NancyGene wrote:
HarryLime wrote:
NancyGene wrote:
HarryLime wrote:
NancyGene wrote:
HarryLime wrote:
HarryLime wrote:
HarryLime wrote:
HarryLime wrote:
W.Dockery wrote:
Jordy C wrote:
Will Dockery wrote:
Jordy C wrote:
Will Dockery wrote:
Jordy C wrote:
Will Dockery wrote:
Jordy C wrote:
Ciao, my friend
Good afternoon, Jordy, and thanks again for reading and >>>>>>>>>>>> commenting.
Shalom Will
Good morning, Jordy.
🙂
Bonjpur Will, spent a few days with my nephew… what a marvelous young
mean he is! So thankful
To be his uncle! ðŸ™â¤ï¸
Sorry for the spelling mistakes! Writing on my phone, and it is >>>>>>>>>>>> difficult to see…
thank you for understanding that I would NEVER do what NG, claimed,
ASH! here is just ONE of countless examples-from June... >>>>>>>>>>>>
Thanks again my friend.
Get a room.
Will & Jordy rent the local bridal suite.
If Stinky G had been in the room (under the bed?), he would have had >>>>>> that rat on the barbecue in a NY minute. Or, does he do sushi-rat? >>>>>
Both. Stinky G eats rats raw, barbecued, and boiled in a stew.
Unfortunately, there's no electricity at the homeless camp, so he can no >>>>> longer deep fry them.
We know that he has tried to steal a turkey fryer at Thanksgiving. He >>>> loves the taste of rat cooked in peanut oil. He has started many a
forest fire trying to do that.
As Stinky G likes to say (when he's sober enough to remember it), "Rat
is where it's at."
We have heard that Stinky G hangs around the pest control trucks, hoping
for a ride to where the trophy specimens are.
The local pest control workers give their exterminated rats to Stinky G
and Dirty Mike. Rodent disposal can be costly, and since Stinky & Dirty
take care of it for free, it's a classic win-win situation.
This is a response to the post seen at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=658174848#658174848
[quote="W.Dockery"]On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 16:14:00 +0000, HarryLime wrote:
HarryLime wrote:
W.Dockery wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 6:33:27 +0000, HarryLime wrote:
Will Dockery wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jun 2025 0:56:24 +0000, HarryLime wrote:
Will Dockery wrote:
Quicksilver
However possible
through magic or other means
let's make it work.
Let me light
whatever spark you need
to take you from your pain.
Can you stand it
living this life at top speed
you need to slow down... somehow.
-Will Dockery
***
(Original text restored.)
Reviewed at the author's request.
However possible
through magic or other means
let's make it work.
If we assume that line breaks stand in for commas, this would actually
be a sentence. Let's all break out the champagne!
It's a dull, clich‚d sentence, expressing an even duller thought... but
it is a sentence nonetheless.
It's also a little odd that the speaker relies on magic to make the
relationship work, rather than on things that might actually work:
honesty, mutual respect, consideration for one another's needs, etc.
Let me light
whatever spark you need
to take you from your pain.
More clich‚s. This is also a sentence, so I have to concede that in
this respect alone, the Donkey is on a roll.
Most people would say "take away your pain" rather than "take you from
your pain." The former implies that the pain will be removed for good;
the latter is more akin to running away from it (a temporary solution at >>> best).
But Will isn't any more capable of helping someone to overcome
their pain, than he is of honesty, respect, or consideration.
He wants to play the role of Prince Charming, rescuing the damsel in
distress... but it never advances beyond the land of make-believe.
Can you stand it
living this life at top speed
you need to slow down... somehow.
The first two lines form a question, and a question mark is required
after "speed."
The final line serves as a separate sentence, and should be capitalized. >>>
This stanza seems out of place with the two that went before. The
speaker has gone from wanting to work together ("Let's make it work"),
to wanting to play Prince Charming ("Let me light the spark...") to
blaming his partner for living too fast ("It's all your fault, b**ch!"). >>>
Then again, shifting the blame entirely onto others is a Donkey
specialty.
The poem is mercifully brief -- comprising two complete sentences (a
rarity in Fragmentist works!) and one run-on sentence. The narrative is >>> unbearably clich‚d in the first two stanzas, only to take a much less
common, egocentric turn in the final one.
