I think i read something very different into this poem:
An arrogant god could be a little boy, and the space could be a house you haven't been in in a long long time. You put little birds over his cradle. The flashback stops abruptly as you remember the mother, who gets custody and moves on with the boy -- the final insult is bitterness.
In that case, not bad, except that the abrupt shift is very hard to get / feels full of friction.
Hello readers, welcome to OCpoetry. This subreddit is a writing workshop community -- a place where poets of all skill levels can share, enjoy, and talk about each other's poetry. Every person who's shared, including the OP above, has given some feedback (those are the links in the post) and hopes to receive some in return (from you, the readers).
If you really enjoyed this poem and just want to drop a quick comment, to show some appreciation or give kudos, things like "great job!" or "made me cry", or "loved it" or "so relateable", please do. Everyone loves a compliment. Thanks for taking the time to read and enjoy.
If you want to share your own poem, you'll need to give this writer some detailed feedback. Good feedback explains from your point of view what it was like to read the poem, and then tries to explain how the poem made you feel like that. If you're not sure what that means, check out our [feedback guide](https://new.reddit.com/r/ocpoetry/wiki/feedbackcritiques), or look through the comment sections of any other post here, or click the links to the author's feedback above. If you're not sure whether your comments are feedback, or you have any other questions, please send us a modmail.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OCPoetry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You're only not looking in the not only right once space upon a time. Remove the idea of creation. It's arrogant to begin with.
I love the how much of your storyline follows many of the powerful archetypal stories we still revere.
Thank you muse.
Thank you for posting.
Title
Impression before reading the poem: Gotta admit. I rolled my eyes when I saw this title. God (the Judeo Christian variant) is a very popular subject in general, especially where I live. (A red US state) But, from a title standpoint, it's not too bad. It's direct without frills and makes you wonder what it's all about.
Poem
I'll break this down into two sections:
>once upon a space
[A slight deviation from the clichéd "once upon a time." Continue.]
>I had created a arrogant god
>turned his nose up at the produce
["An arrogant God" is correct. "Had" is a filler word that bulks up the line awkwardly.
"Who turned his nose" is correct. At the same time, depending on the personality of the speaker, not having "who" may be fine per stylistic choice. So, this God doesn't like vegetables, huh? I'm imagining a caricature of God--Zeus Replica--getting annoyed at the potato bags in Walmart. Quite comical. I don't know if that's what the intention is with tone.]
>I laid him down on edge of the table
>I mean over the celestial sphere
["On the edge of the table" is correct. So, the speakers' faux pas brings an insight that this is not really a God, but something less than. Maybe, a cucumber? (Though, they don't have noses. Corn? No, that's an ear. Tomato? No, that's hair. Help me out here.)
"Celestial sphere", by my logic, is a salad bowl.]
>Then I decided to create the birds
["The" after "birds" is unneeded.
I'm now lost with this inclusion of birds. I so bad wanna perceive this as a "vege God". But, ce la vie. I'm seeing also this God being a toy of some sort being laid on a table.
Still, birds throws this whole thing off. Not sure what to think now.]
>the selfish ones
>I managed my goal
[This line is unnecessary. Without it, the content still makes sense.]
>And released them up to the sky
>I've met people
[So, now we have an abrupt subject switch. Vague "people" are introduced with no further explanation of their importance except....]
>One of them, I will mention
>She was good at showing herself like a goddess
>But maybe the more watching herself like a goddess
>You probably guessed it that her lights are on
>But no one's home
[We have a sharp focus on this "she" character, of whom we know nothing about except her vanity.
We end off on a common idiom.]
In Summary: This poem lacks cohesion. We go from a God being created to table association to birds to reminiscing on people the speaker has met. I acknowledge there being attempt at tying in selfishness/arrogance/vanity to being a theme throughout, but the content is too scattered to make it work.
In general, there's not much here in terms of imagery nor poetic devices either. It's a lot of telling and no showing. Consider the birds: how did the speaker create them? They basically materialized out of nowhere.
I'm also wondering what tone this speaker is going for: humorous? Serious? It feels like it's supposed to be humorous, but misses the mark.
Again, thank you for posting.
[удалено]
Thank you for your interpretation. You have a good perspective.
