| Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments |
|
Reflections of the Living Dead (Other) by SomeKindofPoet Two tired eyes that fail to sleep,
Two crying eyes that fail to weep,
Two bloodshot eyes that fail to see
The worthless lies you sang to me.
And here Iâm mourned in sad lament
For all the days âtwere wasted spent
On fools and jobs and worthless things
Like pearl balls and diamond rings.
To me is sung the funeral song
For such a life which died so long ago.
Perhaps one day youâll learn and see
That all you ever did to me
Was lead me to a life I hate
Where now Iâve died a reprobate,
Loving that Iâve hated still
While laid to rest upon the hill
Where wasted lives are littered there
Under headstones worn coarse and bare.
Perhaps one day Iâll rise from death
And breathe again that precious breath
That fills these bags of flesh and blood
With life and love and all that should
Have been the thing to drive this brain
Before it thought that it could change
Into a beast to never die
No matter how youâd ever try
To hurt it, beat it, leave it dead
By all the piercing things you said.
But here I lay, the living dead,
Blood pumping, still, into my head,
Where thoughts and hopes and all my dreams
Remain entrapped behind my seams.
Up the ladder:
Collage
Down the ladder:
Truth of the Moon
Votes: (green: user, blue: anonymous)
Arithmetic Mean: 1.3333334
Posted: May 19, 2004 5:18 PM PDT; Last modified: May 19, 2004 5:18 PM PDTWeighted score: 4.5629225 Overall Rank: 12658 Comments:
Maybe you can explain something to me, SomeKindofPoet: on Decapolis people are always posting things like,
"Topic: back-stabbing whores ...posted 05-12-2004 09:34 PM ack!!!! i'm sooooo livid right now. a supposed friend has just stabbed me and several of my friends in the back and horribly so. i'm so glad she's not here or i would most definitely kick the **** out of her... " and "like my wife used to always say.... "you can't trust a byatch."" and "Crap on a crap cracker. Josh." What I don't understand is why don't the Jesus Police bust these people's asses posthaste? Is that the way young "hip" Christians talk these days? I don't know about you, but in case of Rapture *this* car will be unoccupied. Thanks.
Well, zodiac, this was my reply to that topic.
"*whispers* It's hilarious how the title of this site is "Christian" and yet we don't talk any differently than the rest of the world...shies the pity, indeed. -SKoPwhohatesvulgarlanguage...and wonders what happened to the whole "you shall be set apart" bit." And this was their reply to that... "Actually the title of this site is 'Decapolis.'" and... "piss off eh. and what happened to the friggin topic?? haha i mean i've seen some deviations before but **** ! yeah too bad i dont have any back stabbing whores here to pal around with... but i gots mah beer!!" Very sad...indeed. -SKoP
Anyway, your comment on the poem would be nice.
-SKoP
The worst thing about this poem isn't that it's about religion. It's that you're either A) the world's biggest failure for allowing yourself to remain "reprobate" when you know how you should act/believe to be saved, or B) the world's biggest failure for presuming to know what reprobates think when you are not, in fact, one of them.
If A) better describes you, why don't you just take control of your life, you ninny? If B) is closer to the truth (and I'll bet it is) why don't you write about something you actually know instead of casting your exceedingly self-righteous presumptions around like swollen buttocks? As it happens, I'm probably utterly reprobate, and yet my life isn't anything like this. In fact, every reprobate I know isn't like that. In any event, in your current form, you fail.
