Re: Coney Island Fall by ecargo	amanda_dcosta 203.145.159.44	4-Feb-06/10:31 AM
I don't get it. Is this some kind of a roller-coaster ride called a cyclone or something like a giant ferrous wheel? Am I hot. Fill me in.
Re: a comment on I'm there by amanda_dcosta	amanda_dcosta 203.145.159.44	4-Feb-06/10:20 AM
Alchemy, as you know, the first line is stolen (I mean borrowed).And the truth is the first line of the third verse too is borrowed. I logged into a poet's help site, and there was this random pick for opening lines. I picked a couple of them and made it the structure for my poem. I also did a dive into meanings and phrases today after you adviced me to look up alternate meanings and what it might suggest. It helped, thanks. And I found out that silence induces a sense of creepiness, or that something creeps in the dark and silence. Why not turn it into something positive esp. when referred to being in a nursery ( a place where children / plants / saplings are nutured. So I thought over it and decided that graces indeed creeps up when we are 'Still' and nutured in the presence of the Lord. do I justify myself for what I wrote? I did give it a lot off thought and study. Alchemy, you were a big help. Thank you. By the way, the rest of the stuff is totally mine.
Re: a comment on I'm there by amanda_dcosta	amanda_dcosta 203.145.159.44	4-Feb-06/10:07 AM
Dovina.....kindly don't mistake this for Psalm 23. This psalm was the inspiration behind what i wrote. This beautiful psalm is an expression of david's trust in the Lord; I agree, I will never be able to write as beautifully as he did, but this poem that I wrote was an outpouring of my soul to the Lord..... it made ME feel beautiful inside.... and that's one of the reason's it's titled 'I'm there'.
Re: Exodus of Babylon by SupremeDreamer	ecargo 172.136.109.231	4-Feb-06/9:53 AM
I like this--the bitter energy of it, the random rhymes/near rhymes (ash, flesh), the cohesiveness of it. Some good lines too--euphoric pilgrimage. Watch the cliches (ravaged soul, piece of my heart, all-embracing). Nits: one's, not ones. The 'n's for "ands" don't seem to serve any purpose; more distracting than anything. Cool.
Re: a comment on Even the elephants by ecargo	ecargo 172.136.109.231	4-Feb-06/9:49 AM
Ha--yeah, that crazy sky and its lampshade. The trees hide the sky and the trees hide the elephants, that's all I meant, but yeah, good point. The em-dash stands in for "for." Me and my ems. Too close to this--if/when I rewrite, I'll definitely consider your suggestions. Thanks for the thoughtful comments and for spending the time, lady.
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	ecargo 172.136.109.231	4-Feb-06/9:42 AM
"Pseudepigrapha, from Greek pseudos = "false", "epigrapha" = "inscriptions"— see Epigraphy— are falsely attributed works, texts whose claimed authorship is unfounded. For instance, few Hebrew scholars would insist that the Song of Solomon was actually written by the king of Israel or ascribe the Book of Enoch to the prophet Enoch, and few Christian scholars would insist today that the Second Epistle of John was written by John the Evangelist. Nevertheless, in some cases, especially for books belonging to a religious canon, the question of whether a text is pseudepigraphical elicits sensations of loyalty and can become a matter of heavy dispute. The authenticity or value of the work itself, which is a separate question for experienced readers, often becomes sentimentally entangled in the association. Though the inherent value of the text may not be called into question, the weight of a revered or even apostolic author lends authority to a text. This is the essential motivation for pseudepigraphy in the first place." Many of the writings attributed (by name or implication) to Solomon are now considered psuedepigraphical, because of anomolies with regard to dates, language, etc. It doesn't mean that the works are any less beautiful, inspiring, valuable, etc., just means that they weren't necessarily written by Solomon (or any other kings of Jerusalem).
Re: I'm there by amanda_dcosta	ALChemy 24.74.100.11	4-Feb-06/9:09 AM
Stanzas 2 and 4 are weaker and are more cliche than the other two. You should stay more with the nature theme in stanzas 2 and 4. Change "graces creep to fill" to "graces creek fills". "Creep" is just a creepy word and doesn't quite fit in with the poem. Some really great lines in this poem though.
