New to the Forums

[bflagsst]

I'd have enjoyed it more like this:

I romance her
wrapped in frigid night
breathe clouds around the hedges
of gleaming hazel eyes
sweat steaming on the cusp of her

On crimson sheets
laid tender by moon's aura
she's purring, primal
whispering heated words into my ears

"Are you real?" I ask




ok, I know this changes the entire aspect of the write from the author's intention, and agree that last image of her dissolving taste fizzing on his tongue is good enough, but it makes a better poem for ME. I'm selfish like that

You're sticking with "I romance[d] her"? I thought that was a terrible first line. The poem is about erotic romance, I wouldn't write a dirty poem where the first line was: "I ate her vagina, dirtily and dutifully". There are romance poems and then there are eating vagina poems, but the first line shouldn't say "This is the genre of the poem you're about to read."

 

[butters]

You're sticking with "I romance[d] her"? I thought that was a terrible first line. The poem is about erotic romance, I wouldn't write a dirty poem where the first line was: "I ate her vagina". There are romance poems and then there are eating vagina poems, but the first line shouldn't say "This is the genre of the poem you're about to read."

if i were to write it, then i'd lose it but I was trying to keep his voice in the poem

I just made the point I'd have enjoyed it more written that way than the way it was first presented.

 

[bflagsst]

if i were to write it, then i'd lose it but I was trying to keep his voice in the poem

I just made the point I'd have enjoyed it more written that way than the way it was first presented.

Besides for that, I'm really trying to figure out what a moon's aura is and whether it can illuminate a room. The aura is the glow around the moon, old wives say it predicts snow, old men sometimes see it when it's not there cuz they've cloudy vision, see auras everywhere. The glow of the moon in the room can't really be related to the aura of the moon, poetic license might not be able to pull them together.

 

[butters]

Besides for that, I'm really trying to figure out what a moon's aura is and whether it can illuminate a room. The aura is the glow around the moon, old wives say it predicts snow, old men sometimes see it when it's not there cuz they've cloudy vision, see auras everywhere. The glow of the moon in the room can't really be related to the aura of the moon, poetic license might not be able to pull them together.

i think (hope) he means more a softening of demeanour (the lovers) more than the softening of the bright sheets, crimson being the colour of carnal passion/savagery - the influence (romantic) of the moon having a softening effect on the heart and mind in (i'm assuming) post-coital prostration?

 

[bflagsst]

i think (hope) he means more a softening of demeanour (the lovers) more than the softening of the bright sheets, crimson being the colour of carnal passion/savagery - the influence (romantic) of the moon having a softening effect on the heart and mind in (i'm assuming) post-coital prostration?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zbi9NgWUyQ

 

[butters]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zbi9NgWUyQ

that is too cute

 

[EroticOrogeny]

Yeah, transcendental, tensor, vector, Gaussian and Riemannian poetry

If we consider quantum we can't forget spinor.
Riemann sheets or surfaces ?

 

[champagne1982]

where can i find it? show me

I like my December 01 in front of it, too...Dirty December 02

 

[Epmd607]

Besides for that, I'm really trying to figure out what a moon's aura is and whether it can illuminate a room. The aura is the glow around the moon, old wives say it predicts snow, old men sometimes see it when it's not there cuz they've cloudy vision, see auras everywhere. The glow of the moon in the room can't really be related to the aura of the moon, poetic license might not be able to pull them together.

Moon's aura can illuminate a room. Maybe it needs a medium, such as fog outside the window, but I'd say aura can infiltrate a bedroom, since it's just reflected, refracted light. But there has to be clouds, moonlight and aura are different poetic vehicles of illumination. Using 'aura' in any context is probably cliche, though. That's a small contest, see who can writing two lines of poetry using 'aura' in a cool way. Auerole, corona always beats aura, aura has that New Age nonsense tied to it. Auerole sucks too. Forget it.

 

[bflagsst]

If we consider quantum we can't forget spinor.
Riemann sheets or surfaces ?

I remember reading about Riemann in my math book. It said he was like the most shy guy of all-time, like shaking in public terrified to give public lectures. Riemannian poetry would be sort of like sad surfaces, and sometimes droopy sheets.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

I remember reading about Riemann in my math book. It said he was like the most shy guy of all-time, like shaking in public terrified to give public lectures. Riemannian poetry would be sort of like sad surfaces, and sometimes droopy sheets.

A leap into the unknown?

 

[bflagsst]

A leap into the unknown?

