The review
Critically claimed,
(Following his debut)
That the actor could not be blamed
For his unconvincing performance
On the evening before last,
On the grounds:
‘it was abundantly clear
From his muddled entrance’,
He had been utterly
And completely miscast.
Layer upon layer upon layer. I love the complexity! I attempted to convey this in a poem I wrote about a woman's smile. I don't know if I would have gotten the deepest layer from the words here, but your writing also does a wonderful job of conveying the emotion. Your poetry really ties together!
Thank you for your comments. I'd like to read your poem, is it on here? By the way, you may like to read poems by Gerard Manley Hopkins - a man, I believe, after my own heart.
I like this poem and I especially like how the title conveys the meaning without those words being repeated in the text of the poem. So we think we're reading about a play, when in actuality we are reading about an unsuccessful love story...?
This poem, like Gros Michel, is deliberately ambiguous. I enjoy playing with language finding ways to indirectly convey meaning. The meaning of this poem goes even deeper. The actor has been miscast both for his role in the play and for his greater role as a man.
This poem has not been translated into any other language yet.
I would like to translate this poem
it was abundantly clear From his muddled entrance’, love and acting, being a miscast because he was muddled.......... life, love, symbol of acting and smybol of failure. so i understood this poem. i do not know whether i am correct. thank you dear poet. tony