I found the version put up by peach to be the best one, though it appears to be an original poem rather than a revision of the original one. As regards the revised version put up by sarratackz, I am not clear what exactly is sought to be conveyed. Each commentator has applied his or her own interpretation to the poem, no one being quite sure what the original is meant to be. "They claimed it fate for you love to me". But I thought that the rules of grammar and English usage applied to poems also. This is followed by "For you to leave." What is this supposed to mean? Will the love be followed by a parting of ways? But peach seems to be writing about everlasting love.

Sarah,

How about...

In Your Eyes


Sparks from your eyes: those stars 
in purest form,
        burning blue and green as the seas.
They haunt my dreams.
In my own night I see it all:
how they fall
from the heavens of your face
and illuminate mine
spelling out destinies in old light.
I found this paradise and begged it for love. 
I dreamt oracles that divined meaning 
in the bombardment 
of your eyes and moaned
prophecies of a soul mate. 
They claimed it fate for you to love me.
For you to leave. I thought us destined, 
in your eyes. 



Sparks from ones eyes don't need a verb, especially not dripped. Sparks fly, produce trajectories, etc.
There's also no need for stars a second time, when the first time those sparks are named as stars more aptly, the repetition works against the 'heaven of your face' image. If that line is now too thin, carefully, add something else that builds on the already developing extended metaphor.

Incidentally, did I mention that I enjoy how fearlessly you are in extending metaphors. I love that about your writing.

Okay, I was going to delete 'old' in this example, until I got to soul mate and thought 'old soul' was the intention there. If so, that needs a little more help/connection, maybe?

Sparks, stars, illuminate, light, bombardment does not need bright. Bombardment is a pretty harsh word to begin with. 

It's late, I don't think I need to explain why the ending the way it is. It's just an idea, everything that came after those lines, seemed to be tying up loose ends. I prefer loose ends, the looser the better.

Love this poem. I haven't look at other versions or other crits. Just blazing through, so to speak. A pleasure to read.


Namaste,
~Tim

Hello sara,

I went back to the first version. The second was too overwhelmed by influence. The line “burning blue and green as the seas.” & “And in my own night I see it all:” were stronger than their replacements.

I found the most interesting the line 'the drip of sparks'. 
As a paradox—if that's what you meant, is the strongest part of the poem (even though I would have them fall upwards (or another way) to extend the paradox, as well as to link it with the burning blue…). Perhaps clarification for the reader helps, but far too often the poet remains subjected to the need to make simpler, instead of requiring the lazy reader to struggle with the words and their greater meanings. 

The interest stopped for me then somewhat (too much twinkle and heavens for my dark side).
Though I did like old light, and the overall sentiment of the piece.

In revision, especially when taking advice or suggestions I would recommend going deeper with the meaning instead of making clearer so as to be understood more easily. 

Keep at it.

Mark







Quote:

sarattackz wrote on Aug 12^th, 2009 at 12:12am:

sarattackz wrote on Aug 10^th, 2009 at 2:47am: