richa
on science by whispern_smoke_wisp
13 Apr 2005, 3:24 AM
The dogs don't love humans can be taken two ways: (i) That dogs are only in it for the reward and any attachment is to the reward and not the person and (ii) That dogs unlike humans have no consciousness and therefore do not 'love' or 'like' or 'be'. There is also the old Bernie Skinner adage that the question is not do animals think but do we. Is what humans call love qualitatively different from simple behaviourism of animals. Anyway whichever view you take, it is important I believe that you make the poem 'slant'.
you would shake your head at something you agree to be terrible.
Are you suggesting that white people should let themselves be subjugated in the interests of fairness. Frankly I am not really up for that.
lacks any clarity. significant grammar errors. as an exercise, next time write a poem with as much linguistic precision as you can manage. also make sure the architecture and the idea of the poem are clearly envisioned in your mind before you write. (it would therefore behoove you to avoid spontaneous composition at this time and until your technique is better developed.) your current style is terribly muddy and makes communication with the reader impossible. only digress from the above method when you are sure your foundation is sound enough to allow for the exploration of your personal style. good luck.
All things considered, you did not consider all things, especially not the poem, which never said anyone ignored me in his/her poetry. It is not a preposterous suggestion that one side's history of institutionalized oppression can be "balanced out" or "made up for" by black people whupping white ass for a while! It is exactly what happened in this case. Remember I'm describing a case, not a population.
He ignored me, didnât hire me, belittle me in his poetry,
skiped over me at his open mic reading. It's all sadly there.
with polishing, it will be superb. some notes: the wordplay with the two drawns works but seems slightly incongruous with the poem's dreamlike tone b/c it's such an overt rhetorical display. also, "pitch", as in to throw, is incongruous with the arrow metaphor. one does not throw arrows.
oh fuck.
Thanks
The last two lines change from contemplative to didactic. That is if you mean "Be cause." If that's what you want to do, and I hope is is not, then transition needed.
Good, but a problem with tenses - "You said weâd go" in first sentence, then "Drive your red truck" in the second. Then back to "I'd" in the third.
Interesting - I like the tension created by the fact that 'let' could be present or past while 'found' and 'spent' tie it to the past. Do you find that ambivalence a hindrance? Similarly, I like the tension caused by the repetition of 'drawn back', hoping it prolongs the action in the imagination - perhaps this is not the case in practice. Thanks for your comments.
In my country, people actually do throw acid at other people's faces. It's just not a very cool image.
Were you in a Philosophy class when you heard that?
Do you believe "Because" answers the question "Why?"
You're saved from eternal mocking for this by the fact that you weren't even potty-trained when the song "Truly, Madly, Deeply" was popular.
There are probably happy people somewhere. You just don't know where they hang out. They want it that way.
There seem to be a lot of dangling, misplaced, or mismodifying participle phrases in this. Some examples:
"Feeling atlas blue the Atlantic pulse quickens;"
"pulling me in currents I fight it with leaden arms"
"Staring at the ocean you loved my soup of bones."
I wonder if you realize you're writing about an Atlantic pulse that feels blue, you pulling yourself in currents, and a woman who loves bone soup (but not necessarily the ocean).
The third and last stanzas are well-written. The rest could use some poetry.