Were the poem intentionally trying to depict the speaker as a
self-centered, narcissistic a**hole with delusions of grandeur and no
clue as to how to maintain a healthy relationship, it could make for a
darned good poem. As is, however, it's easily summed up, and summarily
dismissed, with a "meh."
The "magic" reference was taken directly from real life, as the lady
this poem was written to was a Wiccan, regularly using magic of various
types to try to sway events and people.
Unfortunately, there's nothing in the poem that even implies that the
poem was addressed to a Wiccan. I've written several poems addressed to >>> witches (Wiccan and otherwise), but made it clear that they were
witches, and carried the witchcraft theme throughout.
Your readers don't know the story of your life, and unless you provide
them with specific information in your poem, they are not going to have
any idea of what you are referring to.
First and foremost, a poet *must* be able to successfully communicate
his ideas through his writing. Even modern poems manage to communicate
their ideas (often too prosaically for my taste). Readers can only
figure out the meaning/symbolism/metaphors/layers of a poem *based on
the information that the poet supplies*.
Okay, I can see how my poem is possiblity too subtle.
At the time I felt that it conveyed the situation well, and in fact was
a bit of a personal note to a specific person at the time.
***
Your poems are never subtle, Donkey.
Subtlety doesn't mean that something lacks the necessary information for >>> readers to follow. That's just bad writing.
Subtlety means that something in the body of the poem is only hinted at. >>> "I put my finger to her hole" is the opposite of subtlety. It is
blunt, graphic, and exceedingly crass.
Here is an example of subtlety:
I could cry salty tears
Where have I been all these years?
Little wow, tell me now
How long has this been goin' on?
There were chills up my spine
And some thrills I can't define
Listen, sweet, I repeat
How long has this been goin' on?
Oh, I feel that I could melt
Into heaven I'm hurled
I know how Columbus felt
Finding another world
Kiss me once, then once more
What a dunce I was before
What a break, for heaven's sake
How long has this been goin' on?
Cole Porter is obviously talking about sex. It could refer to losing
one's virginity. Or, perhaps even one's initial experience of a
specific sexual act. But "sex" is never directly mentioned or
graphically depicted.
There is no subtlety in this, or any, of your poems. You are not a
subtle person.
Your poems are merely unintelligible.
Partly because you use words incorrectly. Partly because you rarely
write in complete sentences. And partly because (as in this instance)
you fail to let the readers know what you're talking about.
You often address characters as a generic "you," or refer to them by an
equally generic pronoun ("he," "she," "they," "them"). And when you do
name a character, you simply drop the name (expect your readers to know
who "Cody" is), and never mention them again.
Would it kill you to say "my best friend, Cody" or to address your lover >>> of the moment as "My beautiful witch"?
I like those ideas.
With your permission I'd like to add them into my poem?
You're welcome to use any suggestions I make, Donkey. But they won'tThe poem was written to that skank ho/psychologist Ellen whom Will
save your poem.
The basic idea is too clich‚d, and the narrative (such as it is), too
weak.
You need to expand it -- bring something *new* into it -- something to
make it more than just another run-of-the-mill recollection of a failed romance.
This is a response to the post seen at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=658174785#658174785
Will-Dockery wrote:
Jordy wrote:
On Mon, 16 Jun 2025 1:43:37 +0000, Will-Dockery wrote:
Jordy C wrote:
On Sunday, May 28, 2025 at 4:15:28 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
On Sunday, May 28, 2025 at 1:19:31 PM UTC-4, Jordy C. wrote:
Ciao, my friend
Good afternoon, good find:
thank you, Will
Hello again my friend.
This is a response to the post seen at:
http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=658174785#658174785
Bonjour Will
--
Hello there, Jordy, thanks again for reading and commenting.
View the attachments for this post at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=691021342#691021342
This is a response to the post seen at: http://www.jlaforums.com/viewtopic.php?p=658174785#658174785
| Sysop: | Tetrazocine |
|---|---|
| Location: | Melbourne, VIC, Australia |
| Users: | 8 |
| Nodes: | 8 (0 / 8) |
| Uptime: | 99:47:37 |
| Calls: | 161 |
| Files: | 21,502 |
| Messages: | 78,499 |