Inside the Shed

From the dark came a cracking sound --
the chewing of a discarded chicken bone
crushed in the jaws of a resident raccoon --
a full moon illuminating the eyes as if
tiny head lights, pierced the humid night.
 
In the distance, another light grabbed attention,
flickering through rustling leaves, now overgrown
with the twisted travel of snaking vines,
lay a ramshackle dwelling --
inside, he sipped black coffee, stroking a bearded chin, 
until all became bathed in a lightning strike, a split second
discovery, when eyes met eyes.
 
It was then, beast and man became one, though survival
seemed mixed, intent focused on different outcomes,
intellect fighting each other for superiority, the raccoon content,
wandering back to a chicken bone and inside
the shack, please love me thoughts gathered
under the night's umbrella.

Edward Rochester Esq.

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 7:11:49 AM UTC-4, Edward Rochester Esq.. wrote:
> Inside the Shed

I believe that I'd commented briefly on this one in the past, but it's such a good poem that it deserves a more in-depth examination.

Of course we all know who this poem was inspired by, but it could be about anyone -- anyone of a certain, desperately lonely, rustic mold, that is. And that's one of the points about this poem that I'd like to further explore. A poem à clef that retains a large degree of universality, is basically a two-for-one, literary deal. It can be read and appreciated by those not familiar with its intended target, and enjoyed with extra relish by those who are. That said, there's really no need for this review to dwell upon the similarities to the individual on which it is based, but to approach it as a universal work, independent of its source.

> From the dark came a cracking sound --

An em dash is probably too strong a break for this line (I would go with a comma) as the "cracking sound" of line one directly relates to the explanation given in line two.

> the chewing of a discarded chicken bone
> crushed in the jaws of a resident raccoon --

This is a wonderful image, but also one that sheds some light on the personality of the protagonist: he's the type of person who would have discarded chicken bones lying under the fallen leaves about his lawn.

> a full moon illuminating [its] eyes as if
> tiny [headlights] pierced the humid night.

"Its" is not only more personal (making the racoon a more viable character/antagonist), but it also makes for a better sentence.
"Headlights" is one word, and does not require a comma.

These lines continue the strong imagery of the opening three.

Taken all together the first stanza introduces the antagonist (or is it the protagonist?), sheds some light on the protagonist, and does it all with striking imagery. It is almost impossible not to imagine this as the opening scene of a film.

> In the distance, another light grabbed [his] attention,

"His" attention, for clarity.

> flickering through rustling leaves, now overgrown
> with the twisted travel of snaking vines,

This passage could use a little work, as it is technically saying that the rustling leaves have become overgrown with vines. My suggestion is to rebreak the lines and to punctuate as follows:

In the distance, another light,
flickering through the rustling leaves,
grabbed his attention: there, overgrown
with the twisted travel of snaking vines,
lay a ramshackle dwelling.

I don't think that "travel" applies to vines (snaking or otherwise), as they are firmly rooted in place. I would substitute "the twisted snarl of snaking vines."

> [I]nside, [a man] sipped black coffee,
stroking [his] bearded chin[...]

Having broken this into a separate sentence, "Inside" receives a capital. "A man" should be used, as the character has not previously appeared (in which case, "he" would refer to the racoon).

"His" bearded chin, signifies that the man is alone; whereas "a" bearded chin suggests that he is cozying up to his male companion.

I have introduced a set of ellipses at the end because the following line breaks from setting the bucolic scene to the moment of confrontation between the protagonist and antagonist.

I would also suggest adding another line or two about the protagonist (the man, that is) before jumping into the action. It feels a bit rushed, and a little incomplete. Perhaps you could tell us (or hint at) what the man is contemplating while he strokes his beard and sips coffee.

> until all became bathed in a lightning strike,
a split second discovery when eyes met eyes.
>

I've rebroken the lines and deleted the unnecessary comma in the above.

