| Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments |
|
The Rocketsâ Song (Free verse) by Dovina Alignment with this war
has awakened hope,
for war is life to us,
not deathâ
romantic violence,
chivalrous at last
under technologyâs rule.
The President called
as Pope Urban did,
preaching the first Crusade,
admonishing us,
who waged wars
for self-interest and plunder,
to remake ourselvesâ
Soldiers of Democracy,
achievers of stature,
of warrior nostalgia.
I was fired with utopian ideals then,
engaged in the tragedy of war,
among frauds and adventurers
ânow a lingering silenceâ
Up the ladder:
In response to
Down the ladder:
My Brain
Votes: (green: user, blue: anonymous)
Arithmetic Mean: 7.0
Posted: December 5, 2004 10:45 AM PST; Last modified: December 5, 2004 10:45 AM PSTWeighted score: 5.537883 Overall Rank: 2562 Comments:
could be a bit more intruging
Are rockets are a phallic symbol in the title?
...for war is life to us, -not deathâ(Is this death necessary?}. Yep,war is romantic until it touches you with stray bit o' metal. -9- Ask Michael Moore for the extra point to make it a ten.
Must everything be phallic?
Yes.
Those who find phalluses (phalli?) in everything have their heads up their ass. It happens to be a very useful shape, whether for cocks, rockets, train tunnels, or rifles. That's all it is - a useful shape. The world needs to get over it.
You need to get over it.
THANK YOU!!! Though the debate over such thoughts can inspire interesting poetry. If nothing else.
373 view(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
In Arabic, the expression "she thought" sounds like "fuck-rat"; the expression "he thought" sounds like "fuck-'er".
The idea that you use "ordinary words with their ordinary definitions" to point out anything is preposterous. That's exactly what -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. does and you don't. That's how he knew that "shocked" and "dismay" are, respectively, adjective and noun forms of the same fucking thing, and "urging" doesn't mean what you think it does, and you didn't.
For another thing, -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. didn't impute anything, you dumb fuck. And would you not agree that it's boringly characteristic of you to misuse a word during a conversation about using words according to their precise meanings?
For another thing, no one's fucking been talking about the meaning "plum" carries, normally or otherwise. Oh, except you, just now. The point is not that Briticisms, Americanisms, or what have you use words differently from their dictionary meanings; that's not even your original point.
And besides, if you'd bothered to check, you'd know that "plum" as used on poemranker actually means 'a large purplish kind of mealy fruit'. Good one!
I do wish you'd calm down sometimes.
If you think -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. is some hopeless relic of the aristocracy because he uses obscure slangy expressions while you, Dovina, champion the proletariat by supporting dictionary definitions and disdaining slang, you're totally backwards. Besides, if you think that, you'll have utterly reversed/contraried yourself from your last month's bungled argument.
As everyone in the world knows, most slang expressions are made up by the poorer classes. It's in their interest, since it's a stick in the eye of the aristocracy, and since they probably won't get really get real language usage anyway. It's in the upper-classes' interest to defend dictionary definitions; besides, the aristocracy and people controlled by the aristocracy write dictionaries, so it's in their interest to include their own special meanings in them. You'll notice that in cases of slang expressions invented by the aristocracy (i.e., "Jolly good!" or the way many Brits say "Right!" every couple of seconds), the words are mostly used according to their dictionary definitions, while most proletarian slang terms I can think of depend on using a word removed from (or only slightly related to) its original meaning - like "to shag", "fucking", or "dyke".
In short, of course -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. is a relic of the aristocracy. Everyone knows that. Unfortunately for you, that only means anything to someone who'd assign value to a person based on his class, which is called racist. And if you've proved anything here, it's just that -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I. is an aristocrat badly imitating proletarian slang expressions and you're a proletarian (or middle-classer, more likely,) badly imitating aristocratic dictionary-love, which everybody knows already. And you come out a lot worse for it.
PS-Don't talk about slang anymore until you get some kind of idea about it. Slang is designed to be unintelligible to everyone who's not "special" enough to be let in on it. Consider: when enough people start getting a slang term, the originators usually change terms. Jargon is designed to be intelligible to everyone in the field to which it applies. Jargon is only useful if both parties in a dialogue know what it means. Slang is even cooler when one of the parties doesn't know what it means. In most other ways, the two words are unrelated except in your dim conception of them. And "plum" on poemranker actually means plum, you dimtard!!!
In short, your totally backwards again. Be ashamed.
Of course, I would never dare suggest I wasn't a pretentious self-deceiver. Would you?
lol 'embodiement of thwarted lives'. Good grief you couldn't be more wrong. 'Through a Superman or Spiderman'? That's hilarious. It's hilarious because you included the 'or Spiderman', as if Spiderman some how has particular qualities, distinct from those of Superman, or any other generic superhero, that may or may not be more suited to the -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. persona. Well your colossally wrong big time. It's patently obvious to anyone who 'gets' -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I., that he is an attempt at seeking betterment through a Batman. Something that is completely different from seeking betterment through a Superman, or even a Spiderman. You fool.
