Figurative Language In Weeping Willow

Internal Comments:
There is a lot of nice (figurative) language used throughout this piece, and the imagery created by the cyclic titles is simply gorgeous. While the idea behind the poem is quite unique, the way that it is expressed in some sections is trite. In addition, the poem requires further development, particularly near the ending, as it seems to rely more on the subsection titles than actual narrative development to bring the piece back together full circle. It definitely has a lot of potential though!

To the First Reader:
Dear Elena Kaye, thank you for your commentary on submission 10580 (“Weeping Willow”). Your specific comments maintain a nice balance between critiques (e.g. on grammatical mistakes) as well as compliments on the piece’s diction. The way that you have phrased your constructive criticism, moreover, is particularly gentle, which I am sure will be beneficial to the writer as they progress forward with their piece. Please make sure to use the proper grammatical words (e.g. “principal” rather than “principle”) and format your comments to read Specific Commentary and General Commentary rather than Specific and General, and keep up the great work. I was particularly impressed by the fact that this is

This is an incredibly well-written and polished submission. The idea of “ouroboros” - a dragon or serpent eating its own tail - speaks to the cyclical nature of life and death. Coupled with the following title of “baptism” and “exsanguination”, the poem beautifully wraps itself up full circle back to the original image of the weeping willow, but instead of feeling lost and hopeless, the narrator has found a sense of self and identity beneath the tree. Your usage of figurative language is rich and full of life, and the instances of repetition (e.g. “eldritch roots”) rarely come across repetitive as they are viewed and presented in a new line: a tone of hope rather than one of