately David and Goliath sense (small country successfully attacks meg-state)?
Just suggestions. It is excellent though.
Sun, 2 Mar 2008 10:18 am
very powerful Scott
I agree with one of the posters here - but feel that the last line is the only line that could be dispensed with - the poem lends the understanding of the last line without the need for you to then say it
If this was my work, then I would almost feel the need to end it with
they are waving
they are falling
waving, but not falling
- a kind of reverse thought to leave the work open ended and therefore without end...
I agree with one of the posters here - but feel that the last line is the only line that could be dispensed with - the poem lends the understanding of the last line without the need for you to then say it
If this was my work, then I would almost feel the need to end it with
they are waving
they are falling
waving, but not falling
- a kind of reverse thought to leave the work open ended and therefore without end...
Sun, 2 Mar 2008 11:15 am
Scott Devon
Hello peeps,
I can see where you're coming from but the last two lines don't really refer to the people in the tower. That is why they are seperated out into there own space.
Earlier we have the line 'They've been hit before' but the towers haven't so who does the they refer to? The answer for me is the US, a sneaky pearl harbour ref if you will or maybe it could be said to be about when that plane in the 50s crashed into the Empire State. You decide. But the point of that ambiguity is that we get the they's at the end. The people in the tower's arent sunk but the US people are. A brief preidiction that there's (and our) world won't be the same again.
As for the title, it is a 'found' title from a documentary made by an American association called 'pilots for justice' who claim that the second plane which we see dissapeer into the building isn't a plane at all, (because it is not possible for a plane to be completely engulfed by the building without breaking apart). They (NOT I) claim it was a rocket. Hence the title.
I'd love to know what anybody thinks of these comments.
Cool?
I can see where you're coming from but the last two lines don't really refer to the people in the tower. That is why they are seperated out into there own space.
Earlier we have the line 'They've been hit before' but the towers haven't so who does the they refer to? The answer for me is the US, a sneaky pearl harbour ref if you will or maybe it could be said to be about when that plane in the 50s crashed into the Empire State. You decide. But the point of that ambiguity is that we get the they's at the end. The people in the tower's arent sunk but the US people are. A brief preidiction that there's (and our) world won't be the same again.
As for the title, it is a 'found' title from a documentary made by an American association called 'pilots for justice' who claim that the second plane which we see dissapeer into the building isn't a plane at all, (because it is not possible for a plane to be completely engulfed by the building without breaking apart). They (NOT I) claim it was a rocket. Hence the title.
I'd love to know what anybody thinks of these comments.
Cool?
Sun, 2 Mar 2008 08:58 pm