| Poem: Submit | Random | Best | Worst | Recent | Comments |
|
Rejuvenation (Free verse) by Dovina She sat before the easel,
mixing oils on a palette.
The scene we both were looking at
was the scene I wrote on pad.
Her strokes and colors by impression
from somewhere in her mind.
My words described the daffodilâ
hard, like yellow polished steel.
Together we made our impressioned strokes
for so delicate a plant.
Both had said before we started,
a flower has but one true role.
But with so many other traits,
letâs give it something more.
Weâre past the stage of bearing kids,
letâs take the flowerâs goal,
And change the two from making seeds
to making weak things strong.
Up the ladder:
The Deep End
Down the ladder:
Dreams
Votes: (green: user, blue: anonymous)
Arithmetic Mean: 5.3333335
Posted: September 8, 2005 12:28 PM PDT; Last modified: September 8, 2005 12:28 PM PDTWeighted score: 5.0397344 Overall Rank: 7087 Comments:
[8]
wilco @ 66.61.101.130
|
8-Sep-05/12:49 PM
|
Reply
I like the way this flows and the sounds of it, but it's just a little peppy for me (I'm in a state of disillusionment with the human race at the moment), sooooooooo....I don't know...thats just how I feel, and as many of the whipper snappers posting on this site will tell you, feelings are the only thing that matters.
[n/a]
Dovina @ 69.92.13.105
> wilco
|
8-Sep-05/1:06 PM
|
Reply
Become a daffodil. Forget about the human race. Right now I'm about to polish my yellow steel petals and go peppily out for some leisurely shopping snd dinner. You might find me later this evening at a bar in Dyersburg, Tn.
[8]
wilco @ 66.61.101.130
> Dovina
|
8-Sep-05/1:08 PM
|
Reply
I'll be in Memphis..I try to stay away from Dyersburg as much as possible...but hey, stay away from Chequers...that place is crusty in the worst way.
[n/a]
Dovina @ 69.92.13.105
> wilco
|
8-Sep-05/1:15 PM
|
Reply
Alright, I'll be there.
[n/a]
Dovina @ 69.92.13.105
> Dovina
|
9-Sep-05/6:50 AM
|
Reply
I'm hurt! You weren't there. Neither was Chequers - only a vacant store front across Main Street on the east side of the courthouse.
Where you went wrong was probably saying flowers only have one role. At least that's more than halfway through the poem this time.
What purpose do flowers have other than to produce seeds?
1) To attract insects to pollinate them (not primarily to produce seeds,) but that's neither here nor there. Before you argue, the flower - that is, the colorful petaly part of the plant - is devised for bug attraction and fertilization. You can say that's a step in seed production, but then so are all of the plant's functions.
2) Pure prettiness. 3) To provide something to compare pretty girls with. 4) To give Jesus a better metaphor than "consider the coniferous trees of the field, they toil not." 5) To provide olden poets with rhymes for bower, hour, and power. 6) To make crowns and garlands out of. I'm not even being silly yet. Seriously. At the very least, if flowers weren't pretty, comparable to beautiful women, and easily-rhymeable, you'd have written your poem about something else that was.
I can say that those are steps and side effects in reaching the goal of making seeds. Yes, I will say that. Weâre talking about purpose and goal here. Strange how the path to a mundane goal sometimes becomes beautiful.
Would you say that the purpose of your eyes is to produce children? Why?
No. Eyes are not organs of reproduction. Flowers are. Of course you could take the arguement that the sole function of any organ is to help the organism reproduce. Your wisdom teeth, (misnamed), for example, then - what are they for?
Why not? Eyes attract males for purposes of fertilization. Flowers attract bees for purposes of fertilization. If you don't believe me, ask yourself, what part of the flower actually produces seeds? Is that really even part of the flower? What's all the rest for?
