Comment 7 of 17, added on May 14th, 2013 at 4:56 AM.
AlBEve I truly appreciate this post.Really looking forward to read more.
Will read on...
best compact digital cameras
Comment 6 of 17, added on November 3rd, 2012 at 5:29 PM.
Eh96Wm Thank you ever so for you blog article.Really looking forward to
read more. Really Great.
Comment 5 of 17, added on October 18th, 2012 at 3:14 PM.
QWxfx5 Thanks for the article.Thanks Again. Great.
cheap seo services
from United States
Comment 4 of 17, added on September 20th, 2012 at 10:51 PM.
PCimPN I really like and appreciate your article.Thanks Again. Cool.
cheap seo services
from San Marino
Comment 3 of 17, added on September 20th, 2012 at 3:50 AM.
Q74mhS Really informative article post.Really thank you! Want more.
Comment 2 of 17, added on March 9th, 2012 at 2:27 AM.
UbBNA3 Say, you got a nice blog.Thanks Again. Awesome.
Microsoft OEM Software
Comment 1 of 17, added on February 1st, 2006 at 12:16 PM.
As I read this poem, I felt the stretched heartstrings of its author, but
found myself overwhelmed at the sometimes strained verbosity. Perhaps more
white space would have helped, but that would have created too stark a
division in the text.
The poet's words sometimes seemed contrived, as if a ponderous word (or
contraction) was more suited to the depth of the author's feelings than the
In particular, two criticisms are offered in the hopes that other poets
might avoid them (if, indeed, they are deemed worthy of consideration):
1. I found the use of "refulgent" to be almost arcane; would not
"resplendent" (or perhaps, "radiant") have been a more immediately grasped
word and perhaps, even more expressive of the thought? Of course,
"tintinnabulation" never hurt Poe, so perhaps this unfair.
2. The author shows excellent sense of poetic form (of which I will say
more in a moment) and I appreciated the contrast of "Death" to the the
cherub's reply. Yet, since both reside in the ethereal realm, should not
"thee/thou" have been maintained in the cherub's words, rather than the
more human-like "you/your"? It might be argued that the cherub is speaking
to the human parent, but the conversation occurs within the realm of the
spirit and it just seems that consistency in using either "thee/thou" or
"you/yours" would be in better form.
Someone has rightly observed that if one is to criticize, he must also
commend, and to that wisdom I defer. Two points:
1. I've already spoken of the author's sense of poetic form and I mention
it again, if only to point out the effectiveness of the afore-mentioned
contrast of "Death" to the comforting words of the cherub. I like the
author's use of the unidentified speaker, too. In particular, I
appreciated the stark finality of Death's effect and the same starkness in
the cherub's preachments. In fact, the author avoids one thing I find
objectionable in some poets, who sometimes overly soften words of one side
in a contrast (as if to avoid accusation or appearance of dogmatic
2. The author's use of figures (particularly simile and metaphor, as well
as personification) is very excellent. Most poets are equally as effective
in figurative speech, but I appreciated that this author never lost sight
of the celestial realm in which the conversation takes place. Even the
speaker's words ("...I seem to hear..." and "Methinks...") and the cherub's
reply ("...and serene replies..." stating "...th' intelligence") to the
parent's (singular?) heart ("grief", "...no more indulge..." and the
unstated parental wisdom) reflect the spiritual nature of the conversation.
This poem needs to be read several times to appreciate its message. That
says more about its worth than can be immediately perceived with a casual
R. P. Bell from United States
This poem has been commented on more than 10 times. Click below to see the other comments.