I don't know about a leap. This guy Riemann as a real young guy knew exactly what he was doing, he went up in front of the legends of math and basically told them that they were still doing ancient math and showed them how to do grown up math. Then he'd go and have another nervous breakdown, get a little better and change math again. I was definitely more interested in the stories around these math guys then in all the math. I can't remember why I did three semesters of calculus, I couldn't pay attention, all these cute butts kept distracting me.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

I don't know about a leap. This guy Riemann as a real young guy knew exactly what he was doing, he went up in front of the legends of math and basically told them that they were still doing ancient math and showed them how to do grown up math. Then he'd go and have another nervous breakdown, get a little better and change math again. I was definitely more interested in the stories around these math guys then in all the math. I can't remember why I did three semesters of calculus, I couldn't pay attention, all these cute butts kept distracting me.

Errrrr quantum leap? never mind lol

 

[EroticOrogeny]

I remember reading about Riemann in my math book. It said he was like the most shy guy of all-time, like shaking in public terrified to give public lectures. Riemannian poetry would be sort of like sad surfaces, and sometimes droopy sheets.

Combining relativity and complex analysis.
Riemann surfaces of differential geometry (dula of the dual maps to itself, tangent bundles ...)
Riemann sheets as one way of comprehending branch cuts.
One of the entertaining itmes in our math buuilding was the stamp vending machine, which would return a penny change for a quarter and 3 8 cent stamps - sometimes the penny would fly and land over a meter away from the machine!

 

[butters]

maths and i were always odd bedfellows

 

[UnderYourSpell]

our maths master was called Mr Spanky

 

[butters]

our maths master was called Mr Spanky

for real?

 

[UnderYourSpell]

for real?

Yes lol we also had a Miss Bunny,Miss Hare, Mrs Smiley and Miss Poots (fondly called potty Poots)

 

[butters]

Yes lol we also had a Miss Bunny,Miss Hare, Mrs Smiley and Miss Poots (fondly called potty Poots)

what a great school! well, name-wise anyway.

 

[butters]

I like my December 01 in front of it, too...Dirty December 02

for some reason I can't access search or some pages. might need to reboot. but i am able to grab your dirty december 02. It's only showing up as a single post, not as a part of a thread or a published piece?

shall I paste and comment here?

i frikkin hate heartburn. not your poem though

 

[skimmyskim]

I found myself vaguely amused at the way he 'explained' the technicalities of his poems to people here who obviously know far more about the subject. It did, unfortunately, smack of condescension to us poor illiterates

Okay, well I took lorencino's comment out of context. The way you worded your phrase, it seemed to me, that it was sarcasm. I read another poem that you posted that was just you repeating the word "cock" and "cunt" and assumed that you were just trolling (Again, if that makes me seem arrogant or something, again, I apologize). And for that mistake I'm really sorry. I was taking what he said as sarcasm, that got me to post what I did. The internet is a place where there are a lot of trolls and people who just want to argue for the sake of argument, so I was just going to cut my losses and just stop posting. But since this is not the case, I apologize.

As for why i was put off by the comments about the haiku, was not an act of arrogance on my part. I did not assume that you guys were less intelligent than I; where did I say that? I'm sorry that my impatience came off as arrogant. It was that I did not need a lesson in what a haiku. I already know that it is a 17 syllable poem, in Japanese, usually with a slight twist at the end, usually about nature, etc. I thought I could loosely associate my poem with that since it had some similar formal element. If it pleases the forum, however, I would like to agree and say that first poem was merely a loose nod towards the haiku and not itself a haiku.

As for other comments about my second poem, the only reason I explain myself is dialogue. Are you saying I have no right to defend my statements? That I'm supposed to just let you say things about it, and that I have no say in what you have just said? I tried my best to be as polite as possible in my explanations and did, in no way, come of as arrogant or claim that I was better or more intelligent. I was merely telling you where I was coming from and why I would disagree with what you would have to say. Isn't arrogance then, if trying to explain my reasoning, for you to shoot me down as arrogant simply because I'm offering a rebuttal? I felt then, if I responded from where I was coming from, you'd have a better idea about what I was trying to do. That doesn't mean I'm existing in a vacuum, simply to deflect any negative thoughts about the poems I did. I agreed, the first line sucked. Another user said that I be more specific about certain elements of the imagery I used. As a rebuttal, and I've already stated this, saying that I simply want you to fill in the noun is an oversimplification. What I tried to do was illicite the right image or noun in your head by using the phrasing before that blank spot. I tried to guide you using the words beforehand to illicite that image or thing in your head without saying it; It is not a simple fill in the blank as you made it sound. But, if you say that it came of as such, then I think I should rewrite those lines in order to make the word and images apparent to you. I considered it, and will try to do so more in the future. I want to keep the flow of this poem, and will try different in the future. But honestly, I want to try being different, and that was a small way in which I tried.

