| Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments |
|
An Afternoon Walk (Free verse) by Dovina Snow on the ground,
shallow and dirty.
Up in the trees
itâs crusty and clean.
Walking and talking,
cars kicking dust,
it settles still dry
on the roadside snow.
White seems more bright,
in this afternoon light,
and dust is not only
kicked up by the cars.
Snow jokes like a salve
and covers his wounds
and rambles like honey,
sweetening mine.
And dust in the snow
becomes gaps in his lines
or dark flaws
in my light-hearted tales.
Both are designed
to look white and bright,
to cover the dark things -
dirt and limb.
Which are more lofty
covering whiter?
Which bear the dust
of weaker defense?
Up the ladder:
lame ass shit
Down the ladder:
Sex Mob
Votes: (green: user, blue: anonymous)
Arithmetic Mean: 3.75
Posted: November 9, 2004 10:57 AM PST; Last modified: November 27, 2004 12:23 PM PSTWeighted score: 4.8509965 Overall Rank: 10575 The following users have marked this poem on their favorites list:
Comments:
Dovina! others may deprive you of your material wealth
and cheat you in a thousand ways, but no man can deprive you of the control and use of your imagination. That's why I say nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere Ignorance and consciencious stupidity.I am sure that I'm going to get some kind of smart comment from someone, but understand! What people think of me isn't any of my business.And I would like for you to remember that my friend.
Jroday, Whenever you consider posting a poem or a comment on Poemranker, itâs wise to check the spelling first, insure correct punctuation, grammar and, most of all, logic. These are the things the âsmartâ people here consider before they call you a dimtard. But as you say, that is not your business, and if logic, grammar and the like concerned you as greatly as something deeper, you would have written to those ends. I am going to think about âsincere ignoranceâ and âconscientious stupidityâ because I believe they will have more to say in time. Thanks for your comment.
The correct use of logic is what gives a poem depth. How can a poem be anything but surface if the surface only applies to itself. For instance 'the snow makes me warm' this can only mean you like snow (warm feeling) the reader can infer nothing from the properties of snow that could make you warm.
With respect to your constant demeaning of 'smart' people. It reminds me of the time my negro maid fired this gem at me when I read her my masterpiece: "I have no time for false intellectualism". I was so humbled I modified my masterpiece. I ask her every day what she thinks. It garners the same reply. Every day I modify my masterpiece. Will I ever achieve true intellectualism.
There is no incorrect use of logic, for that would be illogical. And there is no incorrect use of emotion. Each stands on its premises â logic on axioms, emotion on perceptions. A poem that is beautiful and artful usually uses both and blends them in invigorating patterns. How can a poem be anything but surface if it uses only logic? It is like a scientific dissertation. To say âthe snow makes me warmâ is to apply emotion to âsnow is reflective of all frequencies of light, much as the sun is a generator of all.â Jroday is one of those poets who lean much further toward emotion than you and I do. We can learn from them.
Let me give you an example of incorrect logic.
P: Snow is cold P:(the sun is a generator of all it reflects all frequencies of light) C: The snow makes me warm.
As for how a poem can be anything but surface if it uses only logic. What are you talking about. You use logic so that your images make sense. You do not write a verse of logic and then write a verse of emotion. If you write a verse without the requisite logic you look an idiot.
As for jroday leans toward emotion. Bow'ls. A poet does not portray emotion by the frequency of times he mentions hate in a poem.
As for we can both learn from him. Fuck off.
that is my first ever poemranker swear word.
There's no reason for a senisble man to become angry enough to swear over a disagreement such as this.
because every time I deconstruct one of your uneducated platitudes you come up with ten more. Do you believe there are ace poets out there who would disagree with me on these points. Do you think a single serious poet would tell me or any student to learn from jroday? And why drag him into it.
"deconstruct" is hardly accurate.
'laugh at' then.
I believe there are ace poets out there who would disagree with you on these points. I think serious poets would tell you to learn from people like jroday. Robert frost, for example, in Mending Wall claims to have learned important truths about property boundaries from his neighbor in Vermont who was like jroday. Frost did not just use the man as a character in his poem, he learned from him.
again you fail to make a coherent point. Robert Frost would tell me to learn from jroday. And why, because: 'Frost did not just use the man as a character in his poem, he learned from him.'. What the hell has that to do with telling me to learn from someone who can't write. Go to eratosphere, even to sleepless whispers. Post one of your poems there. See what they say. See if they think that poems that don't track and or have no substance are good poems.
