| taking herself
|
unknown
| pictures (of) her- | 1 |
self-giving | 2 |
him head | 3 |
|
4 Aug 03 |
Rated 8.3 (6) by 9 users.
Active (9): 2, 3, 4, 8, 9, 10
Inactive (24): 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 6, 7, 7, 7, 7, 8, 8, 8, 8, 9, 10, 10, 10, 10, 10
(define the words in this poem)
(3 users consider this poem a favorite)
|
Add A Comment:
|
Comments:
If you're going to go artistically-bankrupt, you might as well go the whole way; for this reason, I give this poem my first and only 10.
— Moth
Insulting.
— unknown
On second reading, I changed my rating to a 2.
— Moth
what's that all about moth? "on second reading"...you mean you didn't understand it the first time you read it...it only has three very easy to interpret lines. remind me to disregard any ratings or comments you leave in the future.
i agree with unknown, this is very insulting.
— unknown
I get it! She's a doggy!
— onklcrispy
Umm...I think iti s obvious to all that Moth was being sarcastic in his comment. I think it's also obvious that "insulting" refers to the poem, like "this poem is insulting to my intelligence as a reader."
— unknown
And if anyone believes this poem is worthy of a nine, they're cracked. I'd like to read their poetry.
— unknown
Smart arses. When did this all become about a bunch of smart arses trying to out 'clever' each other with their criticisms? I'll give you that nine, fuck, i'll go one better and give you the big ten. You deserve it for putting up with this kind of shit when you're just trying to write.
— nose
This is an experience. Not sure if I'd call it poetry.
— Isabelle5
al this talk about the rating- well, i posted this anonymously, so that means i dont care about the rating. (of course a high number would make me feel good, and i hope to remain immune to a low one.)
what i really care about are the comments. if i thought both that there was very little to say about this, and that it was very good, then i would sign up and put my name on it, cross my fingers, and hope for an A.
i did think, well i do still think, in spite of the one-word crits, that there is more to say about it. i mean, i do think ive created something interesting, whether your mom would like it or not. and in 4 lines! and without one dirty or big word!
it was challenging, in a challenging way. if it happened to you, you'd want to write about it.
— unknown
Dear unknown poet,
Someone once said "Great art may exist only in the mind of the creator." I think that is the case here. What you have delivered unto us is a three line stanza, most notable (first) for its mild shock value, and (second) for the annoyingly "poetic" use of punctuation, regarding the (of) and her-. This poem did not make me think, because it as simple as any one noun or verb poetically-stanza-ed and titled. For example:
yellow (ap)p-
le fed to one-armed
child.
Do you see? Now, at first I felt the author of this poem was sort of stupid for trying to pass his avant-garde musings off as great poetry; but now I see he's simply delusional. This is not great poetry, and the "shock" thing has been done to death. I'm sure you're a capable writer, but this poem does not especially convey that message.
— Moth
Furthermore, this is a very undeveloped thought. In fact, one might even consider it a selfish act, magnified. Giving "you" head. The women "takes pictures" of it. And then you write a "poem" about it. The more I think about it, this poem is actually an alienating and wholly-narcissitic work.
— Moth
Yeah, like nose said, why are you all being so critical? It's not like this is... oh wait... this is poetry critical.
— unknown
Why is the "of" in parentheses? I suppose it's possible that we can ignore the "of" and read it as "pictures herself giving me head," but that's still an incomplete thought. You could add a "she" in parentheses, (she) pictures (of) herself giving me head, but that's not worth it. Why is it "herself" and not "pictures of her" giving me head? I don't think "pictures of herself giving me head" is grammatically correct - it could be "pictures of her giving me head." Is the word self somehow important or were you trying to maintain the sentence fragment mentioned previously? Why is "self" and "giving" joined by a dash? And why is herself broken into "her" and "self." Self-giving-head sounds like it could be some clever compound word, but it doesn't seem to meaning anything. Also, you could be emphasizing the word "self," but that, also, yields nothing in the context of this poem. A puzzle is only meaningful if it has a real answer. Is this poem arbitrary? If it isn't, then there are some solid answers to my questions.
PS: If you don't care what we think, why did you post it?
PPS: Unless you're playing a joke, don't announce that your poem is "challenging in a challenging way."
— unknown
I don't see the problem of a poem being wholly narcissistic. Many of the greatest authors and poets were. As far as this (poem) goes, I don't personally feel it was posted for shock value. It's a snapshot (no pun intended) of a moment. That's all that a lot of poetry does, and often the poet will take much longer to say this. I don't want to say this is comparable to a haiku, because, well, it's not. But it's not entirely meritless.