Wisdom teeth are relics from times when people ate grass. Here in Jordan, where people actually do eat grass, most people retain their wisdom teeth and lose the rest. True story. Extra grass-chewing ability allows grass-eating humans to survive to fertility and reproduce. But that's nothing like the eye argument. PS: Note the spelling on argument. You've gone on too long with your vestigial 'e's, frankly.
But eyes have many other functions. What other functions do flowers have?
Like I said, to attract insects and birds for pollination. In that sense, they're as much a part of seed-production as beards or buttocks, especially the baboon sort. Yes, eyes were a bad example, but you wouldn't say beards have a lot of other functions, would you?
It's a moot arguement, and all about words, not about reality. We both know that to reproduce is the goal of man and all his organs.
That's a moot argument and not about reality. For one, plenty of purposeful people living now are not reproducing. For two, if your answer to the previous sentence is humans (and their organs) came into existence for purposes of reproduction, please ask yourself if you believe organisms have a purpose besides the one they give themselves at any moment, who or what gave them that purpose then, and why you aren't in church this Sunday morning? To wit, reproduction isn't necessary to the continuation of the species for 99.9999% of human beings or flowers. How can you claim reproduction is still a purpose?
To even more wit, it's all kind of backwards anyways: All existing species survived by reproduction, so you say that the purpose of existing species is survival by reproduction. If a species didn't reproduce or, consequently, survive, would you say that it failed at its purpose or that it excelled at a totally different purpose, like going extinct?
For a species to continue, it must reproduce. Evolutioin states that that is its purpose - to continue. I agree that we humans can have other purposes, but these are of our choosing and are not needed for species survival. So such a view is as odds with evolution. I find a lot of truth in evolution, but can't believe it's the only force in human continuance.
Evolution doesn't STATE anything. Most of the aminals you see around you have a strong urge to reproduce, because the stupid animals who didn't have that urge did not sustain themselves. For obvious reasons. The idea of PURPOSE only makes sense within some CONTEXT. For instance, in a game of cricket, the PURPOSE of a batsman's box is to PROTECT HIS BOLLOCKS. There you have a CONTEXT, namely, that cricket is played with a hard ball, and batsmen want to shield their unmentionables from violent knocks. For you to mention PURPOSE without CONTEXT is paltry in the extreme, and leaves me no choice but to ban you from further discussion on the matter.
The context, obviously, is the array of living things on the earth. Evolution does state things, again obviously. And it states that the those species which are able to reproduce survive. Your banning is banal in the extreme.
OBSTINATE, headstrong girl I'm ashamed of you. Firstly, the collection of living things is not an Array, it's a Tree. Secondly, "the array of living things" doesn't even come close to being a context in which a Gentleman may meaningfully employ the word 'purpose' without further qualification. When we use the word 'purpose' we always do it with some wider context in mind. "The purpose of X is to do such-and-such so I can achieve Y." "The purpose of my hammer is to bang in this nail so my house doesn't fall down." The hammer's purpose is described by reference to a wider context, and it's purpose is entirely dependent on that context. It's nonsense to talk about its purpose in the context of itself. Hammers mean different things to different people, and in different contexts. I use hammers beat my servants. God knows what you use them for.
And yet people always talk about their 'purpose' without reference to a wider context. "The purpose of living things is to reproduce." Ok but in what context? "In the context of living things on the earth." Yeah great but that's not a wider context (and therefore is not a context at all, since all contexts must be wider contexts). And it goes on: "What's our purpose?" Well, purpose to whom? To God, our purpose is to worship Jesu, thereby obtaining a free ticket into Heaven. "Yes but what's our purpose to US?" I don't know about you, but if praising Jesu is a good enough purpose for God, then it's good enough for me. The fact that it isn't good enough for you is why I'm so ashamed of you, and why my banning you was not an act of banality, but an act of mercy.
First, allow me to express appreciative humility on having so affected your life that your esteem of me has reduced to becoming ashamed. Such feelings donât arise from casual acquaintance over an internet exchange, but rather from deep affection such as between brother and sister or father and daughter.
