MMLP:
Solid piece, a couple of odd rhyme placements that threw me off - admittedly I don't only look for end rhymes but, I do expect some cohesion at the end and when they jarringly switch to midpoint rhyming and then back it's disrupting to my expectations and stalls my read.
took me awhile to catch on to the piece you were creating - I don't know much about history, but Blitz caught me up to speed and without skipping ahead, the end was "pull the curtain back" confirmation. that said, and with the grain of salt that I DON'T know my history, I'm not sure I can identify how many foreshadowings happened towards this twist. I would like there to be more, but maybe there was and I'm just blind to them.
it felt like it jumped through some historic repurposing and tied it all to chess (which given the topic is obviously fair) likewise, it did seem to touch on a lot of the concepts in the image (even the slightly hard to notice bits), but despite this... I wish chess had nothing to do with it. I dunno, seemed aggressively obvious. maybe I'll do the Lars thing and break down what I would have done.
anyways. it was an alright piece, not a finals piece though.
Dom:
in recognition of me just saying "god I wish it didn't have to do with chess", I'll rephrase a tad bit: "I wish it either went harder on the chess angle or not at all" - to which I think you did a valid job of leaning fully into the chess angle.
your rhyme scheme was generally smoother than your opponent, and I try to think critically about "is it just bc the end rhymes" which DO make a smoother read for me. but fuck y'all, my vote is from my perspective. there were less jarring rhymes, and less flipping of the scheme in unexpected ways - which, if done right, can be a boon, but if done poorly can just interfere.
I also caught on mega-quick to the idea of the piece, being a computational device that plays chess, which made the read through much smoother the first time around. things clicked instead of being like "ok why... that phrase" etc. which (again, not a history buff) your opponent failed to provide to me.
I also appreciate the subtle control of the topic you exhibited (and that was readily picked up on) - little touch about the pendulum to address the hanging item, the endless loop of "users" for the heads, fragile egos for the tears, it all tied nicely together. I think the only thing I don't see that you clearly brought in were the pieces that were behind the chair - seeming to push it forward. maybe I just missed it.
all that said,
MVGT Dom, a much more finals ready verse.
and to strike a Lars note:
I would have approached this from a dating app experience - the pressure of society to be in a relationship hanging over you, the subtle games people play instead of just talking clearly, the mistakes you made in your past following you relentlessly as you press forward, and the just bland consistency in the dating pool as you swipe - yet, they all seem to brand themselves as good options, a crown of game pieces as if they've mastered dating.
cheers!
|