Well, to fit the form of the "golden rule," I can't believe that this place is full of pretentious idiots. Of course, bad assumption on my part, no doubt. The whole world is full of âem, so why wouldnât this place be? Anyway, what I've seen in the past two days is enough to tell me that the mind set of many of these people, zodiac and Dark_Angel for most, is rather narrow and poorly assumptive. Both keep believing that this poem is about "religion" or a lost love, broken heart, etc. Can it be? Sure. It can deal with many area's of life, but for two self-claimed geniuses to keep believing that it merely deals with two areas of life shows their incompetence for a wider range of thought. One, this poem never has the words âreligionâ or âgodâ anywhere. Maybe you believed it was about love because it seems to be directed at one person? Well, why does it have to be a person at all? Or maybe you thought it was a broken-hearted love poem because of just the word âlove,â even though we love many things other than that of our âtrue love.â This poem can deal with religion, this poem can deal with love, but the main focus was a wasted life (seen by the last two lines). And whoever said my theology was wrong...prove that it is. Also, whoever didnât understand why I used âseamsâ then must not remember Frankenstein (which, I assumed, would be so simple to get). So, I now know that even the educated canât deduce a poem worth a flip...making poemranker.com a rather worthless place to get a good, useful opinion on poetry.
re: "Both keep believing that this poem is about "religion" or a lost love, broken heart, etc. Can it be? Sure."
It's not stupid to believe this poem is about religion. Observe: 1) You were referred to this site by Decapolis 2) Decapolis is a website where "hip" young "New Age" Christians get together to dish about religious stuff in, at best, a barely concealed fashion. 3) Many Decapolis users have posted exactly identical poems to this on the same Decapolis discussion board where you learned about this page. 4) It isn't really necessary to have a 4. You should have gotten the point by now. 5) -=Dark_Angel=- wasn't saying this poem is about lost love; he was saying that your kind of Decapolis-referred hack new poemranker user always posts poems which are only about religion or lost love. If you haven't posted a lost love poem by now, you will soon. What's more, "It can deal with many area's of life, but for two self-claimed geniuses to keep believing that it merely deals with two areas of life shows their incompetence for a wider range of thought" is crap for a dozen reasons. To wit, 1) We never said it merely deals with two areas of life; in fact, only I said it dealt with anything, which is religion. 2) I didn't even say this poem was only about religion. 3) I'll bet you a million bucks you can't say what this poem is about. PS-If you say it's about more than two things, you are a retard. 4) someone 'competent for a wider range of thought' wouldn't have made so many blunders already, such as the blunder of saying "incompetence for a wider range of thought." 5) Neither -=Dark_Angel=- nor I would ever be so stupid as to claim to be a genius. -=Dark_Angel=- has even taken the unprecedentedly honest step of posting his IQ on poemranker. Though I am the farthest thing from a "self-proclaimed genius," I am a society-proclaimed semi-expert in matters poetickal, having recently received a Master's in Poetry from an accredited Poetry School. 6) A poem about religion or God, or even solely about religion or God would not need to include the words "religion" or "God," you idiot. Cf. All the songs of Creed and Live. 7) Since I'm off the topic of the above-reprinted quote anyway, let me add a few things. None of the rest of your message after the "religion or god" part makes any sense. It's also presumptive to the max. To think any of the things you've suggested, I'd have to be a near-perfect retard. 8) If you've read Frankenstein, I'm my own left buttock. 9) I don't think you know what pretentious means. Allow me to propose this definition: Anything which impugns your, SomeKindofPoet's, poetickal superpowers. 10) Here's "a good, useful opinion" on your poetry: http://mycgiserver.com/~prawne/code.jsp? -11- 11) Making up two more reasons why your comment is crap is not worth the effort I've already expended on it. 12) Thanks.
bow'ls
1)Again...a worthless place for a good, useful opinion on poetry.
2)You are your own left buttock. 3)You must be, by your logic, a perfect retard. 4)Pretentious- instead of giving true critizism you insult, per definition "of a display that is tawdry or vulgar." This shows that my definition was correct in the first place...your proposed was off by quite a long-shot. 5)Decapolis has nothing to do with the subject of my poetry...just like poem-ranker probably has little to do with the subject of your own. 6)If you wish to put your obvious education to proper use, then be a good critic that gives useful information to a poet rather than a stream of insults. Insults help neither you nor the poet. You turn yourself into prick in their eyes while putting your education to waste and leaving the page blank of anything meaningless whatsoever. 7)You're Welcome.
1) Yes. But not because of me.