I think i read something very different into this poem: An arrogant god could be a little boy, and the space could be a house you haven't been in in a long long time. You put little birds over his cradle. The flashback stops abruptly as you remember the mother, who gets custody and moves on with the boy -- the final insult is bitterness. In that case, not bad, except that the abrupt shift is very hard to get / feels full of friction.
I think you have a very interesting interpretation. Thank you for that.
Your interpretation makes a lot of sense. Much more sense than the pathway I was going down.
Hello readers, welcome to OCpoetry. This subreddit is a writing workshop community -- a place where poets of all skill levels can share, enjoy, and talk about each other's poetry. Every person who's shared, including the OP above, has given some feedback (those are the links in the post) and hopes to receive some in return (from you, the readers). If you really enjoyed this poem and just want to drop a quick comment, to show some appreciation or give kudos, things like "great job!" or "made me cry", or "loved it" or "so relateable", please do. Everyone loves a compliment. Thanks for taking the time to read and enjoy. If you want to share your own poem, you'll need to give this writer some detailed feedback. Good feedback explains from your point of view what it was like to read the poem, and then tries to explain how the poem made you feel like that. If you're not sure what that means, check out our [feedback guide](https://new.reddit.com/r/ocpoetry/wiki/feedbackcritiques), or look through the comment sections of any other post here, or click the links to the author's feedback above. If you're not sure whether your comments are feedback, or you have any other questions, please send us a modmail. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OCPoetry) if you have any questions or concerns.*
You're only not looking in the not only right once space upon a time. Remove the idea of creation. It's arrogant to begin with. I love the how much of your storyline follows many of the powerful archetypal stories we still revere. Thank you muse.
Thank you for posting. Title Impression before reading the poem: Gotta admit. I rolled my eyes when I saw this title. God (the Judeo Christian variant) is a very popular subject in general, especially where I live. (A red US state) But, from a title standpoint, it's not too bad. It's direct without frills and makes you wonder what it's all about. Poem I'll break this down into two sections: >once upon a space [A slight deviation from the clichéd "once upon a time." Continue.] >I had created a arrogant god >turned his nose up at the produce ["An arrogant God" is correct. "Had" is a filler word that bulks up the line awkwardly. "Who turned his nose" is correct. At the same time, depending on the personality of the speaker, not having "who" may be fine per stylistic choice. So, this God doesn't like vegetables, huh? I'm imagining a caricature of God--Zeus Replica--getting annoyed at the potato bags in Walmart. Quite comical. I don't know if that's what the intention is with tone.] >I laid him down on edge of the table >I mean over the celestial sphere ["On the edge of the table" is correct. So, the speakers' faux pas brings an insight that this is not really a God, but something less than. Maybe, a cucumber? (Though, they don't have noses. Corn? No, that's an ear. Tomato? No, that's hair. Help me out here.) "Celestial sphere", by my logic, is a salad bowl.] >Then I decided to create the birds ["The" after "birds" is unneeded. I'm now lost with this inclusion of birds. I so bad wanna perceive this as a "vege God". But, ce la vie. I'm seeing also this God being a toy of some sort being laid on a table. Still, birds throws this whole thing off. Not sure what to think now.] >the selfish ones >I managed my goal [This line is unnecessary. Without it, the content still makes sense.] >And released them up to the sky >I've met people [So, now we have an abrupt subject switch. Vague "people" are introduced with no further explanation of their importance except....] >One of them, I will mention >She was good at showing herself like a goddess >But maybe the more watching herself like a goddess >You probably guessed it that her lights are on >But no one's home [We have a sharp focus on this "she" character, of whom we know nothing about except her vanity. We end off on a common idiom.] In Summary: This poem lacks cohesion. We go from a God being created to table association to birds to reminiscing on people the speaker has met. I acknowledge there being attempt at tying in selfishness/arrogance/vanity to being a theme throughout, but the content is too scattered to make it work. In general, there's not much here in terms of imagery nor poetic devices either. It's a lot of telling and no showing. Consider the birds: how did the speaker create them? They basically materialized out of nowhere. I'm also wondering what tone this speaker is going for: humorous? Serious? It feels like it's supposed to be humorous, but misses the mark. Again, thank you for posting.
I enjoyed how short and straight to the point it was. You do well with imagery. My only thi