— Ananke
thank you ananke- yes it is a snapshot of a moment, and yes, it's value is not shock value, although it is difficult or irresponsible to completely diffuse all shock from the moment since there was some surprise.
and thank you unknown before ananke- for asking the right questions. i agree with you that a puzzle is only meaningful if it has a real answer. this is not meant to be a puzzle, but yes, something you can "get" something from with repeated observation. it is not arbitrary. (moth's perceived example of the poem, above, is arbitrary.)
ps. i do care what you think. i just dont care about the number that gets assigned to it. this poem can never get a fair trial. i just hope its an interesting case.
pps. when i said "challening in a challenging way," i didnt mean that the poem was a challenging puzzle. i meant that it was challenging to write about.
— unknown
This poem is the equivalent of me posting pictures of myself jacking off. It's a picture of a moment, can't you see, can't you see? But it's only for myself. Unless you wanted to see those pictures...and in response to that, I'd probably direct you to this poem instead.
— ersaph
Oh, and i give this poem a one.
— ersaph
so i'm telling you something you don't want to hear about. fair enough that you don't like it for that reason. and i can see that the reason you don't want to hear about it is because it sounds to you like i'm yapping about myself. why would you care? i understand.
the point of view of your interpretation was as a third party.
what i was thinking though, seriously, believe it or not, was that the reader would put themselves in as the first or 2nd person- me or her. that they would interpret it not as a peeping tom, but as a participant. now, i guess that is asking a lot. i should have thought more about that. but honestly, i imagined that it might be granted a little imagined intimacy from the reader rather than (understandable) revulsion. i see that that was a lot to assume.
but, if you could, read this as though it's you, then i think you have a better chance to hear the "moments" here.
i will explain what i perceived can be, from these few lines, in a day or two. i dont want to drive it into the ground. it was good to get this far- i already learned something.
— unknown
moth said in a forum, "My rating of "taking her" was a criticism of the poet itself; clearly they had put not thought into the actual content of the poem. "
the title of the poem is "taking herself" which is a very different couple of words. all i want to show, is that there IS thought in the poem, more than moth recognized (being so distracted as he was, by the "shock value") and that it's "enough" thought to satisfy the average poetry reader (you folks).
Why is the "of" in parentheses? I suppose it's possible that we can ignore the "of" and read it as "pictures herself giving me head," but that's still an incomplete thought. You could add a "she" in parentheses, (she) pictures (of) herself giving me head, but that's not worth it.
you are right about the intention. the parenthesis are there so that two things can be read. (1) "pictures herself giving me head" (which may be an incomplete thought- but it is what it is.) it is one note of the chord of this poem. and (2) "pictures of herself giving me head" another note. this reading, i think, makes you think, "either this grammer is wrong, and should be "her", or, she is taking the pictures herself...
being the writer, i would hope that you decide that there is no grammar mistake, and that she must be taking pictures of herself. if you "try this thought on" then you can find additional hints that lead you to conclude that you are reading correctly.
everyone is certain this has something to do with photography, but there are no photos or cameras in the poem. "pictures" is used once, half as a noun and half as a verb. to confirm to the reader that I am indeed talking about photographs, i put the word "taking" right next to (above) "pictures", but not right beside (if it were beside, i couldn’t get reading(1) out if it because "taking pictures herself giving me head" is nonsense.)
Why is it "herself" and not "pictures of her" giving me head? I don't think "pictures of herself giving me head" is grammatically correct - it could be "pictures of her giving me head." Is the word self somehow important or were you trying to maintain the sentence fragment mentioned previously?
thank you for thinking. the reason is that she is the one taking the pictures, herself.
Why is "self" and "giving" joined by a dash?
when you are giving someone head, chances are you are giving yourself. i mean, you are, as literally as the expression, giving your own head. most would agree that the person getting the head, is the receiver in that situation. it is the other, who is self-giving. the person who is giving head, is making a discrete sacrifice. they are being kind to the other one. they are literally giving a little bit of themselves.
And why is herself broken into "her" and "self."
1- so you can read "Pictures of her."
2- so you know that "her" is only the first part of a longer word (“herself”).
if it were "pictures of her / self-giving / me head" then the message that she was the one taking the pictures, would not be loud/certain enough.
