Missionaries(working title)

[Mister Emu]

Kind of simplistic, but sometimes I prefer straightforward wording...

The missionaries work
can never be complete,
'til all have seen
the wondrous joy
of our great savior's feat.

Near and far they must go
across the globe they tread
with but one goal:
to proclaim life,
the truth of God they spread.

Though dangers they be sent,
dread terrors they may face,
they'll steadfast stand,
and never blanch,
accepting all with grace.

This toil of love is theirs:
falsehoods of past to bury,
with much success,
and well earned rest,
God bless the missionary.

 

[Mister Emu]

No thoughts anyone?

No criticism?

 

[bain-druie]

No thoughts anyone?

No criticism?

I used to be an editor until I went for medicine....do you want a purely objective criticism (i.e. grammar etc.)? Not all poets do!

 

[Mister Emu]

do you want a purely objective criticism (i.e. grammar etc.)? Not all poets do!

Objective, subjective either way

I can't get better without knowing what I'm doing wrong

of course I might pull a Stewie if your too harsh
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XsIG0Xa6Sk0#t=00m55s[/youtube]

 

[bain-druie]

Here goes! Ready? :cover:

First, my poetry disclaimer, which I forgot to put on the first one I edited here. Poetry is an art form, and as such is only bound to the rules of grammar loosely, as it were. It should obey rules of rhythm, meter, etc. as well, but all of this is more arbitrary for poetry than it would be with prose. Ultimately, only the artist can decide what sounds best for their own work, and an editor has limited usefulness. So do not feel obligated to adopt any changes I suggest - only the ones I will tell you are actual definite errors.

Now, to begin:

First stanza, first line: 'missionaries' should be 'missionary's'; 'ies' is a plural ending, as opposed to 's being a possessive ending. That's an example of an actual error, not a subjective artistically open one Now that I look again, in fact, you need to reconcile your noun status throughout the piece: pick singular missionary or plural missionaries and stick with it, making sure to have all your pronouns agree also!

The rhythm is very stilted to my mind's ear, largely because you have punctuation at the end of every line. (this is a subjective artistically open editing suggestion, btw) I suggest murdering several of your commas there, they really chop up the work a bit too much. In the first stanza, for instance, the only comma I would suggest leaving in would be the one after 'complete'. The idea of breaking the poem into lines is that the pause a comma suggests in prose is suggested in poetry by a line break. If you put a comma AND a line break, it is a very long pause in the reader's mind.

I think I know where you want to be with the rhythm as far as your stanza structure, and it should work fine without some of the punctuation (I think).

I do suggest in the second stanza that you annihilate the commas after 'go' and 'tread', and substitute the one after 'goal' with a colon instead. I also suggest leaving the comma in after 'life'.

In the third stanza first line, first word, I am not sure if you meant 'though' or 'through'; either would potentially work, just making sure!

I suggest adding 'they'll' in the third line third stanza, as it keeps a pronoun consistency with the first two lines and flows better to my ear; also gives the last two lines a nice extra 'oomph'.

In fourth stanza I suggest substituting the comma after 'theirs' for another colon. You may want to reword this a bit, as the transition between the second line and the third is not smooth.

You have a good sense of rhythm, without all that punctuation!

 

[Mister Emu]

Someone else recently commented on the punctuation... it comes from me still being able to hear one of my elementary teachers scolding my punctuation saying all lines except the last one of a verse should have commas and the last one a period... I'll make some alterations

In fourth stanza I suggest substituting the comma after 'theirs' for another colon. You may want to reword this a bit, as the transition between the second line and the third is not smooth.

Hmm... Ok

Thanks for the critique