A very satisfying plan, if only it could be... *sigh* What the hell! I'm an atheist! *8*

It's a riddle. You're a librarian.

I love your poems. keep up the good work, and remember
Whatever is in anyway beautiful has its source of beauity in itself. and complete in itself; praise forms
no parts of it. so it is none the worse nor the better for being praised. when you create this planet let me
know.

You're staggered lines threw me. I was expecting a beat that didn't show. 30 Lashes with a soggy file box, and one hail mary over a bowl of fruity pebbles.

To sum it up "I existed from all eternity and, behold,
iam here; and i shall exist till the end of time, for my being has no end.

A small suggestion:

S2, L1:
-My creatures shall find everything I've created

Just my own tick really. In response to your piece, I say that:

Faith sought & praise uttered, inevitably conflict; for gods shape is incomplete, recklessly manifested-- burdened with the weight of confused human expression and mis-calculated interpretation. Amen.

Blessed with seven.

And then, because you always make me feel kind of furtively generous, here's some real criticism for your poem. It's more and better than you've done for anyone else here in recent memory. That's the whole fucking point. Check out this hook:

1) "with great beauty and wit" is poorly phrased and an innaccurate description of how you'd set up a world. If "with great beauty and wit" is how you'll be acting while you're setting up the world, then beauty seems kind of out of place. If the world is going to have the qualities "great beauty and wit", even before you've made people in it, then wit is out of place. You might consider changing it.

2) "discover all ... quite pleasing and right" is an innappropriate use of discover. You can't or shouldn't, for example, "discover a dog friendly". You might consider changing it.

3) I don't understand why you're not "leav[ing] about" ancient texts, when you just said you'll "show them... how their world was formed" etc. Aren't those pretty close to the same thing? You might consider changing one of them.

4) What are you on about "self-made diseases"? That's all kind of pleasing and nice, but if you're going to believe in a God, you pretty much have to believe He made diseases, too. Oh, right, you're not going to be that kind of God. Well, you might consider changing it so people don't think you're just taking a super-easy way out.

5) In fact, there's no kind of conflict here, except the half-alluded-to one with the real God, which isn't really enough and isn't fair since God can't answer. Besides, almost everybody in the world besides you and me, practically, thinks God IS exactly like this poem. As it is, this poem is just kind of a daydream and fluff. You might consider doing something about it.

6) The places where the rhythm is off make the rest of it - the rhythmed part - seem kind of jumpy and weird. You'd do better to either loosen up the rhythmy parts or tighten up the non-rhythmy ones.

7) Stanzas 2-4 just repeat the same idea, sometimes contradictorily. The last stanza, particularly, doesn't pack very much of a punch, mostly because it's already been said. You might consider adding some more ideas and condensing these to one stanza.

8) Other than an inconsistent rhythm and the big honking central conceit, there's not really a lot of poetic phrasings or devices (like bits of simile, metaphor, alliterative words, or original ways of describing things.) You should consider adding some of these.

9) By the start of the twentyfirst century, this is all kind of old hat. The only part that makes it not old hat is that most twentieth and twentyfirst century writers have figured, probably rightly, that their worlds would have all sorts of problems, too, while you haven't.

10) If you say this isn't criticism because I haven't added some, I don't know, praise-thingy on the end here, well, sorry, that's not my idea of criticism, and I guess I should have a pretty good idea about it by now, shouldn't I? Well, ta-ta!

Yours truly,
zodiac in Karak Islamland

If you were a god, which of the following would you be?

a) Just like yourself now, only with invisibility and creating-matter-from-nothing superpowers;

b) Have invisibility and matter-creating powers, plus a +50 Cloak of Perfection (ie, also perfect);

c) It's all the same thing, since if you were God whatever you thought or did would have to be by definition perfect - kind of like the reality (but not the idea) of Papal infallibility probably is.

thats why god has to be a man, he's just to lazy to care

I like this. A strong religious statement that's good both on a personal and universal level. Not too over-told or sidetracked, the focus is exactly where it should be. Lines thirteen and fourteen spoke most loudly to me, but it's altogether a worthwhile read.

•°•Gregory James•°•

this is beautifully written - i love it

You'd make a better god than that Christian idiot some people like.

Boring garbage.