Self-giving-head sounds like it could be some clever compound word, but it doesn't seem to meaning anything.
you're right. i certainly didn’t mean self-giving head! but just as it sounds, "her: self-giving"
Also, you could be emphasizing the word "self," but that, also, yields nothing in the context of this poem.
you're right. but one of the many voices/notes of the poem, as it sounds in my head, uses "self" twice: "pictures of herself / self-giving" (as well as "pictures herself" / "self-giving")
i want to add a couple more of my thoughts, so that i can tell you all in honesty, that "that is all there is to it". then judge it as you will.
the giver of intimate attention such as this, i would argue, using this poem, is not "being taken". there is no violence or force. she is taking nothing from me. it would be the sad poem moth and ersaph describe, if i were bragging about having done something to someone. having gotten something. having taken someone. but there was no taking, only giving. so, to the extent that there is no giver without a taker, and i am not the taker, she is "taking herself". a sacrificial act by one person who loves another (or wants very much to please them).
so, in 8 words only, what i believe the reader hears, are these many voices:
- she is taking herself
- she is taking pictures
- she is taking pictures of herself
- she is taking pictures of herself giving me head
- she is giving herself
- she pictures herself
- she pictures herself giving
- she imagines giving me head,
- perhaps even while doing so.
- there are pictures of her,
- in which she is giving herself.
By which they can conclude:
- she is giving me head
- she sometimes imagines doing this
- she is taking pictures of herself in this embarrassing position
and finally,
- there exist now, photos of this (the “pictures of herself giving me head”). Who has them? What are they for? What of them?
one would not wonder why i am taking pictures. that would be a boring narcissistic tale. but im not, she is. and i think one wonders why
she is taking the pictures,
itself a voluntary act,
of her own voluntary act.
i guess the poem lets you think about why.
who the hell would take pictures of themselves giving head? someone who loves and trusts the receiver very very much. perhaps the same she, might love the person so much that she might sometimes "picture herself giving" her head?
finally though, the poem itself, is of course, a picture of this event. obviously I took this picture myself. It’s one that one would want to show the world, but never expose. it’s a charged life moment that makes you want to write a poem.
Maybe that is the same reason that she took the pictures.
The end.
“that’s all there is to it.”
(and all the while, no dirty words, no sharp edges, no harsh lighting, no cheesy soundtrack, no pizza guy.)
A puzzle is only meaningful if it has a real answer. Is this poem arbitrary? If it isn't, then there are some solid answers to my questions.
yes! i would also be as angry as moth if this was arbitrary, and there were no answers. But there is not one arbitrary word, or arbitrary line break.
If you don't care what we think, why did you post it?
i don't care about the number. but of course i care what you think! that's all i care about! thanks to all of you who cared to think for a moment more.
i hope you will tell me if you agree that there is enough “content” in this eight word poem, to be a poem that you approve of.
or if im crazy to imagine that anyone would spend so much thought process on something so small/ silly/ pornographic/ simpleminded/ your-adjective-here.
or, having come this far, that the payoff is disappointing.
PS- given all this, i actually would be interested in what my number score would be from those of you who read this far. if this information makes you change your answer, please update your score + or -.
— unknown
unknown, I had not read or rated this poem before just now, but I want to say that I have no idea where the above commenters are coming from. I can't say I would have gotten the poem without your explanation, and I can't say that I see myself as "you" or as "her", but I will say this: reading this poem made me nervous, nervous in the way when you run into an old ex- on the street and wonder what she's up to these days. For me, that makes it enough of a poem.
— unknown
PS: I love your analysis of the "giving head" idiom. I never thought of it that way before.
PPS: Ignore Moth, he's a troll.
— unknown
oh pennylane that is so hot!!!
— loonytune
Oh Pennylane, we really don't need to know everything about you...really.
— unknown
i have a 1, 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10,
with which i am well satisfied.
and, finally, at least one person who thought this poem was more than nothing.
now, if some of you would be kind enough to give me a 2, 4, and a 6,
i will be straight flushed.
— unknown
Well, well, well quite a bit of controversy surrounding this poem. I think that if anything has this many people either praising it or trashing it, it has to have something more to it than just initial shock value. As for length determining whether it's a poem or not, that’s just plain BS, one of my favorite poems by Jim Carroll is 13 words long , and each word is precisely chosen as was in this poem. I think people really need to get past critiquing everything based on thier personal taste instead of merit. There are lots of things in this world that I don't particularly like but I can respect them, even though in the case of this poem I both like and respect it. People who are too lazy to try and gain more than the one obvious message from a poem shouldn't be critiquing poetry. What is really arbitrary are the scores that people receive from people who don't really read their poetry, just glance at it and take it at face value.
