Our children are our alibis.

redarmyblues

This is the first section of a work in progress, the last line is undecided.

Our children are our alibis,
In solemn testimonny,
Swear our bona fides,
Our hearts were in the right place,
It was our mouths were in the wrong.

Any comments appreciated.

pickarooney

Lose "it was" from the last line and it scans better and uses repetition effectively while keeping the meaning.

One 'N' in 'testimony'

Who does the 'swear' refer to - us or our children?

Is the shift from present to past tense conscious?

Is bona fide a countable noun?

redarmyblues

pickarooney wrote: »

Lose "it was" from the last line and it scans better and uses repetition effectively while keeping the meaning.

One 'N' in 'testimony'

Who does the 'swear' refer to - us or our children?

Is the shift from present to past tense conscious?

Is bona fide a countable noun?

Thanks for the feedback.



As I said I am equivocal about the last line.

Testimonny was a typo.

Yes, well I mean legal a process takes place in a present but is about a past.

In historical Irish Licensing law shorthand the term Bona fides was a countable noun as in 'When we entered the premises at 2.30 in the morning the accused were present and swore to us they were Bona Fides' otherwise I think bona fides is an uncountable noun and bona fide an adjective.

Oh and yes the children are doing the swearing.

redarmyblues

OK this is nearly finished.

Our children are our alibis,
In solemn testimonny,
Swear our bona fides,
Our hearts in the right place,
If else is in the wrong.

Yet, see the moral suspect,
And the jury's folded arms,
The clerk cries out 'first witness',
As they contemplate a pram.
There is a break for argument,
And then the ruling comes,
No such testimony is admitted,
In the case of single Mum's.

Ectoplasm

A couple of things stand out with this. The last line of the first stanza is still not working although I agree with pickaroooney's earlier assessment that the 'It was' was unnecessary.

The second stanza opens with 'Yet' - the line reads better without it.

I think you'd benefit from mixing up the punctuation. At the moment the second stanza reads as one long sentance but seems to be two 'movements' - although I could be reading it wrong.

Finally the last word, 'Mum's' reads as a little too contemporary for the language you have used in the poem until that point and so it jars for me slightly.

I'm not sure how helpful this is though, as even with multiple readings, I am very unclear as to what this one is communicating.

redarmyblues

EMF2010 wrote: »

A couple of things stand out with this. The last line of the first stanza is still not working although I agree with pickaroooney's earlier assessment that the 'It was' was unnecessary.



The second stanza opens with 'Yet' - the line reads better without it.

I think you'd benefit from mixing up the punctuation. At the moment the second stanza reads as one long sentance but seems to be two 'movements' - although I could be reading it wrong.

Finally the last word, 'Mum's' reads as a little too contemporary for the language you have used in the poem until that point and so it jars for me slightly.




I'm not sure how helpful this is though, as even with multiple readings, I am very unclear as to what this one is communicating.

Thanks for your advice.

The above is a first draft and needs to be polished, e.g. I am going to use 'first witness' instead of 'exhibit one' I am doing this in bed on a ****ty phone which makes the editing process harder, since I can only see bits of the poem.

As regards 'Mum' jarring at the last line, I could have said something like

And then the ruling uttered,
No such testimony is admitted,
In the case of single Mothers.

But the change in tone is intentional.

If you understand the meaning of the first line the rest should be easy................ Edit. major typo in the last line 'so' ought to have been 'no'.