[Eŋg]

i did not at all like your use of the comma to fragment syntax and maintain a rhyme scheme. i've done it, admittedly, and i'm usually good at masking it between flowery abstractions or a less obviously contrived slice of rhyme-smith. i.e. once in a four mile radius. you did it a few times in the first stanza - as if you were making a point. idk. i do like structure. i appreciate meter, i hate studying it. i just noticed your comma breaks and didn't like them so i wrote a preamble to that effect. how unnecessary, right?

always a pleasure to sample the bizarre combination of words you put together for rhythm... the potent imagery they conjure and abstract concepts are knitted together in a whimsical narrative often boasting an overarching theme, if not several slivers of morality in between the fantasy. or both, why not? you have your style, and it IS very much yours, down to a science.

Meet the portrait of Dr. Cenotaph, and his real grave expression

Don't be needlessly embarrassed, since an outstretched psalm
can go out on a grotesque limb & reach toward the cloud drenched fog

those were both clever, amongst others. i remember reading your poetry and occasionally seeing inspired treatment of well-tread ideas or phrases having undergone a slight, or violent, paradigm shift. it's arguably the most reverential aspect of your pen. to me, at least. this might be the only second time i've seen Kierkegaard mentioned in this OM. i can't remember where the first came from. this was more typical of your writing than the one i read last... the b-hop one -- which was still dope, and had your style, but it felt like you'd refined yourself to be more easily consumed/accessible, a compromise i've rarely seen you make, if ever (outside of that piece) but it matched the object you wrote about. the rhyming was really crisp, although i took the slightest of issues with banker bloc/shangri la. i said it to myself a few times and suppose it works. anyway, back to the last piece i read from you, and this one -- i think i'm seeing a wit develop in your pieces with greater prevalence than i can remember. it compliments the already-established staples of your writing very well. it's dope. continue to sharpen it.

so was this an allusion or allegory to recent events? it could have been something more timeless, less topical. conditions are common. not sure if it was rhetoric, or not, or which way it hoped to bend the ear/sway impressions.

thanks for the read, all the same.