The force of blazing fire rages on,
Despite the loss of those who crave its heat;
In truth it matters not what's dead and gone,
But only that which cannot find retreat
And falls as ready fuel for hungry flames.
Inferno rages on til all is burnt.
It follows not the rules of petty games-
Devouring careless players 'fore they've learnt
That, though they struggle, fire won't be tamed
But rather it is they who are assured-
The hearts they risk to love won't be reclaimed,
Nor is a claim of love simply abjured.
It isn't that the fire of love is wrong,
But that, despite one's will, it rages on!
*** I didn't edit the poem itself but I added a reply to your comment in the notes section. (I wasn't sure if replying directly would mess up the whole not showing my name thing)
Author notes
*** Respnse to comment; Ok, I understand the issue with "devouring" and in fact myself was using it as four syllables in the beginning but it sounded off to me so I did some checking. Pretty much everything I checked listed devouring as a three syllable word "de*vour*ing" http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/devouring
I even used a syllable counter http://www.wordcalc.com/ and came up with the same result and to me it reads well that way. Also from what I've found the traditional syllable count of fire is one "Other problem words for some haiku poets—in addition to many words ending in -ed—include “fire” (sometimes thought of as two syllables, pronounced in some places as “figh-yer”—although such a pronunciation is nonstandard)," from- http://www.worldhaikureview.org/3-2/whcessay_mdw.shtml
Thanks for the feedback. I'm glad you liked the poem and I hope this clears things up, though it is your contest so I suppose if that doesn't work for you it's understandable. ***
This is an English or Shakespearean sonnet. I had some struggles with the syllable count and I've resolved them (I think) but in a slightly unconventional way.
What I struggled with was the word "fire" and using it as both a one AND two syllable word. In line 9 it is read (naturally I THINK) as "fi-yur" whereas in line 13 it reads more quickly "fire." I honestly do not believe it sounds forced, though once you KNOW what you're looking for it might end up seeming that way. I checked around and the consensus on several poetry forums seemed to be that the two syllable pronunciation is reasonable, if not standard. I only mention it as in counting, it's easy to drop it and see line 9 as having nine syllables as opposed to ten which is how I believe it is naturally read aloud.
I'd love some feedback as to whether it works or not, as well as to the poem itself.
A contest entry
- Love Of Form by Cupcrazy.
600 points, ended December 30, 2006, 14 entries
Honorable mention
• next poem in this contest, remove from contest
Please tell me what you think
Comments
-
Wonderful
This is a wonderful sonnet and yes you do have a couple of syllable problems, in lines 8 and 13, as I read both have 1 extra, the word devouring has 4 syllables and fire has 2, although I do recognize the difference in using fire in the previous line as 2 syllables and then in line 13 using the quicker version of 1, but standard theory has it that it is indeed 2.
Having said all that, I still found this to be a wonderful sonnet, I loved the flow and form, and the thoughts were well conveyed in a rhythmic way that was captivating. So I am of the opinion to slide on the second fire and count as one, but maybe you could substitute devouring for a 3 syllable count and thus woould have made the form required. thanks for this great entry and good luck at judging, I will stop by and reread again to see if you've made any changes. Hugs, Bunny
Adding your comment:
