Re: Translation by Dovina	4-Jul-04/11:44 AM
This is really quite a lovely little poem. I love the last three stanzas and my only suggestion is the third stanza. IMO, it doesn't quite flow as well as the rest of the poem. Still, it's exceptional as is. Good stuff and a solid nine.
Re: a comment on Time's End by Quarton	4-Jul-04/11:13 AM
Dovina... Thanks for the read and taking the time to comment and your suggestions. Brevity is definitely a goal to strive for in writing poetry and I agree with you. Actually, I often suggest this when commenting on other poems and guess I should take my own advice. Your version reads quite well and your critique is appreciated.
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	4-Jul-04/9:57 AM
Sorry. I should have put my comments under Zodiac's post, not yours.
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	4-Jul-04/8:31 AM
Zodiac....My, my, we are getting testy. Not unusual plus the personal name calling by someone whose arguments are mostly bogus and self-rightious. I bet you would like me to "walk off a cliff." Then you could peddle your comments and opinions with no one to dispute them. I will try once again to explain reality but I doubt you are capable of understanding anything beyond your own personal bias. We can no longer view the world or universe as being separate from ourselves. Humans are part of an intrinsically dynamic universe that is in constant flow and change and reality must be, according to quantum mechanics, one which recognises the basic unity or oneness of all things. The reality is that nothing exists in isolation and our perception of a world "out there" is bogus. Still, a perceived reality is still valid in the mind of the observer who is still bogged down in a "Newtonian", classic concept of the world. In modern physics, mass is no longer associated with a material substance and particles are actually bundles of energy. So from a quantum view, I can dismiss your arguments regarding reality and take comfort in knowing that you actually believe reality exists in your dualistic mind-set. So chill out, turkey. Things are not as they seem and your arguments concerning reality are merely illusionary nonsense. And regarding the Ebert analogy, I only said I liked him as a movie critic. You are the one who turned this into an analogy, though a very weak one. Have a nice day, dipshit.
Re: Cyber Junkie by J.B. Manning	3-Jul-04/10:43 AM
Some pretty good lines in this and interesting enough to hold my interest.
Re: When Fairy Tales Forgive Us by J.B. Manning	3-Jul-04/10:40 AM
Too sappy and forget the rhyme. Try free verse.
Re: Why by J.B. Manning	3-Jul-04/10:38 AM
Nice try but this just doesn't work for me. Sorry:) IMO, you should try writing poetry with no rhyme. This would permit you to use words other than those which rhyme and perhaps improve the content and flow. For most poets today, rhyme is seldom used and when it is, much skill is needed to avoid sounding forced or using words that are obviously chosen based upon rhyme and not on their merit. Robert Frost could do it but for you and me, free verse is much better. So use rhyme sparingly until you become more proficient as a poet. I hope this helps.
Re: Sacrificial Virgin by EAger to Offend	3-Jul-04/10:21 AM
Though a bit confusing, I liked this. One minor suggestion; "The luscious bird hath finally flown" Hath seems out of synch with the rest of the poem and, IMO, it reads better with "has."
Re: I Love You by babyBOOMER	3-Jul-04/10:12 AM
Nothing personal but this is awful. It reads like a bad soap opera. Sorry:)
Re: Companionship by milkymilk	3-Jul-04/10:08 AM
A little too sappy for my taste but you have some good lines.
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	3-Jul-04/9:52 AM
Your anology regarding Ebert isn't worth a comment though you probably perceive it to be profound. And reality exists only in our perceptions and this varies with each individual. Reality is not a constant or a fact, rather a conception based upon perception. My reality is unique to myself as is yours. It is, (or should be), constantly changing and evolving and that is why I have such an affinity for poetry. Poets are constantly exploring and challenging mundane and fixed realities, sort of like pioneers in the quest for truth in a world where reality is too often preached from a pulpit and where reality is rooted in dogma and superstition. In such a scenario, reality is that which we are taught with little or no original thought, mere acquiessence to the self-serving "truths" of others.
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	2-Jul-04/10:31 PM
I don't know about filmmaker but I perceive him to be an excellent movie critic. Actually, my favorite was Siskel who is no longer living.
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	2-Jul-04/10:22 PM
I grow weary of your bullshit and will waste my time on your comments only briefly. You say reality or what is real is, by definition, anything which is in the universe. Wrong!!! Reality from a human perspective is that which we personally perceive to be real and we all pick and choose differently. Reality to one individual may be fantasy to another and we all tend to view the world based, not upon reality but rather, on what we expect to see, what we have seen before. It is a concept/percept continuum which negates reality and promotes complacency as you so aptly demonstrate in your writing. You can't see the forest for the trees dimwit and it is you who is "ass-talking", not me. The only difference between fantasy and reality lies in your pre-conceptions which are based, not on reality but upon that which you choose to acknowledge in a feeble attempt to bolster your personal bias, your world-view which has no validity beyond the limitations of your perceptions. You say that I have no knowledge of superstrings and I say neither do you or the physicists who postulate them. That being the case, what is wrong with a bit of fantasy? After all, self-imposed realities tend to be just that, beliefs and concepts unique to each of us and mere conjecture based upon a very limited amount of information which we pick and choose to suit our particular preferences. I could go on but it is late and time for some refreshing oblivion. Peace!
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	2-Jul-04/8:35 PM
You are entitled to express your opinions but what makes you the Roger Ebert of poetry? I have read some of your work and found it to be generally mediocre. Pick your best poem and I will pick mine. Then we can compare and critique each other and let other members express their opinions. That would cut through all the bullshit and self-serving rhetoric. Your move, turkey.
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	2-Jul-04/4:39 PM
god'swife... You are correct in saying there is no time if you mean at the infinite level where there is no beginning or end. No beginning doesn't make any sense so congrats on your keen observation. But you know how elusive time is to us mere mortals and answering your rubbish is surely a waste of same. If mixing ecstasy, vodka and PBS always turns out ugly, so be ugly. I'll have a glass of chablis and be beautiful for a "time." Love and kisses creep!
Re: a comment on Recycled Stardust by Quarton	2-Jul-04/11:31 AM
zodiac...Yes, I would like to hear more but first, some omments on yours. In a time/space continuum, time does flow freely at its outer limits as there exists nothing to impede its flow. Time is being created, not in a conventional sense but in accordance with quantum theory and a four dimensional time/space. Light is indeed impeded by gravity and other things such as mass but that is not what is happening as time becomes extant. What is so silly about comparing the small craters created by a raindrop (yes, they do cause craters to form but on the waters surface, not on a flower.) or the unfolding of a flower petal? Like the universe, they expand from within and are indeed a sort of miniature likeness in their expansion. "exploding stars creating reycled stardust" is what, "silly to the max?" In fact, we and every element in the universe were created either in the bowels of a star or by the explosion of a supernova. And these stars are currently second generation which makes them recycled. This "stardust" is a shared common bond and links us all in a physical as well as a mystical way. "random destination" is not an "enormous contradiction",(better called an oxymoron). Random is defined as "chance" or "not determined" So if I said "undetermined destination", would that still be a source of irritation to you?
Re: Lady Bradbury’s Excursion by Dovina	2-Jul-04/10:05 AM
You have taken the mundane and transformed it into art. About as original as any poem I have read in a long time. It takes a "leak" where it has never gone before and somehow does so in good taste. Womderful!
Re: Recycled Stardust by Quarton	2-Jul-04/9:48 AM
richa: Thank you for the comments on my poem and your belief that science and poetry are not compatible. I do, however, disagree and think there should be more, not less written on the subject. One major problem when writing about science or quantum mehanics, (cosmology), is the difficulty in avoiding abstractions but I believe that is acceptible considering the rich amount of material available and the fascination we all share for the universe and the meaning and purpose of life. Perhaps some of my other poems are more likely to portray this though I am sure some think my work is generally not good or of interest. (but I try)
Re: Recycled Stardust by Quarton	2-Jul-04/9:25 AM
You know, Zodiac, I always appreciate those who take the time to critique one of my poems and you are no exception. However, I cannot believe you are serious in stating that "every sentence" in my poem is "wrong." Perhaps you could enlighten me on those sentences or concepts you deem inaccurate. Such a blanket statement as yours needs some specifics and you offered none but rather, a meaningless indictment backed up by nothing concrete or even close to justify its validity.
Re: a comment on Lady Bradbury’s Excursion by Dovina	1-Jul-04/2:53 PM
Actually, "Whiffs" is perfect. Excursion, indeed:)