If you're on the fence:
He's not worth your hope
And everyone knows it
(Or he totally is
And a few people do);
He's a heart-scoring scalpel
That he's named “confidence”
(Or he turns blind and dizzy
Moving in to your view).
If you're at the fence:
You have too much trust
In the soul-depth of skin
(Or you want to look past,
But that film's all you see);
You want to be a part of
What he pretends he is
(Or you haven't seen his best
There, waiting to be).
If you're in the fence:
It's yours – and you tied it
To make your lawn look square
(Or to bring some shade
That, sun-lit, looks like a hole);
You need to jump out
For the dim or the bright
(Or spread, like fine roots,
Through the line you've poled).
I like how this poem takes the overused metaphor of being "on the fence" about something and re-words the phrase slightly (changing "on" to "at" and "in"). What seems like such a minor change in wording majorly changes the meaning of the metaphor. I think about it literally: if you're on the fence, you can see both sides--if you're AT, however, you can't see anything: you're facing the fence head-on as it's overshadowing you. It's this change in each stanza where I really feel a tone shift.
ReplyDelete