Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	22-Mar-05/6:55 PM
I was responding to richa, but happy you agree. You are new here and will have some trouble following the color shades of the sheathes around the comments. Here's an example of where they are hard to follow.
Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	22-Mar-05/4:38 PM
Truth is something which can be picked up by an open mind and deflected by a closed one. I would not see any truth in Evolution if my mind were closed to it. I would deflect that truth. This does not assume there is any truth in Evolution, only that I would not receive it if I saw it. I think there is a lot of speculation in Evolution (which I use only as an example) but I think there is some truth there too. We are not discussing ways of distinguishing truth, only receptivity to it. I do, as you say, attribute a magical property to truth that separates it from falsehood, but that’s not the same as saying I know how to distinguish truth from falsehood. I don’t think that to discover truth, I must first know what I am looking for. That would be saying that I know a truth – how to discover truth – before I discover truth. You can see the inconsistency in that. The important thing here is to be receptive to truth, even if comes through an unlikely source like the words of Dovina. Wouldn’t you agree?
Re: Tribulations of the ear and eye by oneglove	22-Mar-05/1:08 PM
The eye and ear high-tail it, dissatisfied. Okay, but "atrophied"? maybe "starved.” The “greatest gift” of the heart seems left alone and undeveloped. Maybe it needs a tender helping hand.
Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	22-Mar-05/12:43 PM
I think we're saying almost the same thing and tangling ourselves in words. Peace.
Re: The Populous by durr_T_hip_E	22-Mar-05/12:38 PM
I’m following your butler of a title, and assuming this houseful of descriptions applies to the people as a whole. Frankly, I find that concept too broad for value. Still, the flow is good and the descriptions vaguely valid. I wish for greater definition, punctuation perhaps, and something personal.
Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	22-Mar-05/12:18 PM
Dear Sean, I’m sorry you have a worldview. It holds a person back from receiving truth, like blinders on a horse steady it in the master’s chosen direction. Having a worldview, you will applaud my response if it conforms and reject it otherwise, no matter what insights it contains. For that you have my sympathy. God, or a symbolic god as you say, cannot even be perceived without an underlying belief in the concepts of Beauty and Good. If all we have with which to evaluate the world is reason, then life does not extend beyond birth and death. The poem’s message is to look at Good and Beauty (Verse 3) and to say with tongue in cheek that I know the difference between good and bad, beautiful and ugly (Verse 4) Then having assured myself of what is good and beautiful, or at least the methods I will use to determine them, I surpass the waypoints of birth and death.
Re: a comment on Rusty knife to the kidney by INTRANSIT	22-Mar-05/10:08 AM
It is poetry or poetrye because INTRANSIT wrote it and because I have found most of his poems uniquely saying things I understand and relate to. This one in particular is terse, masculine, and tight. Go ahead and tell me about my sexual attraction based on what I just said. Everythiung is sexual; I can only speak from a sexual position. If you live in a universe where that's not the case, I have no objection.
Re: a comment on No Worries by Dovina	22-Mar-05/9:58 AM
I'll bother with it then because it says you agree with righteous old Asaph where he says “Surely in vain have I kept my heart pure” and I’m rolling on the floor.
Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	22-Mar-05/9:52 AM
Love is not the word, but the molecule has a beauty that’s like the rat’s beauty. Both are elegant in their complexity, but despised for what they do or how they act.
Re: a comment on Reasonably Good by Dovina	22-Mar-05/9:51 AM
You ask me to answer which I extol – the rat or the cock. Let’s not get personal here, but if I were a rat, I’d extol the cock. If I were a cock, I’d extol myself.
Re: stab in the dark by not_a_philosopher	21-Mar-05/6:56 AM
Can we have some of you happy athiests speak out in rebuttal?
Re: Rusty knife to the kidney by INTRANSIT	21-Mar-05/6:51 AM
I liked it better before, but still good.
Re: A good little poem by INTRANSIT	21-Mar-05/6:46 AM
Do you really need (bread) after "rye" and "possibilities" after infomercial. You did say it's a little poem. Thoughts turn rye is good. Why not infomercials piclke?
Re: a comment on Drinking before noon with Bukowski by Beyond_Dreams	20-Mar-05/6:39 AM
But greater pleasure comes when both emotional and sensual desires are tantilized, then fulfilled in both partners.
Re: a comment on Apostrophetic Loss by Dovina	19-Mar-05/9:15 PM
1) Okay, I’ve hyperbolized. But certain renegade poet comedians seem to get a kick out of butchering the language to impress the incrowd. Call it making fun, but it’s just silly. And in case you wish to say that I am silly in other ways – admitted. 2) Colloquialisms and apostrophes go together sometimes, sometimes not. I don’t see how that’s related to anything. 3) Apparently you have concluded that “stuffy bastions of conservative poetry” are the same people as “renegade poet comedians” in my estimation. I hadn’t thought of it that way, but maybe they are so inconsistent as to be so. Thank you for that inspiration. 4) Have I use a passé word, “dim”? It just shows how out-of-touch I am with incrowd norms. 5) Many people on this site besides you say I am uncool, dim, dimtard or whatever the “in” terminology may be at the time. If there is no incrowd, how do you explain your comments at http://poemranker.com/poem-details.jsp;jsessionid=aweLoUJ7fS59?id=121987 6) But they use it. 7) They still use it. 8) I affect many atrocities. This is only one. 9) I should take credit when you admit a fault after I point it out. That’s the slanderous, incroud way to act. But I was not thinking of you when I wrote that. 10) No, I don’t think you are out to get me. Heck, if I leave, you’d have only CLS to pick on. So show me just enough respect that I don’t leave.
Re: a comment on Sauvignon by Dovina	19-Mar-05/6:50 AM
I know someone whom I believe could make the mistake and who claims to be knowledgeable about wines. Of course that’s not the point, nor is it a metaphor for guys who are dogs. It’s a fantasy of getting even for a deception. The relationship between having a glass of wine with a man and having sex is an add-on, not the main purpose of the poem. Still, the metaphor works in real life, I think, though it’s admittedly not well developed in the poem.
Re: nightmare by rainybaby	18-Mar-05/2:05 PM
Have you joined the Your Club in oposition to the rest of us who say "you're"?
Re: To Show is Three by MacFrantic	18-Mar-05/1:57 PM
The answer to your opening question seems to be "Happiness is confined and it is lonely," but the words are tangled and it's hard to tell.
Re: Camping, Volume 3 by jessicazee	18-Mar-05/1:53 PM
I've liked your camping missives. I have memories like them. How about "unknowing trees" and "blackberry briars whisper sharp stings before sweet fruit" and "ember light"
Re: a comment on A Plea To The Mother(Mother Earth) by Rainbow_chaser	18-Mar-05/6:53 AM
Yes, I do often think I know what a person means from the context of his or her statement, even when parts of the comment disagree with what I think they are saying. If I'm wrong, at least my reaction can stimulate a more precise wording of what they mean. It avoids being mean - telling them their words are stupid when their message is not.