What thinkst thou of this light-ful verse of mine/ gleaming in a bowl of sun-lit moonshine.(?)?

Question

I’m bound to you not by an iron chain

Nor do faceless charms reign in my soul

For love’s florid wreath, in me does attain

A light-ful heart that seeks to make us whole

And none dares disrespect this love-ful lace

In delicacies equal to your hair

Whose golden sheen wavers in hatred’s face

Its beauty stripping him from ill-wills bare

Answer 1

worst thing i've read in a while.  i know you're probably one of those fools who believes that the act, art, of putting a string of words together enables your very soul, and gives you an overwhelming out of body experience- but the fact remains that you control the words, and trying to bring back an old world sense of speech and romance, or whatever, is not the way- you are not good at it, and you sound like a fool.  if a lady, or a dude, dug it, leave it at that.  stop trying so hard to impress.

Answer 2

Didn't I tell you to quit smoking that stuff?

Answer 3

Lines 1,2, and 4 are strong but L3 not only disrupts the metrical flow, it also seems semantically disconnected from the other lines in the first quatrain.  You must I am afraid rewrite L3 to establish that semantic link.  This reads like the first two quatrains of an Elizabethan sonnet, but when you disrupt the semantic chain in this manner you do not establish rhetorically the axis of argument that a sonnet is meant to establish.  This is a tricky matter, because you are trying to satisfy simultaneously several problems of composition: semantic continuity coupled with proper use of rhetorical figures, accentual syllabic flow (iambic pentameter), rhyme scheme (ababcdcdefefgg), appropriate allusive texture, and consonance of imagery.  Viewed within the perspective of these constraints, you have created two quatrians that, while not lacking in artistic merit, somehow fall short of fully satisfying those constraints.  While I am embarrassed by the mean-spiritedness of previous respondents, one of them has, among irrelevant and unjustified disdain, articulated something of value. Let me try to say it a bit more nicely and far more constructively: endeavor to write in a manner that uses more modern phrasing.  This does not mean that you must assume that the reader can appreciate only something pedestrian.  Assume you are writing for a discerning consumer of poetry who understands all of the conventions of sonnet construction and who has a thorough familiarity with all of Shakespeare's 154 sonnets, but who also prefers to read and write in a modern diction on some of those same themes.  It will be much easier to arrange the continuity of your argument.  Now relax the rhyming constraint and write instead only for consonance if that facilitates the "rhyming" of ideas and images, but make your meter perfect and precise, i.e. write in blank verse.  This is standard pedagogical practice; if we are overwhelmed by constraints, we loosen them in the service of propeling our line of argumentation forward.  Decide exactly what that argument is before you begin and what you want to say to construct it: where must you start, where will you go, where must you finish!  If your reader is reasonably intelligent and somehow is lost in the argument, then the fault lies with the poet.  I read and write poetry, teach writing workshops, and I suppose I am intelligent (IQ 180, Cattell Verbal Index 226), and find weaknesses and places for improvement in your quatrains.  Relax those constraints and speak to me in your own language; I too love Shakespeare, but feel that I honor him more by speaking and writing from my own perspective and in my own language so that living members of the community of intelligent poets can appreciate me more fully.  Give it a try, and you will never need to feel defeated.  In the interim, just ignore the shallow fools who heap derision on you that would more appropriately be placed closer to home.  Bless you and keep working on this.