God does indeed know what I use hammers for, as do I. Thatâs because we both understand the context, wider or narrower as you wish, of my purpose in using them. Itâs kind of like the way a worm understands the purpose for its existence. It may think of the next meal or the next intercourse, but really its purpose as God and I see it is to reproduce. Granted, God may see other purposes, being wiser than I. Iâm sorry you cannot understand this as well as the worm does. To God, our purpose is to worship Jesus, as you say, but not for a ticket to Heaven. In fulfilling our purpose to the glory of God and in the continuance of mankind, it is necessary for us to reproduce, to eat, to live long enough to reproduce, to keep from freezing, and other purposes. I realize this is an incomplete description of life, and hope its brevity will encourage you to seek more knowledge.
Firstly, your responses to -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I.'s sarcasm are unfailingly to ironically treat his obvious misrepresentations as if they were true. What do you think he's doing? Please give it a rest.
Second, you're still not getting it. This, if I may, is your argument: The purpose of specieses is to continue. The purpose of specieses is to fulfill their purpose of continuing by reproducing. Who says so? Evolution herself says so. Now, please consider: Who or what REALLY says the purpose of specieses is to continue? Yes, the theory we've made up to identify features PRESENTLY EXISTING SPECIESES have in common (i.e., the theory of evolution) says so. Obviously. A theory made by the cleverest people around in order to describe reality actually holds true for almost every situation. Especially when it's such a simple theory as "All creatures currently surviving on earth have in common that they survive, and have certain specialized skills that have allowed them to do so." Even if you don't get the forgoing, get this: I do not believe the purpose of human beings is to reproduce. I certainly don't believe my purpose is to reproduce. I believe my purpose for living is to someday make you see the error of at least one of your ways. This can change at any time. I also believe that if humans were designed specifically and only in order to ensure the continuation of humanity, we'd do a lot better at it.
First, (not firstly) I realized before you mentioned -=Dark_Angel=-,P.I.'s obvious misrepresentations, that they are sarcasm. That is not the thing I was answering. Please read again.
Second, all species must reproduce to continue, making this their purpose, expressed by them or not. Evolution says so, because it is a theory made by humans to say things like that. Surely you get this. Maybe you want to argue about the meaning of the word âpurpose.â We have both stated that we believe humans have purposes other than reproduction. I hope you will someday realize yours by making me see an error of my ways. I look forward to that.
Yes. I believe I've said thrice now that you're bumbling for assuming that the purpose of any species is continuation, and doubly so for thinking that by not admitting that what you're really saying is "the purpose of any species is continuation" you're somehow getting around that. Still not getting it? Try this:
Saying the purpose of a species is to reproduce in order to continue is THE SAME THING as saying the purpose of a species is to continue. If you're going to argue with something, argue with that, at least. Or on second thought, don't. Just please, please, please for once in your life listen to either -=Dark_Angel=- or me. The "purpose" of a hammer is to drive in nails - we all know that. However, I own a hammer which has never driven in nails but has, for the entirety of its existence, been a doorstop. Does this mean the hammer's existence is wasted? Does it mean the hammer has failed to accomplish its purpose, or that it has bumbled off the path in pursuit of a WRONG purpose? No, of course not. Especially since, as far as my house is concerned and probably even farther, the only thing determining a hammer's purpose is I, me, zodiac (and Mrs zodiac, of course. She rules.) Are we agreed to this point? Good. Now extend the metaphor to a human living in the universe. Questions: 1) Who is the "zodiac" in the larger, universal metaphor? 2) That is, who is defining species' purpose like I (or hammer manufacturers, if you will,) define my hammer's purpose? 3) God? 4) Do you really think so? 5) If no one except the person living in the universe (or me using my hammer) decides what the purpose of life (or hammering) is, can it not really be anything we want it to? 6) If an evolutionary scientist (or some hammer expert) tried to tell me what the purpose of my life (or hammer) was, I'd probably hammer his fucking eggy head. I know this isn't a question. 7) In short, don't you seem kind of off your rocker on this? 286 view(s)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
