Having just come across this piece again recently, I thought I'd post it here to see what others think of it. It is not mine, but was written by a fellow named Neal Bowers, and was published in the March 1996 issue of "Poetry." Due to the format, some line breaks may not translate well, so I apologize in advance for any percieved injustice I may do to the poem. Additionally, I'll say that I think Neal Bowers is an excellent writer, and his books of poetry are well worth your time, so go forth and buy them.
_____________________________________________
RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Because most respondents spend most of their time
repeating whatever mantra helps them cope,
most said YES they were satisfied,
though the instrument itself did not allow
elaboration to distinguish between, say,
a soaking gladness or an intermittent
spritz that tantalizes more than it pleases,
nor can we say how much or little
of anything it takes to lift or crash the heart
of any individual, the wind
and every other variable being unpredictable
and somewhat relative, permitting
only a snapshot measurement--
the population posed momentarily and smiling
before dispersing to separate fates.
Off on the edge are others,
statistically predictable in their gloom,
a few of whom bore down so hard
when marking NO they tore the paper,
and we had to hand-score those,
though it was easy enough to read
the braille of their blinded lives,
to hear from the hole they made an emptiness;
and one or two percent
marked NO OPINION, as though remote
from their own minds, but we know
they are the timid who choose
the nearest thing to not responding
but still respond because they think they should,
which is why we always provide this category,
like putting out a certain seed to lure
the shyest bird for counting.
The fraction who did not respond at all
cannot be said to have no opinion,
though we can never say with certainty
what their silence means, if anything.
Logic dictates they must fit somewhere,
but their self-removal perhaps implies
we haven't offered enough options,
and are therefore indirectly measuring
our own failing, which we score
as their inconsequential absence.
weighty matters
H
Herring405
(view)
Having just come across this piece again recently, I thought I'd post it here to see what others think of it. It is not mine, but was written by a fellow named Neal Bowers, and was published in the March 1996 issue of "Poetry." Due to the format, some line breaks may not translate well, so I apologize in advance for any percieved injustice I may do to the poem. Additionally, I'll say that I think Neal Bowers is an excellent writer, and his books of poetry are well worth your time, so go forth and buy them.
_____________________________________________
RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Because most respondents spend most of their time
repeating whatever mantra helps them cope,
most said YES they were satisfied,
though the instrument itself did not allow
elaboration to distinguish between, say,
a soaking gladness or an intermittent
spritz that tantalizes more than it pleases,
nor can we say how much or little
of anything it takes to lift or crash the heart
of any individual, the wind
and every other variable being unpredictable
and somewhat relative, permitting
only a snapshot measurement--
the population posed momentarily and smiling
before dispersing to separate fates.
Off on the edge are others,
statistically predictable in their gloom,
a few of whom bore down so hard
when marking NO they tore the paper,
and we had to hand-score those,
though it was easy enough to read
the braille of their blinded lives,
to hear from the hole they made an emptiness;
and one or two percent
marked NO OPINION, as though remote
from their own minds, but we know
they are the timid who choose
the nearest thing to not responding
but still respond because they think they should,
which is why we always provide this category,
like putting out a certain seed to lure
the shyest bird for counting.
The fraction who did not respond at all
cannot be said to have no opinion,
though we can never say with certainty
what their silence means, if anything.
Logic dictates they must fit somewhere,
but their self-removal perhaps implies
we haven't offered enough options,
and are therefore indirectly measuring
our own failing, which we score
as their inconsequential absence.
_____________________________________________
RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE
Because most respondents spend most of their time
repeating whatever mantra helps them cope,
most said YES they were satisfied,
though the instrument itself did not allow
elaboration to distinguish between, say,
a soaking gladness or an intermittent
spritz that tantalizes more than it pleases,
nor can we say how much or little
of anything it takes to lift or crash the heart
of any individual, the wind
and every other variable being unpredictable
and somewhat relative, permitting
only a snapshot measurement--
the population posed momentarily and smiling
before dispersing to separate fates.
Off on the edge are others,
statistically predictable in their gloom,
a few of whom bore down so hard
when marking NO they tore the paper,
and we had to hand-score those,
though it was easy enough to read
the braille of their blinded lives,
to hear from the hole they made an emptiness;
and one or two percent
marked NO OPINION, as though remote
from their own minds, but we know
they are the timid who choose
the nearest thing to not responding
but still respond because they think they should,
which is why we always provide this category,
like putting out a certain seed to lure
the shyest bird for counting.
The fraction who did not respond at all
cannot be said to have no opinion,
though we can never say with certainty
what their silence means, if anything.
Logic dictates they must fit somewhere,
but their self-removal perhaps implies
we haven't offered enough options,
and are therefore indirectly measuring
our own failing, which we score
as their inconsequential absence.