P.S. Virtually all my poems are already narrated by complete dunces.
And with those indisputably accurate words the matter was finally settled before a capacity crowd at Poemranker Stadium.
I knew you were talking about the narator's voice in your poems. I just wanted to break this thing off because it's going nowhere.
then feel free to delete.
I feel free to, but why?
to end it at 'the crowd goes wild' dunce.
lol, but I don't see why.
I see you deleted one of yours. Maybe you'd like this whole record expunged.
Robert Frost would not say that. And he never learned anything from anybody. You can argue with me if you'd like, but I should tell you I know more about Robert Frost than you know about all other writers put together.
Pardon me, Raja Z.
I hope you got richa's point. Robert Frost already knew about good fences being good neighbors, being the most colossal bigot, sexist and generally crotchety cunt ever. He just thought it would be good to use a stupid character like his neighbor to teach you. Why? Because he thought you were stupid, too.
Yes, of course, how brilliant. Why didn't I I see that Frost wrote to me? And why can't you see that he did rely on his neighbor, not as a writing instructor, but as a man of wisdom?
And jroday is not doing that. He posits unsubstanciated emotional phrases, but not the same thing too often.
Again. Unsubstantial is not good.
Then emotional is not good.
...because emotions can not be explained, that is the magic of poetry no doubt.
I don't know if you mean to mock, but the magic of poetry is to bring emotions to light, so that similar emotions in a reader become better understood and often more palitable.
not by writing incoherent sentences it doesn't.
That's illogical, but to say it's an example of incorrect logic is to admit logic can be incorrect. You have written an example of gobeldygoop or nonsense.
What are you talking about you mad woman. Of course logic can be incorrect. Half of your poems are testament to that. Your problem is that you think using incorrect logic is a good thing. It is not. Also my example was mocking your explanation of how snow can feel warm. To say some rubbish about wavelengths is not to argue snow makes you warm. It does not follow.
You repeat what I say after saying I'm wrong.
can you even read.
That should begin with a capital and end in a question mark.
To quote the inimitable Jroday, for all future students of the man's profoundly influencial poetry..."truth is more than a mental exercise"
I might be so bold as to disagree with jroday on that. Truth is consensus of the 'us' referred to by zodiac.
You misspelled ensure.
Maybe you're right, Dovina. It's not about absolute smarts or ignorance, here, since clearly the dimmest among us is as likely to think he's smart as anyone else, and to think everyone else is dim. It's more about whether you can take being called "A perfectly shaped football-sized turd of illiteracy couched in a rather damp briefcase" (or something such) and having your glaring errors nestled around your ears like so many meat-laurels every time you log onto the site, until you either meet to our demands or find some way to justify ignoring us.
And who is this glorious "us" whoss demands I must humbly meet?
nothing is more dangerous than fucking dimtards spouting aphorisms of their own design. unless you happen to count the giant missiles being fired from -=Dark Angel=-'s massive rump.
Truth is more than a mental exercise.The next time you want to leave me a comment.Dont leave me a fucking dimtard comment if that's the best education you've got.Here's one for you to grow on.I HAVE FOUND THOUGHTS AND WORDS TO BE THE FOUNDATION FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE IN LIFE.
The excessive use of unsubstantiated aphorisms is a bad thing. This is a valuable lesson and hardly deserves such a mock offended reply (and more aphorisms). When I read aphorisms in poems it reminds me of political language. I can never be sure whether the writer understands what he is saying let alone whether he has any depth of understanding of what he is saying.
richa my aphorisms are not unsubstantiated. They are from what "I" and only "I" experienced in my life. I made alot of mistakes, and I learned from them. Yes I understand every aphorism I say, because I have exerienced each one. some good, some bad.And the offended reply. I use to be like that until my mother told me when you criticize someone, they become defensive.
When you spell out there mistakes they listen.I know it works both ways.
but the use of aphorisms is the very antithesis of the personal and the specific.
richa i understand what you are saying, but what work for me to change my life around might not work for anyone else, but we all have our own beliefs in what works and dont works in life. i'm not downing edpeterson, but he never has anything to say or help
anyone if they have a flaw in there poems. he just makes fun of them and a lot of people on this site are trying very hard to become good poem writers including myself. sure your going to have people on this site that's going to have smart remark's, but they still tell you what you need to do to improve.