"Eyes met eyes" is an unusual way of expressing this. "When two eyes met" or "when two sets of eyes met" would sound more natural, but "eyes met eyes" works better because it has a more visceral feeling to it. The eyes are depicted almost as separate entities -- alive in themselves -- which makes their moment of mutual awareness all the more powerful.

> It was then [that] beast and man became one,
though survival seemed mixed,
intent focused on different outcomes,
> intellect[s] fighting each other for superiority [--]

Again, I've rebroken the lines to facilitate the reading. I'm not sure what "survival seemed mixed" means; but am fairly certain that either "survival" or "mixed" is incorrect.
> the raccoon content,
> wandering back to [its] chicken bone[,]
[while] inside the shack
please love me thoughts gathered
> under the night's umbrella.

Again, lines rebroken to facilitate reading. No comma is needed after "shack."

"Its" chicken bone denotes that it's the same chicken bone from the opening, whereas "a" implies that it's another bone (in which case, the raccoon wouldn't be wandering "back" to it).

I love how the description of battling intellects is followed by "the raccoon content" -- implying that the raccoon is the more intelligent of the two..

The ending is particularly strong, in that the "defeated" man is so desperate for companionship that longs for a friendship with the raccoon.

All-in-all this is a powerfully depicted anecdote wherein a chance darwinistic encounter becomes the catalyst for a comment on self-imposed isolation and loneliness.

> Edward Rochester Esq.

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 9:30:22 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 7:11:49 AM UTC-4, Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > Inside the Shed
>
> I believe that I'd commented briefly on this one in the past, but it's such a good poem that it deserves a more in-depth examination.
>
> Of course we all know who this poem was inspired by, but it could be about anyone -- anyone of a certain, desperately lonely, rustic mold, that is. And that's one of the points about this poem that I'd like to further explore. A poem à clef that retains a large degree of universality, is basically a two-for-one, literary deal. It can be read and appreciated by those not familiar with its intended target, and enjoyed with extra relish by those who are. That said, there's really no need for this review to dwell upon the similarities to the individual on which it is based, but to approach it as a universal work, independent of its source.
> > From the dark came a cracking sound --
> An em dash is probably too strong a break for this line (I would go with a comma) as the "cracking sound" of line one directly relates to the explanation given in line two.
> > the chewing of a discarded chicken bone
> > crushed in the jaws of a resident raccoon --
> This is a wonderful image, but also one that sheds some light on the personality of the protagonist: he's the type of person who would have discarded chicken bones lying under the fallen leaves about his lawn.
>
> > a full moon illuminating [its] eyes as if
> > tiny [headlights] pierced the humid night.
>
> "Its" is not only more personal (making the racoon a more viable character/antagonist), but it also makes for a better sentence.
> "Headlights" is one word, and does not require a comma.
>
> These lines continue the strong imagery of the opening three.
>
