we want in waves
a memory/your memory is
the apple skin/
is the
living sea/is
Jacque Cousteau
in the adventures of a/
silent world/in
which way does the
right way/go/in the
vanilla valley of the
buffalo roam/do we
proceed swimming-
ly/do does the
language/does do
our semantics/do does
our syntax betray
some inner notion of/
gestural decay/
can you/
will you/
look at me with your
knees/your stomach/
we have eyes
in our speech/yours
are blue/hummingbird/
mine green/i will tie this to
balloons/so you will never/
I'm trying to pin down why your style works so well for me. The images are mostly very distinct, you tend toward a lot of categorically related visuals (things that are oceanic, edible, animals, or some combination there-of appear a lot) and taste. The attention to taste is refreshing and permeates in a way the visuals only do after you repeat them a few times.

I think the syntactical play in the middle works well. The slashes instead of spaces make this very staccato and emphasize the sonics. Rearranging little words like "do," "does," "we," and using them in unusual places works really well for you here and in the other poem "o." you posted recently. The ideas on communication in this are great.

At the same time, I think "hummingbird" falls flat the way it's inserted. It seems purposefully rearranged like the smaller words I mentioned but it doesn't work the same way. It doesn't add much sonically, and the slashes emphasize that, make it seem more of an aside. Seems like an image for an image's sake.