Rejected Poem

[Tsotha]

Well, no. The implied accusation was that koba was baiting pedophilic fantasy through a narrative.

Which would suggest that he is...?

Aren't you a bright one. If you're desperate to take a poke at me, just go find one of my shitty poems. Much easier that way.

 

[butters]

"shit title"

I agree.

i know.

you're trying to make a point of being facetious with the intent of showing how 'ridiculous' we are while still getting away with posting the same piece. in my opinion you've wasted the opportunity to get your piece through as you intended (no matter what we thought of it) with minimal change.

 

[twelveoone]

For Portia, a Love Poem Dedicated to a 50 Year Old Submissive Female Who is in the Process of Reawakening Her Inner Child in Safe Sane and Consensual Interactions of a BDSM Nature With a 56 Year Old Dominant Male Who Cares Very Much About Her in a Very Loving Way.

well there goes my prurient interest...
Quick - what colour are her eyes, and don't give me that she's blindfolded bullshit.

 

[butters]

 

[Trixareforkids]

You used TLG purposefully, what was that purpose?

'My baby', which would tie in with the "birth" that follows better and is a common phrase used between adult lovers, would work just as well, better even.

You put the image (little girl)
before the context (porn/loving)

So the readers/editors aren't setting you up
YOU set them up

lots of ways to rephrase it so at the first real image the reader gets isn't of an actual child.

Posting on the forum when you already knew why it was rejected, whining about the rejection and pointing out other places where it hadn't been rejected, all lead me in a straight line to the conclusion that it WAS your intent, despite your words of denial.

You want people to overlook the very leading words in your piece and see beyond them to your intent. Well, I overlooked your words here and the intent that I see is that you DO want people to picture a little girl.

 

[pensivepoet]

I'm all for offensive poetry. Poetry is too often polite and too thought out.

Ya know, for a minute or so, i almost forgot i feel the same way.
Thanks bogus

 

[champagne1982]

You used TLG purposefully, what was that purpose?

'My baby', which would tie in with the "birth" that follows better and is a common phrase used between adult lovers, would work just as well, better even.

You put the image (little girl)
before the context (porn/loving)

So the readers/editors aren't setting you up
YOU set them up

lots of ways to rephrase it so at the first real image the reader gets isn't of an actual child.

Posting on the forum when you already knew why it was rejected, whining about the rejection and pointing out other places where it hadn't been rejected, all lead me in a straight line to the conclusion that it WAS your intent, despite your words of denial.

You want people to overlook the very leading words in your piece and see beyond them to your intent. Well, I overlooked your words here and the intent that I see is that you DO want people to picture a little girl.

I agree Trix. It's Alice Through The Looking Glass and we're supposed to believe that she's a grown woman on this side of the mirror.

To Koba: Why don't you grow up and stop promoting your shit? I firmly believe that Lewis Carroll was a pedo, but at least in his stories he doesn't hit his little girl over the head with a sledge hammer. I'm now putting you in my blocked list, which is a shame since I was finding everyone else's posts here vastly entertaining. Sadly, your posts merely annoy and nauseate. SHOO!

 

[Tsotha]

Maybe she is a 50 yr old with the soul of a child, Trix.

 

[Trixareforkids]

Maybe she is a 50 yr old with the soul of a child, Trix.

I think you've got it wrong there Tsotha, the only thing childish about this is the author. He sees the child as a peer because he is one. He lacks the maturity to see the view of others and is just jumping up and down shouting "look at me, look at me" then pouting when we don't see the race car in his toilet paper roll construct.

 

[bflagsst]

suggest that he is...?

Aren't you a bright one. If you're desperate to take a poke at me, just go find one of my shitty poems. Much easier that way. [/QUOTE]

Try to follow along. KOBA the author isn't the narrator of the poem in an accusation that the author is putting pedo bait out there. So no one was calling Koba the pedo as for you to slip in out of nowhere for any type of lesson in sarcasm. Poetry 101, champ.

 

[Tsotha]

suggest that he is...?

