Thread
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? Mongrol 1 Oct 08 1:23PM | Thread Closed |
> 'cryptic' meaning that you weren't able to follow the discussion,
> that you heard only what you imagined to be my tone, and, like a dog,
> just started barking at what you thought was barking. the problem of
> who is a critic and why isn't going to go away, mork -- you're not
> going to get off that easy. possibly you're too old to become an
> intellectual but it may be that you can write a decent poem out of all
> this energy you've found yourself inducting off me. be a man, do the
> right thing.
>
My poetry is better than yours joey.
Deal with it ;)
I'm also far more intellectual than you joey, I'm just going to waste my amazing powers of mind on you. You haven't earned it.
|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? Mongrol 1 Oct 08 1:23PM | Thread Closed |
I'm just not# -
|
|---|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? Mongrol 1 Oct 08 1:25PM | Thread Closed |
..that's not what cryptic means joey.
But it does mean you are squirming around looking for a way out of your own hypocritical tangle, as usual ;)
Feed some of this energy joey, see the face in the glass?
It's you.
|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? joey 1 Oct 08 1:26PM | Thread Closed |
mork, what you don't seem to be able to get is that i don't really care if your razor sharp mind turns away from my writing at all. you don't add anything to the discussion except the exchange of insult -- you haven't the mental energy to transcend your own humour and that condemns you to second rate thinking and writing. possibly you can be an excellent collector of string, however.
> > it's not that it was necessary to me that you liked my poem at all.
>
>
> Your ego is just distorting it again joey.
>
> I said I wouldn't comment on your poem because of YOU.
>
> How I liked, or disliked your poem isn't the issue here.
>
> YOU physically stopped me making any comment or reflection on you or
> it for the joy of the piece, and the joy of enjoying the writing for
> what it was/is.
>
> YOU made me not want too joey. YOU have repulsed me away from the
> pleasure I felt on reading it.
>
> Intended audience or not joey, you know I read poetry - well written
> poetry - properly.
>
> Whether I had a 'real literary experience' or not is something you
> will never know joey.
>
> Your loss. Not mine.
>
> .. and yep, I really, honestly do think that bothers you. Whatever you
> say.
|
|---|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? joey 1 Oct 08 1:28PM | Thread Closed |
well, actually, maybe you googled the wrong entry for 'cryptic' -- it simply means 'unavailable', just as critical thinking is unavailable when you're full of righteous indignation.
> ..that's not what cryptic means joey.
>
> But it does mean you are squirming around looking for a way out of
> your own hypocritical tangle, as usual ;)
>
> Feed some of this energy joey, see the face in the glass?
>
> It's you.
|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? Mongrol 1 Oct 08 1:28PM | Thread Closed |
> mork, what you don't seem to be able to get is that i don't really
> care
yes, yes you do joey.
that is your great lie.
it's so, so obvious you do care, saying this just makes you, and all you say, a lie.
now go write some after-swim poetry of how a fish swam close to your penis and how you got sand in your foreskin.
and make it wonderful.
|
|---|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? Mongrol 1 Oct 08 1:29PM | Thread Closed |
> well, actually, maybe you googled the wrong entry for 'cryptic' --
> it simply means 'unavailable', just as critical thinking is
> unavailable when you're full of righteous indignation.
>
uh huh .. yep righteous indignation... you got me there... ;)
maybe you need to re-google.
|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? Mongrol 1 Oct 08 1:30PM | Thread Closed |
Tea.
Now.
|
|---|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? joey 1 Oct 08 1:34PM | Thread Closed |
possibly, in the pit or pub, people don't realize that a critique of henry is anything more here than the beginning of a discussion of critiquing itself. i don't think many people here work on that level, and any direct challenge to me or henry had better be understood by henry and I as a wake-up call -- that the issue is on the table and that it's up to us to find the critic's way and the honorable way to understand and reinterpret the site. i don't want to see it turned into myspace -- i'd like to have it be a forum of discussion. if i say 'this isn't poetry', that's a statement of aesthetic and one that i'm willing to back up in reasonable argument. some people here are simply reacting to what they perceive as an insult. that's fine, but i'd be better if they could articulate out what a poem is, in response to that direct statement 'this isn't poetry' instead of immediately attacking me for saying blasphemy. it makes me attack back, on many levels, and, though i enjoy making jokes off some silly responses, i'd rather have a discussion on what a poem actually is. it's not obvious.
> well, actually, maybe you googled the wrong entry for 'cryptic' --
> it simply means 'unavailable', just as critical thinking is
> unavailable when you're full of righteous indignation.
>
>
> > ..that's not what cryptic means joey.
> >
> > But it does mean you are squirming around looking for a way out of
> > your own hypocritical tangle, as usual ;)
> >
> > Feed some of this energy joey, see the face in the glass?
> >
> > It's you.
|
| re: Can Henry actually be critical? unknown 1 Oct 08 1:35PM | Thread Closed |
> thanks. the problem it seems to me is that poetry is actually an
> entertainment, an illusion presented, and it's sometimes possible, in
> the narration, to have the plot and characterizations be so important
> to the author that he simple tells them to us by talking about them
> and not allowing them any organic growth in presentation. the poem
> gets away from the author. a lot of people here haven't read a lot of
> writing though, and any new plot or description takes them by surprise
> -- the 'jack in the box phenomenon', as they say in melbourne.
>
> 'poetic' is a judgment made after the poem is written. writing a
> poem is what happens to you when you write a poem.
well that's all fine and dandy if our goal is to talk ourselves in circles. i'm not really here to point fingers at people and classify them as "a lot of people here."
being "critical" has an element of practicality to it. how do we take a thought about poetry and turn it into something practical? henry claims that the piece is not poetry. well what the hell is poetry? if you can't answer that definitively, perhaps you should avoid making ridiculous claims like that. on the other hand, if you must, at least outline what you think poetry is and point out what the piece lacks. you aren't being "critical" by simply stating something isn't poetry; you're just being pompous.
|
|---|
Previous | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 | Next
|
|