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	ALChemy 24.74.100.11	4-Feb-06/8:26 AM
I don't know.
Re: Inoperative Head Mechanism by D. $ Fontera	Dovina 67.72.98.100	4-Feb-06/8:01 AM
Funny. The first line is wordy.
Re: I'm there by amanda_dcosta	Dovina 67.72.98.100	4-Feb-06/7:58 AM
If you are like one of the sheep in Ps. 23, then I think stiking closer to that image would help. The last line and the "restful waters" line are there, but the "love never . . ." line is from Paul. On the other hand, it's pretty hard to write it better than David did.
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	Dovina 67.72.98.100	4-Feb-06/7:50 AM
Okay, I've looked around, scratched my head. Are we on a ballfield?
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	Dovina 67.72.98.100	4-Feb-06/7:26 AM
A good woman admits her mistakes. "She speaks with wisdom, and faithful instruction is on her tongue." Proverbs 31:26 NIV. Most of what I've heard you say is like that.
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	ALChemy 24.74.100.11	4-Feb-06/6:13 AM
Dovina, who's on third base?
Re: a comment on I'm there by amanda_dcosta	amanda_dcosta 203.145.159.44	4-Feb-06/5:10 AM
Maybe it should be something related to Psalm 23, . This was the inspiration behind the poem. 'I'm there' is more like this being the dream scene, and I'm part of it. Thanks Paul for the review.
Re: Whales in Gastineau Channel by zodiac	some deleted user 204.97.18.221	4-Feb-06/5:05 AM
Why start over? This is good just the way it is.
Re: I'm there by amanda_dcosta	some deleted user 204.97.18.221	4-Feb-06/4:58 AM
Nice Amanda. I think a different title could add to this poem, I'm not quite there with "I'm there." Something a little more profound maybe? Other than that I think this is one of your better posts.
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	god'swife 71.103.98.44	4-Feb-06/12:06 AM
You are absolutely right. I was under the wrong impression. Ecclesiastes was written by a son of David, king of Jerusalem. Though there is some controversy about which one. Ecclesiaticus is a completly other book. Thank God we had this conversation. Also NIV is translated directly from hebrew & greek. They adhere the philosophy that the intention of the words is what needs to be translated and not the literal words. On their website they give the example of the word 'Vanity', in Greek the word literaly translates as vapor. After much consideration they decided to stay with the traditional 'vanity'. Thanks for helping me pull my head out off my ass.
Re: Taste Ghazni by eliastemplar	amanda_dcosta 203.145.159.44	3-Feb-06/8:26 PM
I don't know anything about Afghan style, this tells quite a bit.........or it is probably of just one area, like Calcutta being refered as India, though just a tiny part of India.
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	Dovina 17.255.240.138	3-Feb-06/7:56 PM
Sorry, your comment got stuck as I was revising mine. I said that the NIV and the NAS claim to translate from the best manuscripts. Statements to this effect are in their introductioins. They claim to have used the best available Hebrew and Greek texts, not the King James. I cannot verify or deny these claims. I have read the gospels of Thomas or Mary Magdalene, and have browsed the Jerusalem Bible. It's been awhile but I found them interesting.
Re: a comment on A Walk in the Park by Dovina	god'swife 71.103.98.44	3-Feb-06/7:47 PM
That's complete bullshit. They don't 'add' dogma but they mislead. I believe those versions where translated from King James and not from Hebrew or Greek. Unfortunately some scholars thought it would be better to translate entire thoughts instead of the words. because fewer and fewer people were reading the Bible they assumed it was because it was written in a old version of english; it wasn't easy to read or understand. Unfortunately one of the side- effects of this is that it becomes inaccurate. these are general purpose translations at best. But there are errors, as in poetry, words have connotations as well as denotations.. Have you read the gospels of Thomas or Mary Magdalene? Oh and if you can get your hands the the Jerusalem Bible buy it. it will set you back 30 smackers but it's worth much more. It's one of the few things the catholics did right. Maybe you can talk someone into getting it for you. A birthday present.