Aren't you a bright one. If you're desperate to take a poke at me, just go find one of my shitty poems. Much easier that way.

Try to follow along. KOBA the author isn't the narrator of the poem in an accusation that the author is putting pedo bait out there. So no one was calling Koba the pedo as for you to slip in out of nowhere for any type of lesson in sarcasm. Poetry 101, champ.[/QUOTE]

I really got to you, eh? But then, you get offended over repeated words, so I'm not surprised.

 

[bflagsst]

Again, I can only reiterate. I wrote the poem. It was intended as a love poem for a 50 year old woman. That was the sole and solitary purpose of it. There was no attempt to offer up anything else or attempt to disguise anything. In my mind the term "little girl" is so commonly used as a term of endearment and affection that it staggers me that anyone can even infer that it is being used as a literal term in this case. There are numerous other references in the poem that clearly point to it being directed at an older woman.

Am I ticked off about what is going on here? Yes. I am being accused of being a pedophile, of disguising pedophilia, of lying, of writing shitty poetry, and being arrogant. There is truth in the last but not a shred in the former cases.

I know what the truth is. If anyone wishes to infer and interpret differently, then I guess that is the way it is. I am not going to change my writing or my outlook to suit the audience.

I'm genuinely interested in your choices of enframing an adult woman akin to a little girl. And it's not just that you chose to use 'little girl' you also chose to make her near birth in your next breath. So you really want us to know she is completely immature, not anywhere close to an equal of the adult man who does the teaching. I'm interested in your choices whether or not you intended the female character to be underage or not.

In what world(including bondage and domination) is it appealing to have a relationship where one of the partners is so lacking in personhood, maturity, character, intelligence that they are near birth in their understanding of the world? You position the female character as not being human, not gaining the fire of knowledge and humanity until you put your tacky tools to use. So the beginning of the poem is interesting, the end of the poem is covered in the residue of fetishism and forgettable.

 

[pelegrino]

Again, I can only reiterate. I wrote the poem. It was intended as a love poem for a 50 year old woman. That was the sole and solitary purpose of it. There was no attempt to offer up anything else or attempt to disguise anything. In my mind the term "little girl" is so commonly used as a term of endearment and affection that it staggers me that anyone can even infer that it is being used as a literal term in this case. There are numerous other references in the poem that clearly point to it being directed at an older woman.

Am I ticked off about what is going on here? Yes. I am being accused of being a pedophile, of disguising pedophilia, of lying, of writing shitty poetry, and being arrogant. There is truth in the last but not a shred in the former cases.

I know what the truth is. If anyone wishes to infer and interpret differently, then I guess that is the way it is. I am not going to change my writing or my outlook to suit the audience.

No need to try to justify your self, Koba, and to give particulars. This is a porno site with its rules and your argument is with them, not with us. Personally, I thought that your poem was a good love poem, and well done!

 

[twelveoone]

Again, I can only reiterate. I wrote the poem. It was intended as a love poem for a 50 year old woman. That was the sole and solitary purpose of it. There was no attempt to offer up anything else or attempt to disguise anything. In my mind the term "little girl" is so commonly used as a term of endearment and affection that it staggers me that anyone can even infer that it is being used as a literal term in this case. There are numerous other references in the poem that clearly point to it being directed at an older woman.

Am I ticked off about what is going on here? Yes. I am being accused of being a pedophile, of disguising pedophilia, of lying, of writing shitty poetry, and being arrogant. There is truth in the last but not a shred in the former cases.

I know what the truth is. If anyone wishes to infer and interpret differently, then I guess that is the way it is. I am not going to change my writing or my outlook to suit the audience.

Don't overplay it, every one knows you are more of a hard head than anything else.
whip lashed girl child

 

[pensivepoet]

I'm genuinely interested in your choices of enframing an adult woman akin to a little girl. And it's not just that you chose to use 'little girl' you also chose to make her near birth in your next breath. So you really want us to know she is completely immature, not anywhere close to an equal of the adult man who does the teaching. I'm interested in your choices whether or not you intended the female character to be underage or not.

