Benjibopper

But at least you'll get to dublin before me.
 

You know, the first time I read this poem...well, after the third time I saw it differently.

Also, I just went over to just to look at his work again. It struck me that I kind of like your poem paired with his watercolor of the tree with the sun poking through. (middle pix on right).

The orange glow in the background: the sun, or a city or nuclear plant burning? The still, lifeless water, with a vapor (poisonous?) slowing rising, perhaps bubbling from the surface.

Just as your poem changed a bit on me, indeed, his painting did as well.
 

Memo to Self:
Remember to use quotes on links!

Sorry.
(the link is to the Art of Benjamin Sr)
 

Trev, if I get to Dublin before me you must be taking one very convoluted route.

Anon, knowing his work as I do, I'm pretty sure it's not meant to be of disaster. But I also know that he likes hearing other people's interpretations of his works and learning how they see it. I'm the same way about my writing, being my father's son. But if I may be so vain, can you give me the specifics of how it changed for you?
 

My initial reading of the poem gave me the feeling that it was about pollution, and the destruction of the environment. I think that the “poisoning everything around me” set me into that train of though.

But, really by the end of the first reading, the pollution motif seemed less plausible. In fact, it felt a bit far from plausible. And now, after reading the poem again, I wonder how I even thought that at all.

Second read, I felt more the feeling of extremes and opposites that eventually come to the same outcome, but not quite comfortable in believing that was the total meaning of the poem.

The third read I felt more a sense of desperation upon the part of the author. Desperation not only at Demagogues espousing the “high morals”, but at the rabble that don’t follow the Demagogues, and do, really, nothing to counter their actions. They, in effect, produce the same outcome as those who follow the demagogues.

(I must say, this is quite an exercise; it is very hard to remember and to write exactly what my initial interpretations were at the time. Funny, one would think it would be easier. I wish I had been more verbose at the time of my earlier post….)

As far as your fathers painting, my interpretation also changed. The first time I looked at his work, maybe a month or so ago, I did not have the feeling of destruction from that work. But, going straight to that piece, after reading the poem with destruction of society and humanity ending, I think that the painting takes on a new appearance.

Both are very interesting pieces of work that can take on such a variety of views. So, I may be wrong on all counts, but that’s the way it goes.
 

thanks anon, i think all your readings were what i intended, with increasing accuracy. it's interesting to hear your progression through it.