Trilogy

It's ok, Cleardaynow, no offence taken and anyway I agree with you that the effort is worthwhile both for classical literature and for your own art which gives a new very valid perspective.

Well done!

Interesting discussion. Thank you.

First, in response to specific queries:

Only angels dare to weep was Case 1, the idea that the rest of us are semi paralysed as we see the train crash unfolding and only angels see the full ramifications of what is happening and react accordingly to what is inevitable. Angels and heaven are not part of the Greek mythology but seemed to fit.

The iron wheel. I think a fresh crop of people rise and then get crushed with each cycle of the wheel – thus Antigone and her siblings are the cycle after Oedipus. The cycle of life and death.

Pelegrino, I fear I offended you with my somewhat flip take on the Greek myths and tragedies. I wanted to strip them bare of all the pomp that surrounds and smothers ‘great’ literature. Among non Greeks, relatively few of us these days will have read the Greek tragedies and most will have no more knowledge of them than say of Norse or Indian mythology. As well as explaining my poem I wanted to ‘sell’ the Greek plays and the whole incredible concept of tragedy. If one reader goes on to actually read the Greek tragedies then my comments will have been worthwhile. My apologies for having forgotten and omitted Ismene.

I agree with others that you do not *need* to explain your poem; however, I think it is nice that you've left comments with further commentary for those that might need it, and I don't see the harm in doing it. I wouldn't have picked on all the subtleties otherwise, that's for sure (at least, not without going after Medea and the Bacchae).

Now, about the poem itself. I think you've managed to pull off an "epic" feeling, with these long lines and full sentences. It's very musical, it flows very well. I found the rhyming curious, in my mind it just becomes lost effort due to the length of the sentences. But, at the same time, I think the pacing is great, so no real complaint there (again, just found it curious).

I thought these lines in the first stanza were confusing:

"For him heaven beckons and only angels dare to weep

To see how mortal man acts out his mortal destiny

And see again the tragic circle begin its sacred beat."

Now, English isn't my first language, so perhaps I'm just lacking what is needed to properly parse this chunk of text. My problem with it is that I have two readings:

case 1: "Only angels dare to weep as they see a mortal man acting out his destiny"

or

case 2: "Angels weep. And oh! To see how mortal man acts out his mortal destiny..."

So, what I'm saying is, if the correct reading is case 2, I feel there should be a point on s1,l2 (after "weep") to separate those sentences.

I like the image of the wheel of fate, of rising to the top and seeing far, to the horizon, while ignoring the inevitable downfall and crushing that is to come. However, I also think it is a problematic choice, for the *wheel of fate* is eternal. So it's up, down, up, down, up... Forever. It doesn't stop with the low tide. Why not use a more generic wheel? A "wheel of hubris", "wheel of the gods", or whatever, just to avoid the "wheel of fate", which has its own mythological bagage? Yes, I'm nitpicking... And to be honest, "wheel of fate" just sounds cooler. Hell, I don't know. Just a thought.

Really cool. Many great lines, very interesting. Thank you for sharing it.

I appreciate the education - but as we discussed before I think the poem is excellent on it's own. The explanations add some depth for the poorly read such as myself but here is what the poem did for me:

At first I didn't like it because of the futility it made me feel. However, because I am learning to think more about the "why" of what I like and don't like:

Began to realize how well it was written, how effortlessly the words evoked the emotion, no reaching, no contrivance.

Realized that happy, sad, or whatever - good poetry makes you feel SOMETHING. Good poetry does it without making you solve a riddle. Good poetry does it with combinations of words that can contain nuance, that can be interpreted, or can be enjoyed for the way they read and sound in your head as well as for the story or message. Enjoyment comes from recognizing and appreciating the above more than from the actual emotion or reaction evoked.

Okay most who read this will be thinking " what,did he just wake up? " Well, in a sense I did and I think both my poetry and comments will be much improved because of it. While I liked what I liked and didn't what I didn't I will spend more time thinking about why.

Thank you, Cleardaynow.