"The project might even attract me if the character were not so obnoxious."
How gallant of you to decline our offer. In fact the -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. team were so desperate for your input, that one of my colleagues burst into tears when he heard you weren't interested in the project. We'll try and carry on without you, but I fear it will be an uphill struggle. :(
Your misunderstandings of regional variations in language use alone form a vast, whooshing catalogue of "hobo guss". When taken together with your shocking physical, personal, social, and ethical deformities, it's a wonder you can even struggle into your full-body wellington in the morning, let alone summon up the energy to make mistake after terrifying mistake on the internet.
Case in point: "colossal" is spelled "colossal."
Try this: The difference between Superman and Spiderman is Superman was born on Krypton, Spiderman was born on Earth. And Superman works for the Daily Planet, Spiderman works for the Daily Bugle.
The difference between Batman and most heroes is Batman is a millionaire recluse who gets out of tough spots by using the gadgets on his toolbelt. In his latter days, he's a wheelchair bound superrecluse mentor to a string of protege Batpeople. and he's not even a reporter at all.
Are you suggesting -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I., is seeking betterment through either an alien or a genetically-enhanced human? Of course not! You just think it's cool to seem to make more-or-less irrelevant distinctions between virtually indistinguishable things, and not get real distinctions between discrete things. In your real, outside life, people probably nod politely and say "Oh, yeah your right," and then conveniently neglect to invite you to St Crispin's Day parties.
Quote: "Does anyone not suspect he is the embodiment of thwarted lives seeking betterment through a Superman or Spiderman."
I mean forget about the details of any given superhero. The sentence just doesn't make any sense.
1. Superman does not "play" or "embody" Superman -- he *is* Superman. He doesn't pretend to have Super-powers -- he does have them. (The same goes for Spiderman, and indeede Batman.) If anything, he is playing at being Clark Kent. This is the exact reverse of your claim.
2. Furthermore, Superman and Spiderman, the two superheroes heroes you mentioned, aren't log-ins to an internet forum that multiple people use. They are single people. (Ironically, comparing -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. to Batman would have made more sense, since according to zodiac, Batman is an identity taken on by more than person.
3. I suppose you will retort by saying that *reading* about Superman is an escapist fantasy of the sort your mentioning. Probably your higgledy-piggledy mind can't understand the difference between "embodying" a shero and "vicariously living" through reading about his exploits.
You've mussed-up everything, Dovina. Everything.
The mythical comparison, as you have stated it, is between the escapist fantasy of a reader of superhero comic books and the alleged escapist fantasy of -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. Do you know what a comparison is? It consists of listing the similarities and differences between the two compared things, perhaps with some sort of conclusion at the end.
So far you haven't listed any similarities or differences between the escapist fantasies of superhero comic book readers and the alleged escapist fantasies of -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I., except to say that they are both escapist fantasies, which is not a comparison at all, because the question is how they compare *qua* escapist fantasies.
Specifically, superheroes aren't "extremely arrogant." They don't "assert themselves to be innately better." They don't have an "obsession with demeaning the lower classes and instilling what they hope to be pain." By extension, the escapist fantasies of readers of these comics probably don't have these features.
You could make a more profitable comparison between the escapist fantasies of the writers of supervillain comics and the alleged escapist fantasies of -=Dark_Angel=-, P.I. Remember, though, what a comparison is. You can't just say "I compare these two things."
Christmas Greetings and Holiday Cheer.
A year later and not much has changed.
Someday you may find your existence defined by an ache in some part of your anatomy, (Oh, youâve felt it before, but this time itâs different), and you begin to doubt that the planets revolve about you according to the logical rules you have believed for so long. You may then laugh upon reading some writer who inspires the ache, and thus feel less alone with the sting.
Merry Christmas,
Dovina
Or that your "arguements", like so many sunwilted and spoiled-smelling meat-hats, have collapsed around your greasy ears, so the only thing you can think to do is Poot loudly enough to cover the sickly squelch?
This simple truth has eluded you as has the falsehood of the rest of your rant about the natures of women. But like I said above, you are right in character now, irritating, insinuating, drumming up reaction from the common folk for your insults.
Are there any fields of knowledge you are not prepared to propose absurd falsehoods in?
Look, I feel bad for you. I really do. And I want this to end, honestly. Why can't you just START MAKING SENSE, for Chrissakes? This is a site for reading and critiquing POEMS, not for hurling around unfounded personal attacks and groundless suggestions that someone is (or isn't) a superhero or Hitler. Jeez!