2) Who is the narrator of Frankenstein and what is his mission? Don't cheat. God will know. 3) I didn't think any of those things. 4) This one doesn't make any sense at all. And don't tell me what true criticism is. 5) Poemranker is often the subject of my own poetry. To wit, http://www.poemranker.com/poem-details.j http://www.poemranker.com/poem-details.j http://www.poemranker.com/poem-details.j 6) If I don't give "constructive criticism" for this poem, it's because it needs to be entirely erased and rewritten by someone other than yourself on a topic other than the one you've chosen. Sorry. If I believed it was in any wise salvageable I'd be the first to tell you where to add a semicolon or adjust an image, really. 7)
I obviously already told you what true criticism is, so telling me not to tell you is rather a waste of your words. If it didn't make any sense, I'm sorry you're unable to understand.
And after having many others criticize on this piece of work, other than the "poetically educated," I find that itâs perfectly fine in the form itâs in. If it speaks to a common person, then itâs served itâs purpose...and I could frankly care less about any opinion from someone who decides to criticize with insults instead of true criticism...which you obviously lack. Poemranker, again, is worthless for true criticism...so I will go elsewhere (to your unbinding joy, no doubt). It was good for a moment, thinking that someone with an education focused on poetry could be useful, but instead they remain like the many others before them, pompous and without any useful commentary. -SKoP
1) If you insist on continuing this conversation, please use a numbered-list format like this one. Without lists, poemranker debates tend to take something like the following form:
USER 1: [responds to all User 2's earlier comments in a semi-methodical fashion.] USER 2: [some completely unrelated nonsense.] USER 1: [responds to all User 2's comments in a semi-methodical fashion.] 2) And without numbered lists, how will we know who is winning? 3) I'm sorry you can't write intelligibly. Clearly, you've missed the memo defining language as a community's generally-agreed-upon system of signs used in a generally-agreed-upon order. That, or your colossal illiteracy made it useful only for making paper hats and/or pterodactyls out of. 4) Why on earth would you value the opinion of what we'll just call "the poetically illiterate" over that of "the 'poetically educated'"? Do you imagine that these illiterates buy, publish, or commonly read poetry? 5) Well, mister, I happen to believe that everyone isn't equally qualified to speak as an authority on every subject, and that I shouldn't regard the views of someone less experienced than myself in some matter as equal to my own views on the matter. If you can't accept my point-of-view then it's you, sir, that's shallow, clothes-minded, and I daresay bigoted - not I. 6) "which you obviously lack" doesn't make any sense. If you say "I'm sorry you don't understand" again, you are a stellar example of the proposition "buttocum ergo sum." 7) How have you come to the astonishingly bright conclusion that "poemranker... is worthless for true criticism," (whatever that means, anyway)? Was it from the one poem other than your own that you've commented/voted on? Was it a result of all the failed attempts at real poetickal discourse on your fellow users' posts which have marked your stay on our site? No, I suspect it was because only two people bothered to comment in any way substantively on your poems, both of whom failed to blindly praise the dribblings of your genius and frankly understated the hideousness of the misshapen illogic that clings to them like dinner-crumbs in an elderly's unkempt beard. 8) Maybe this will drive home the fundamental difference between your conception of a "useful" poetry site and mine: zodiac Total Votes: 2669 Total Comments: 1905 Has read ALL of SomeKindofPoet's posts. SomeKindofPoet Total Votes: 0 Total Comments: 12 Has read NONE of zodiac's. 9) Hey, godspeed! Why don't you give Poets2000.com a shot? Or Poetry.com? They LOVE people like you! 10) Thanks for playing.
Look SomeKindofPoet, I don't know who you think you are, but I have an IQ of 98 (for which I have an official certificate) so I'm definitely not thick. Anything between 90 and 110 is well within the normal range, so how dare you accuse me of being narrow and poorly assumptive?
I dare accuse you by your comments.
I don't think you know how to construct prepositional phrases for "accuse". Great try though! -10-
Don't forget to flush.
142 view(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-0-
-SKoP
-10-
P.S. I like the way you start your sentences with "Again, ". Your mouth is a bountiful harvest for plum-lovers worldwide.