I'm apologizing for my impatience about the haiku subject. And as for my angry departure, it all stemmed from a misinterpretation of lorencino's comment, and, for that I'm sorry. Thank you again for the comments and criticisms on my pieces.

 

[butters]

Okay, well I took lorencino's comment out of context. The way you worded your phrase, it seemed to me, that it was sarcasm. I read another poem that you posted that was just you repeating the word "cock" and "cunt" and assumed that you were just trolling (Again, if that makes me seem arrogant or something, again, I apologize). And for that mistake I'm really sorry. I was taking what he said as sarcasm, that got me to post what I did. The internet is a place where there are a lot of trolls and people who just want to argue for the sake of argument, so I was just going to cut my losses and just stop posting. But since this is not the case, I apologize.

erm, that wasn't my poem, btw. i believe maybe you're referring to lori's take on how some people write erotica, his point being that it's not. The ONLY poem here I have used those words in together they were used once each.
Apologies accepted here by me, and arrogance is something seen all to often on a forum, and even long-standing members have been known to trip over themselves I actually responded to you fairly, and gently, asking questions that you tried to answer. You did, however, come across as having made up your mind about your work and would consider no other opinion than your own. I'm sure most if not all of us have been there. The reasons for us explaining to you the ways of kaiku were what we try to do here - and that's help out, so mistakes don't get repeated too often.

Sure you came across as a bighead And no doubt we came across to you as a sarcastic bunch of c-words. If you can get past that, listen to advice without feeling pressurised to take it but appreciating it's offered with good will, get a feel for what's sound advice to follow, and relax enough to enjoy yourself without anyone taking themselves too seriously, you might enjoy it here. This place has some very decent writers and we're all on a learning curve, no matter how published or new to the game we are.

As for why i was put off by the comments about the haiku, was not an act of arrogance on my part. I did not assume that you guys were less intelligent than I; where did I say that? I'm sorry that my impatience came off as arrogant. It was that I did not need a lesson in what a haiku. I already know that it is a 17 syllable poem, in Japanese, usually with a slight twist at the end, usually about nature, etc. I thought I could loosely associate my poem with that since it had some similar formal element. If it pleases the forum, however, I would like to agree and say that first poem was merely a loose nod towards the haiku and not itself a haiku.

Text has a habit of making us sound pedantic twats at time, even me So, having written tanka, renga, and kus with an award winning haiku writer and having got a little bit of a feel for it (without even now really having a thorough grasp of the sharp end), I am compelled to say your poem still bears no resemblance to a haiku. AND THAT'S OK. It's fine to have different opinions. So long as you realise I'm right, right?

As for other comments about my second poem, the only reason I explain myself is dialogue. Are you saying I have no right to defend my statements? That I'm supposed to just let you say things about it, and that I have no say in what you have just said? I tried my best to be as polite as possible in my explanations and did, in no way, come of as arrogant or claim that I was better or more intelligent. I was merely telling you where I was coming from and why I would disagree with what you would have to say. Isn't arrogance then, if trying to explain my reasoning, for you to shoot me down as arrogant simply because I'm offering a rebuttal?

I didn't shoot you down, dude. You have to try to grow a resilient skin. I'm seriously one of the kinder critters, always looking for the positive as well as the negative in order to offer a balanced viewpoint. It's how I expect to be treated. And yeah, text being a deaf language, when someone tries to explain something seriously and at length it can come off as arrogant. That's why they invented smilies, I think.


I felt then, if I responded from where I was coming from, you'd have a better idea about what I was trying to do. That doesn't mean I'm existing in a vacuum, simply to deflect any negative thoughts about the poems I did. I agreed, the first line sucked. Another user said that I be more specific about certain elements of the imagery I used. As a rebuttal, and I've already stated this, saying that I simply want you to fill in the noun is an oversimplification. What I tried to do was illicit the right image or noun in your head by using the phrasing before that blank spot. I tried to guide you using the words beforehand to illicit that image or thing in your head without saying it; It is not a simple fill in the blank as you made it sound. But, if you say that it came of as such, then I think I should rewrite those lines in order to make the word and images apparent to you. I considered it, and will try to do so more in the future. I want to keep the flow of this poem, and will try different in the future. But honestly, I want to try being different, and that was a small way in which I tried.

I'm apologizing for my impatience about the haiku subject. And as for my angry departure, it all stemmed from a misinterpretation of lorencino's comment, and, for that I'm sorry. Thank you again for the comments and criticisms on my pieces.

okies. well glad to see you back and talking things through. that's a big step and shows you're not a totally ignorant twit I also apologise for anything I said that was out of order.
Now, the next thing that might be nice is for you to visit the works of some other writers here and offer your opinions. So long as you're honest, I don't think people will have any problems with you sharing your thoughts. As adults, we are all entitled to our opinions and needn't feel oppressed by anyone offering ones that differ to ours. Welcome back.

