Thread: end game

There in simple trimuph are you sat
the passive oppressor
the unknown aggressor

you are my all
you are the one.

and all I can do is run.

There in simple trimuph are you sat

Apart from the mis-spelled word lines like this annoy me anyway. Why phrase it as a question, 'are you sat', when it is not one? Obscuring the meaning does not make a phrase more poetic, it merely makes it more obscure, the point of a poem is to take a point of tension and illustrate it. 'You are sat in simple triumph', or 'You sit in simple triumph' are clear, simple statements which contain the full meaning without obfuscation.

if poems were meant to have simple clear and precise meanings they'd be in dictionaries. Obscuring meanings is how you invite or demand reader-personal interpretations. admittedly the first line is far from perfect but you seem to be proposing flat poetry, where the meaning is clear to everyone as the same thing. - how dull -

A good poem does not leave you wondering what the poet meant, it does have a precise meaning. Seeing a poem as an entry in a dictionary of emotional responses could be a valid view quite often. When poets vary their rhythm, metre, syntax degree of rhyme etc. it is not only a device to make the words fit, it chimes with some change in meaning or emotional state, using devices randomly devalues them.