> Taken all together the first stanza introduces the antagonist (or is it the protagonist?), sheds some light on the protagonist, and does it all with striking imagery. It is almost impossible not to imagine this as the opening scene of a film.
>
> > In the distance, another light grabbed [his] attention,
>
> "His" attention, for clarity.
> > flickering through rustling leaves, now overgrown
> > with the twisted travel of snaking vines,
> This passage could use a little work, as it is technically saying that the rustling leaves have become overgrown with vines. My suggestion is to rebreak the lines and to punctuate as follows:
>
> In the distance, another light,
> flickering through the rustling leaves,
> grabbed his attention: there, overgrown
> with the twisted travel of snaking vines,
> lay a ramshackle dwelling.
>
> I don't think that "travel" applies to vines (snaking or otherwise), as they are firmly rooted in place. I would substitute "the twisted snarl of snaking vines."
>
> > [I]nside, [a man] sipped black coffee,
> stroking [his] bearded chin[...]
>
> Having broken this into a separate sentence, "Inside" receives a capital. "A man" should be used, as the character has not previously appeared (in which case, "he" would refer to the racoon).
>
> "His" bearded chin, signifies that the man is alone; whereas "a" bearded chin suggests that he is cozying up to his male companion.
>
> I have introduced a set of ellipses at the end because the following line breaks from setting the bucolic scene to the moment of confrontation between the protagonist and antagonist.
>
> I would also suggest adding another line or two about the protagonist (the man, that is) before jumping into the action. It feels a bit rushed, and a little incomplete. Perhaps you could tell us (or hint at) what the man is contemplating while he strokes his beard and sips coffee.
> > until all became bathed in a lightning strike,
> a split second discovery when eyes met eyes.
> >
>
> I've rebroken the lines and deleted the unnecessary comma in the above.
>
> "Eyes met eyes" is an unusual way of expressing this. "When two eyes met" or "when two sets of eyes met" would sound more natural, but "eyes met eyes" works better because it has a more visceral feeling to it. The eyes are depicted almost as separate entities -- alive in themselves -- which makes their moment of mutual awareness all the more powerful.
>
> > It was then [that] beast and man became one,
> though survival seemed mixed,
> intent focused on different outcomes,
> > intellect[s] fighting each other for superiority [--]
>
> Again, I've rebroken the lines to facilitate the reading. I'm not sure what "survival seemed mixed" means; but am fairly certain that either "survival" or "mixed" is incorrect.
>
> > the raccoon content,
> > wandering back to [its] chicken bone[,]
> [while] inside the shack
> please love me thoughts gathered
> > under the night's umbrella.
> Again, lines rebroken to facilitate reading. No comma is needed after "shack."
>
> "Its" chicken bone denotes that it's the same chicken bone from the opening, whereas "a" implies that it's another bone (in which case, the raccoon wouldn't be wandering "back" to it).
>
> I love how the description of battling intellects is followed by "the raccoon content" -- implying that the raccoon is the more intelligent of the two.
>
> The ending is particularly strong, in that the "defeated" man is so desperate for companionship that longs for a friendship with the raccoon.
>
> All-in-all this is a powerfully depicted anecdote wherein a chance darwinistic encounter becomes the catalyst for a comment on self-imposed isolation and loneliness.
>
> > Edward Rochester Esq.