 

[bflagsst]

He keeps talking about the 'cusp of her petite-' line. It's just not good, you can't end a line where the reader is going to have to sit and think over whether the word is an adjective or a noun. Once the reader stops reading and has to make a decision about something technical like that the flow of the poem is dead. There were many more problems with that poem though, I think I pointed them out pretty well, line by line even. If a group of readers are finding the same difficulties, it's safe to assume you're not communicating what you thought you were. You shouldn't have to defend anything, maybe mention something if someone has a question, but defense of a poem is ludicrous. It's only 10-20 lines, just write a better poem.

 

[lorencino]

Deathbed Advice

snip

I'm apologizing for my impatience about the haiku subject. And as for my angry departure, it all stemmed from a misinterpretation of lorencino's comment, and, for that I'm sorry. Thank you again for the comments and criticisms on my pieces.

Now, my dear friend, let me assure you that I believe it took courage and maturity to come back here and apologize after that display of juvenile petulance.

The next thing you have to understand is graciousness. Your post would have been gracious if it were limited to the part that I quote above. All that other stuff is along the lines of making the same mistake you made when you argued about the validity of people's comments to your poem. When you ask what people think, you should listen carefully and ponder what they think. If you then want to discuss what they are thinking, couch your remarks in such a way as to not invalidate the opinions of those who have taken the trouble to consider your work. What you did in response to comments on your poetry, and are doing in the rest of this apology entry, is argue adversarially. For example, this sentence of yours is worth looking at by way of clarifying my point:

Isn't arrogance then, if trying to explain my reasoning, for you to shoot me down as arrogant simply because I'm offering a rebuttal?

There is no point in “offering a rebuttal” to someone's solicited opinion. There is a world of difference between the act of “trying to explain my reasoning” and “offering a rebuttal” and yet you use both phrases to refer to the same thing. This suggests you are confused about the nature of the activity you were involved in rather than arrogant.

To me, you appeared defensive and defensiveness is very tiresome when it is addressed to someone who was not really attacking you at all. Your defense/rebuttal/whatever was counter-productive because it arrested the discussion on the effect of your poems on your readers. For an aspiring poet, surely the effect of your poems on your readers is far more important than trying to justify the techniques that have not worked on the readers you are in discussion with.

If you had truly been trying to explain your reasoning it would not have sounded as defensive as it it did and this discussion would have run a very different course. Your approach would have been way more productive if your approach had been something like:

“OK, what I was trying to do there but failed to do was to yada yada yada."

Then your critic would be able to say: “Oh, so that is what you were trying to do. Maybe if you did x, y and z it would be more effective,”

or: “Oh, so that is what you were trying to do. The trouble is that that didn't work for me because yada, yada, yada.”

The point I am trying to make is that it is not worth defending your work if your defense puts people off and destroys communication. You have to respond to people in such a way as to make them want to keep up the discussion. If they walk away from you, it is utterly fruitless to blame them for walking away; you have simply failed to engage them.

Hearing criticism of the techniques you have thought long and hard about and for which you feel a certain satisfaction is hard to take. One's ego instinctively wants to defend what one believed is a personal achievement. But the things that one's ego values can range from the most excellent to complete trash and therefore, whenever you ego prompts you to jump to the defence of something you do or have done, it is far better to laugh at your ego than to sneer at your audience.

When a post angers you, NEVER respond until you have had time to consider the possibility that the post which angers you may have a valid point and if they don't seem justified in saying what they have said to anger you, wait for the anger to pass before you respond.

Finally, and most important of all
Humans communicate on many levels and one of the most important levels is in the realm of body language. Because body language, tone of voice, volume, etc are absent from the written word one has to be supremely careful about taking offence in written discussion forums like this one. This is the reason why spoken English is quite distinct from written English. The formality of written English is necessary to minimize misunderstandings that can occur when the body language component of the communication is not there. Spoken English allows for much of the formal rules to be dispensed with because of what is communicated in the body language.

This is not a formal English sentence: “Mmmm.” because it could communicate any number of opposite meanings. When it is spoken with a certain incantation it can mean "Yes” and with a different incantation it can mean “Fuck off! You're bothering me.”

 

[lorencino]

Exactly!

snip
You shouldn't have to defend anything, maybe mention something if someone has a question, but defense of a poem is ludicrous. It's only 10-20 lines, just write a better poem.

Remarkable how you can say in two short sentences what I am saying in my lengthy dissertation above. How does one cure verbosity?