You turd! QUESTION: If a stich in time didn't save you nine, what would it do? Would you even know?
You nerd! QUESTION: What's long and round and got a head on it?
here is one for you to mentally exercise with. I HAVE FOUND THAT BOXER SHORTS ARE SUPERIOR TO COTTON BRIEFS DUE TO THEIR LESS BINDING NATURE. THAT AND THEY ALLOW FOR QUICKER DIFFUSION OF RECTAL EMISSIONS.
sorry, I meant " ~=Rectal Emissions=~ "
-=Rectal_Emissions=-
~@rectal.emissions@~
@~~~~~~
0~~~>
*<~~~~
)*(
!
~ )*(
~ !
` ( )*( )
`~~~~~~~~~~~~~!
~ ~( )*( )
~ ~~~ ! ~~~
I like how you followed "Dont leave me a fucking dimtard comment if that's the best education you've got..." with "I HAVE FOUND THOUGHTS AND WORDS TO BE THE FOUNDATION FOR SUCCESS AND FAILURE IN LIFE" A stroke of genius, to be sure
Dimtard is not your word. Stop using it now.
( ` )*( ` )
this poem had really good flow, but bachus does have some good points. though maybe i'm just not a talented enough reader to fully understand your choice of words.
Maybe I've just not taken enough time on this (I haven't), but I don't immediately see how the imagery is supposed to work. Either
a) the "shallow and dirty snow" and "crusty and clean" snow are the jokes, and the "black limbs sagging" and "tan earth" are the missives; b) or the "shallow and dirty snow" and "black limbs sagging" are the jokes, and the "crusty and clean" snow and the "tan earth" are the missives. There's no other way around it. If a), how are his jokes both "shallow and dirty" and low, and "crusty and clean" and lofty? And how are "black limbs sagging" and "tan earth hidden" missives? The limbs, maybe, reach out - that works. But the earth is the opposite; it's passive and hidden. Sure, you can be reaching out and being passive and hidden probably, but not in metaphor land. Choice b) seems more likely. You get "shallow and dirty" and kind of desparate limbs reaching out and sagging for the jokes. But then you get clean tree snow and hidden earth for the missives. How are either of those missives? And aren't they still opposites? Go ahead, tell me where I've gone wrong.
You've not gone far wrong. The dark substances (limbs and earth) are the pains each of us carries. The snow covers the limbs and the ground (his jokes, my missives) The dust is the pain showing through, at least partially. I wondered who showed more pain and was closer to the ground and who hid it with white crusty snow. It may be a stretch, but at the time, it seemed a perfectly suitable metaphor.
Sorry, none of it holds together. Now you seems like you're trying to make it:
Image(JOKES) Image(MISSIVES) Image(HIS WOUNDS) Image(MY WOUNDS) JOKES, HIS WOUNDS, MISSIVES, MY WOUNDS. Not only is that a totally unnatural construction, but it falls apart or is inconsistent all over the place. Like how in stanza 2 you have either "Black limbs sagging frosty and white" or "frosty and white Tan earth hidden". Jesus. The best fix is to change lines 3-4 to be an image for his wounds and lines 7-8 to be an image for your wounds somehow related to the "black limbs sagging". You see? The black limbs are now your missives. Which is good, because they reach out but in a sagging weak kind of way. Now ask yourself, what are they surrounding? Not tan earth, and earth doesn't seem really wounded anyway. It has to hold together. Anyway, it should be easy from there. Limbs can surround any number of things that represent wounds, like - I don't know - shattered birdsnests or sections of sky or something. You lose the "closer to the ground" thing then, but that was kind of irrelevant anyway; it can just as easily be who's higher up.
Rather than admitting any possible use for my admittedly far-fetched metaphor, you have chosen to misrepresent it, setting up a substitute straw-man for your arrows. Go ahead, for whatever use that is to you. I fail to see how it is useful to me.
You're not understanding me. And I'm not setting up a straw anything. That's just something dunces and richa say all the time when they're getting criticized. All I did was replace your images with poems with abstract titles according to what you said they represented. And it didn't add up. Or it kind of did, just all mixed up. Don't take my word for it. Try this: print a copy of this poem and write above each line whether it represents jokes, his wounds, missives, your wounds, or nothing. See what order they come out in, or if the nothing lines even fit with the metaphors at all (hint: they don't!)