In what world(including bondage and domination) is it appealing to have a relationship where one of the partners is so lacking in personhood, maturity, character, intelligence that they are near birth in their understanding of the world? You position the female character as not being human, not gaining the fire of knowledge and humanity until you put your tacky tools to use. So the beginning of the poem is interesting, the end of the poem is covered in the residue of fetishism and forgettable.

Is your view on birth truly that narrow?
"he was born in the summer of his 27th year, going home to a place he's never been before"
Where here does john denver imply immaturity or actual birth?
You may want to broaden your horizons.

 

[bflagsst]

Is your view on birth truly that narrow?
"he was born in the summer of his 27th year, going home to a place he's never been before"
Where here does john denver imply immaturity or actual birth?
You may want to broaden your horizons.

Read what you quoted again and tell me I'm still talking about actual physical children.

 

[Trixareforkids]

Read your own writing...

As soon as the thought of purgatory had been washed away:

The little girl, frozen since birth, got up to dance. Bathing in the morning sun, she felt her heart fluttering in the clover patch where she had stopped to say a prayer through a spider's web to the rainbow.

I remember watching her walking in a wilderness of mirrors, where daydreaming sheep with carnivorous eyes sought the opportunities of secrecy; moving like a silent panther through glaring reflections of evident truths surrounded by a fog of lies.

She came to my window, a raven with a broken wing.....


We shall steal fire. With it I shall give you the flame of confidence. Will you take it from me?

Now, think like an editor.

To get that far into the poem, with the INITIAL IMAGE of a little girl, on a PORN SITE, do you see it contrasted yet?

I don't. Most people do not want the two concepts mixed. So the editor nixed it, as they should per their rules.

Fix it or drop it are your two options.
You chose a third, to post it here

We are nearly unanimously telling you the same thing the editor did.

You set the reader up.

Failing to take anyone else into account when posting to the public is more YOUR failing than a readers.
Refusing to admit that it very well could be taken differently than you intend because of the placement of your phrasing doesn't negate the fact that it WAS taken AS PRESENTED rather than the metaphor you saw in your head.

Next, "baby" and "my girl" are common endearments, "my little girl" is not, not that it's not used, but it is not commonly used.

Add to that the fact that you didn't use "my" you used "the" and it was not used in the context of an endearment, it was at the beginning of your metaphor/story.

The failing here is yours.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

I know what the truth is. If anyone wishes to infer and interpret differently, then I guess that is the way it is. I am not going to change my writing or my outlook to suit the audience.

That's ok then, you won't get miffed when it's rejected by them will you?

 

[twelveoone]

If it is going to be rejected because of an implication that it is an attempt to promote pedophilia or disguise pedophilia then yes, I will get miffed, because it is neither. But I won't change to please those who misinterpret it.

Koba, rule of thumb, if three divergent people think it is a bad idea, it probably is.
Do you have an overriding argument for it? No, you being a hard head and defensive. Bury the "little girl" in the text, not as an opener with that other line.

 

[ninianne]

I hate to do this, because I feel like any comments aren't going to be taken in the spirit that it was given, but it seems like this discussion has entered into the interesting and problematic world of authorial intention--which is interesting to me.

Setting aside the question of this specific poem (which at this point has been talked to death on both sides without any real hope of resolution of thought between anybody concerned) one thing I think we're touching on is the responsibility that an author has to the reader. The reader also has responsibilities, but because we are authors here, let's set that aside for a moment.

The primary responsibility of the author is to create in the poem (or story--I'm not a poet, I'm much better at thinking in fiction) a sense of shared world that the reader can understand and relate to. In a poem, this needs to be created within the first few lines, because if it is held off, the poem is over without ever having come to that common ground that a reader could stand on.

This means that the first few lines need to establish the basis for the poem. What point of view will it be written in? Will it address a specific audience? What will that audience be called? What are the norms of this world? Are we dreaming or awake? It's also here that the primary metaphor of the poem is established.