I always enjoy your 'in depth' comments. As a rewrite, many things you pointed out were there and changed.

At times I have a problem with 'leave well enough alone."

Thanks, Michael.

On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 9:50:06 AM UTC-4, Edward Rochester Esq.. wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 9:30:22 AM UTC-4, Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Wednesday, May 3, 2023 at 7:11:49 AM UTC-4, Edward Rochester Esq. wrote:
> > > Inside the Shed
> >
> > I believe that I'd commented briefly on this one in the past, but it's such a good poem that it deserves a more in-depth examination.
> >
> > Of course we all know who this poem was inspired by, but it could be about anyone -- anyone of a certain, desperately lonely, rustic mold, that is.. And that's one of the points about this poem that I'd like to further explore. A poem à clef that retains a large degree of universality, is basically a two-for-one, literary deal. It can be read and appreciated by those not familiar with its intended target, and enjoyed with extra relish by those who are. That said, there's really no need for this review to dwell upon the similarities to the individual on which it is based, but to approach it as a universal work, independent of its source.
> > > From the dark came a cracking sound --
> > An em dash is probably too strong a break for this line (I would go with a comma) as the "cracking sound" of line one directly relates to the explanation given in line two.
> > > the chewing of a discarded chicken bone
> > > crushed in the jaws of a resident raccoon --
> > This is a wonderful image, but also one that sheds some light on the personality of the protagonist: he's the type of person who would have discarded chicken bones lying under the fallen leaves about his lawn.
> >
> > > a full moon illuminating [its] eyes as if
> > > tiny [headlights] pierced the humid night.
> >
> > "Its" is not only more personal (making the racoon a more viable character/antagonist), but it also makes for a better sentence.
> > "Headlights" is one word, and does not require a comma.
> >
> > These lines continue the strong imagery of the opening three.
> >
> > Taken all together the first stanza introduces the antagonist (or is it the protagonist?), sheds some light on the protagonist, and does it all with striking imagery. It is almost impossible not to imagine this as the opening scene of a film.
> >
> > > In the distance, another light grabbed [his] attention,
> >
> > "His" attention, for clarity.
> > > flickering through rustling leaves, now overgrown
> > > with the twisted travel of snaking vines,
> > This passage could use a little work, as it is technically saying that the rustling leaves have become overgrown with vines. My suggestion is to rebreak the lines and to punctuate as follows:
> >
> > In the distance, another light,
> > flickering through the rustling leaves,
> > grabbed his attention: there, overgrown
> > with the twisted travel of snaking vines,
> > lay a ramshackle dwelling.
> >
> > I don't think that "travel" applies to vines (snaking or otherwise), as they are firmly rooted in place. I would substitute "the twisted snarl of snaking vines."
> >
> > > [I]nside, [a man] sipped black coffee,
> > stroking [his] bearded chin[...]
> >
> > Having broken this into a separate sentence, "Inside" receives a capital. "A man" should be used, as the character has not previously appeared (in which case, "he" would refer to the racoon).
> >
> > "His" bearded chin, signifies that the man is alone; whereas "a" bearded chin suggests that he is cozying up to his male companion.
> >
> > I have introduced a set of ellipses at the end because the following line breaks from setting the bucolic scene to the moment of confrontation between the protagonist and antagonist.
> >
> > I would also suggest adding another line or two about the protagonist (the man, that is) before jumping into the action. It feels a bit rushed, and a little incomplete. Perhaps you could tell us (or hint at) what the man is contemplating while he strokes his beard and sips coffee.
> > > until all became bathed in a lightning strike,
> > a split second discovery when eyes met eyes.
> > >
> >
> > I've rebroken the lines and deleted the unnecessary comma in the above.
> >
> > "Eyes met eyes" is an unusual way of expressing this. "When two eyes met" or "when two sets of eyes met" would sound more natural, but "eyes met eyes" works better because it has a more visceral feeling to it. The eyes are depicted almost as separate entities -- alive in themselves -- which makes their moment of mutual awareness all the more powerful.
> >
> > > It was then [that] beast and man became one,
> > though survival seemed mixed,
> > intent focused on different outcomes,
> > > intellect[s] fighting each other for superiority [--]
> >
> > Again, I've rebroken the lines to facilitate the reading. I'm not sure what "survival seemed mixed" means; but am fairly certain that either "survival" or "mixed" is incorrect.
> >
> > > the raccoon content,
> > > wandering back to [its] chicken bone[,]
> > [while] inside the shack
> > please love me thoughts gathered
> > > under the night's umbrella.
> > Again, lines rebroken to facilitate reading. No comma is needed after "shack."
> >
> > "Its" chicken bone denotes that it's the same chicken bone from the opening, whereas "a" implies that it's another bone (in which case, the raccoon wouldn't be wandering "back" to it).
> >
> > I love how the description of battling intellects is followed by "the raccoon content" -- implying that the raccoon is the more intelligent of the two.
> >
> > The ending is particularly strong, in that the "defeated" man is so desperate for companionship that longs for a friendship with the raccoon.
> >
> > All-in-all this is a powerfully depicted anecdote wherein a chance darwinistic encounter becomes the catalyst for a comment on self-imposed isolation and loneliness.
> >
> > > Edward Rochester Esq.
> I always enjoy your 'in depth' comments. As a rewrite, many things you pointed out were there and changed.
>
> At times I have a problem with 'leave well enough alone."
>
> Thanks, Michael.

I really liked the flow of

with the twisted travel of snaking vines,
lay a ramshackle dwelling --