To be doing it right, you should come out with either Image(jokes) Image(his wounds) Image(missives) Image(my wounds) Such are the jokes that cover his wounds and the missives surrounding mine ----OR (and this is a stretch)---- Image(jokes) Image(missives) Image(his wounds) Image(my wounds) Such are the jokes, etc etc etc. If you don't have that, it just doesn't make any fucking sense. People try to fit it into a Jokes, wounds, Missives, wounds structure and get "crusty and clean" snow being his wounds and "tan earth" being your wounds and HOW THE HELL IS CRUSTY SNOW SOMEONE'S WOUNDS???!?! Trust me, ANYONE is going to back me up on this. Oh, wait, I've forgotten. You don't trust the opinion of any person on this site except that moron Dan Garcia-Black. Well, take a jump down a manhole, then. I might as well be talking to a fucking vegetable. Sheesh.
I don't recall ever talking about straw men but I do rather embarrass myself when attacked so it is possible. Anyway, I just wanted to say I am grateful for the help I get from you zodiac. Thanks.
I knew when I posted this poem that the imagery was far-fetched, and therefore easy to misinterpret and easy to attack. I have already admitted this, and therefore your attack is somewhat justified. Rather than casting off your diatribe off as easy slander, which would be my first reaction, I have done your exercise. The representation of each line in the poem is in parentheses.
Snow on the ground (Snow is a covering, a shroud â his jokes or my missives) shallow and dirty (contaminated, showing traces of the thing covered â pain) Up in the trees itâs crusty and clean (uncontaminated snow on limbs â effective jokes or missives) Black limbs sagging (limbs and anything dark = pain) frosty and white (pain covered and unseen) Tan earth hidden (earth = pain) âneath snow and dust (only partially hidden) Such are the jokes (jokes = snow) that cover his wounds and the missives (missives = snow) surrounding mine Which are more lofty (his jokes or my missives?) covering whiter? Which bear the dust (his jokes or my missives?) Of weaker defense? (weaker = contaminated with dust)
Thank you for listening to me, really. Now that we're on the same page, I'd like to point out that
a) shallow and dirty snow doesn't immediately suggest to me (or anyone else, apparently) "traces of the thing covered - pain", so I think you missed the mark; b) taking the parallels in the metaphor HisJokes/HisPain, HerMissives/HerPain across the stanza break was really fucking confusing. I'm still not sure I get it; c) And you've got about 4 pains and 4 things hidding by the time you get to the "such are the jokes" part, where the metaphor effectively stops and the metaphor-explanation begins. My suggestion: Just straighten it out. Make his pain something that's actually covered by the snow on the ground, like the ground. Make her pain something that's actually surrounded by your limbs/missives. Something like, Snow on the ground shallow and dirty [Covering the frost-scarred ground or something.] Black limbs sagging frosty and white [Clutching a piece of hard blue sky or something.] Such are the jokes that cover his wounds... That is all.
I'll consider that.
PS-I'm full of spelling errors today. It's cause Yasser's dead. There were actually people wailing in the street this morning.
Dovina this poem is your aceest.However the last two verses are complete bum tripe and do not belong on this fine work. The imagery is quite nice but then to try and relate it to something completely imaginary like a relationship between you and a man is just absurd!
I suggest you write two further verses about pine forests and cold soil. Until there are changes I reserve my vote.
Yes they are bumtripe, if you do not make the connection (see comment above)
But according to Choad the connection is so very dim and weak as to be preposterous. Please explain.
What appears dim to you appears bright to me, and not weak either. The poem reflects a strong feeling I had while walking along a dusty road on a cold winter day. The connection between dark colored objects (pain) and their white coverings of snow was just as strong.
INSIPID I think you were weak in the bowels and you shook a hard, frozen stool off behind a bush.
INSIPID Tell Dovina you're sorry.
375 view(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Like brain cancer.
the third stanza
is utter crap, but...
I didn't know weaker defense was dusty?
And I've never seen snow with dust, because
dust is dry, do you mean silt? or dusty snow?
Only you could make an afternoon walk, this
fucking confusing.
Dust is dry as it moves windborne in the air and remains dry when it falls on snow. Only if the snow begins to melt does the dust become damp.