As authors, we have the responsibility to establish these things clearly and as specifically as the poem allows (if we want the poem read). It is here where intended audience comes into play. Some poems have a highly specific audience in mind which does not lend itself to wider interpretation--for example, if a poem includes inside jokes between friends, a reader outside that circle of friends would feel lost and alone when faced with that poem.

Sharing a poem with a wider audience can give clues to the author about whether those shared jokes are intelligible. If the reader doesn't get it, it's not the reader's fault. The poem was not ready for that reader. Testing audiences like that can give the author clues to interpret whether the poem is ready for a wider audience or whether it should be taken home and rewritten again.

The point is, it is the author's responsibility to create the world. As the reader encounters the poem, they have the responsibility to read it like it is a poem, to accept that not everything has a literal interpretation, to be willing to see the world in a different way because they have been led there by the poem(the reader has other responsibilities--of course, including the obligation to remember that the people in the poem are not necessarily the author). However, if the reader does not get it, it is not that reader's fault. It is the fault of the author.

Either the author has not provided sufficient care in establishing the world of the poem, or the author has presented a poem to an audience that is not appropriate for it. If the author has to stand over the poem with a club, defending it from all possible harm, than clearly, the poem was not ready to share, yet, at least not with particular group that is being defended against.

In other words, if baby (and by baby, here I mean poem--I thought I should clarify) is ready to go out on a date, it's time for papa to stay home biting his nails, instead of heading to the row behind them in the theatre racking his shotgun while glaring at the back of the date's head. And this is true with any poem we put out to the public--I'm not specifically talking to the OP.

 

[twelveoone]

Do I have an overriding argument for it? Yes, it is my poem.

.

get past it.
writer>poem<reader
if you know the reader is going to react in a way you don't want, why do you want it?
I would have dropped in on the second objection, because it is mineand keeping it would make it my cripple.
And we all know what a motherfuckin prick, I am.

 

[Magnetron]

Page 3

We get it. You won't change the poem to suit anyone else. I wouldn''t either.

Let us know when you resubmit it with a disclaimer. Or if it was accepted in the first submit at a competitor. Or if you have it available on your own personal website where you make your own rules about what can be published.

yawn

 

[UnderYourSpell]

Look I'm sorry you are miffed, I too have had a poem rejected for much the same reason and I too had some thoughts of righteous indignation that it was read that way but (and it's a big but) thems the rules and no amount of ranting and raving is going to change them and getting in a high state of dudgeon is going to do your digestion no good at all. Yes I rolled over and changed it, do that or don't, it's up to how much you want it posted here. Simple as that. Site owners are protecting themselves and if that means taking interpretations to the limits ........ then they will ........ and do.

 

[twelveoone]

Look I'm sorry you are miffed, I too have had a poem rejected for much the same reason and I too had some thoughts of righteous indignation that it was read that way but (and it's a big but) thems the rules and no amount of ranting and raving is going to change them and getting in a high state of dudgeon is going to do your digestion no good at all. Yes I rolled over and changed it, do that or don't, it's up to how much you want it posted here. Simple as that. Site owners are protecting themselves and if that means taking interpretations to the limits ........ then they will ........ and do.

i think he likes those parts
he did this shit in the past.
Now cane wendy, he probably was expecting you to show up with the spankies and you didn't. YOU failed him. YOU should be ashamed of yourself.
Go spank yourself.

 

[ninianne]

What you wrote is good. I can agree with much of it. However, I cannot agree with the crux which is: "However, if the reader does not get it, it is not that reader's fault. It is the fault of the author."

There are many poets that I don't get at all. I admire Rimbaud greatly yet I don't get a lot of his stuff at all. Is it his fault? Not at all. I just simply don't have the tools to grasp his poems. I have read Dylan Thomas. I understand very little of his stuff except for a few which I love (Rage, rage against the dying of the light!) Much of Sylvia Plath escapes me. Yet I realize that it is me, not them.

I apologize. I never meant to imply that an author's responsibility is to make their poem easy. However, it is their responsibility to give the poem an entrance, some point of accessibility to the reader.