— unknown
Well, well, well quite a bit of controversy surrounding this poem. I think that if anything has this many people either praising it or trashing it, it has to have something more to it than just initial shock value. As for length determining whether it's a poem or not, that’s just plain BS, one of my favorite poems by Jim Carroll is 13 words long , and each word is precisely chosen as was in this poem. I think people really need to get past critiquing everything based on thier personal taste instead of merit. There are lots of things in this world that I don't particularly like but I can respect them, even though in the case of this poem I both like and respect it. People who are too lazy to try and gain more than the one obvious message from a poem shouldn't be critiquing poetry. What is really arbitrary are the scores that people receive from people who don't really read their poetry, just glance at it and take it at face value.
— voidofcourse
Wow, this poem got alot of attention...personally, I'm giving it a 5 because half of me likes it and the other half thinks it's insulting.
— Adrielle
that ia sick and insulting to women you should be slapped
— unknown
what the hell? this isnt a poem, its just some guy wishing a girl would think about giving him head, and to assume girls who are not porn stars would want a picture of themselves doing that, its just wrong....and gross
— unknown
you are exactly right
unless of course you think about it more.
— unknown
i like how theyre offended by the picture and not the action
— unknown
why dont you change "me" to "him" then it would work on the other levels i think you wanted it to.
— unknown
excellent suggestion.
— unknown
a waste of web space
— sharonz
I like this, but I don't. I'm grossed out, but intrigued. Strange. I'll give you your 2. Heh.
— nickiblitz
Hmm...not sure if i am too fascinated with this one. Yes it is short and simple...but the rest of it is very...disgusting.
— Rwg-impaired
*bump after randoming* Sam, this must be the biggest comment regarding this subject I have ever seen. Props just for the comments.
— unknown
roink!
— unknown
Dude, for your explanation on what this poem could possibly mean, I give you a nice happy 8. But for what this poem writes..heh. =]
— wendz
this reminds me of heinrich boll's "Dr Murke's collection of silence" or maybe that guy who released a song of silence; you could play the record and hear nothing. (i wish i could remember the guy's name)
yeah interesting like krapp's bananas
and as un-insulting
— kaleidazcope
the guy was john cage and the peice he composed is called 4'33".
in fact you can listen to it at http://www.johncage.info/soundfiles/main.html.
interestingly, 4'33" is 4.3mb.
i dont know what that has to do with this poem.
— gnormal
you don't see what silence has to do with nothing, or cutting bits of nothing out of something has to do with making a new something, and it's relation to the nothing that can be read between the lines of a poem. isn't that strange. because i can.
— kaleidazcope
what i meant though was thank you for finding the name
— kaleidazcope
skip the 1 is a0
— unknown
all these coments and shit, would somebody just explain the meaning of this poem.in the poem itself it sounds like she is giving him a blowjob hehehe, but i don't catch the name. maybe if i read it backwards??? if it is what i think it is i'll atleast give it a 4
— Odin
Interesting, the if in parenthesis changes the whole meaning if of is left in or taken out. I like it.
— kaze
This doesn't show any range at all. In fact, in merely displays a penchant for the lude.
— themolly
what a comment. someone frame it quick. oh for a lude! my favourite pants for a lude. (or a bottle of them.)
i really hope you didn't mean lewd, because that would just ruin it.
— kaleidazcope
Sure, free verse is fun
But Mother says you'll go blind
If you do it much.
— unknown
I can't read your ludicrously long explanation. I didn't look at one word. But I appreciate that this is kindof neat. "him head" alliteration, "self-giving" as a meaning just on that one line, "pictures her" if you omit the (of) has it's own meaning, too.
Now I note it used to be "me." Excellent change.
— synej
is it hysterical to anyone else that the number of lines in the comments exceeds the number of lines in the poem by a butt load. that's funny :)
— themolly
c,mon! you put 'butt-load' on the comment list of a poem about head. now that's lewd!
kal- i'm rolling off my chair at your comment.
by the way, almost a nice poem.
— hank
interesting way of writing a simple thre lined poem yet discriptive enough to give the reader the idea that you are describing an event that happend in a synopsis.
so for this i give u a 6
— icey_blue
its not a poem. Its an insult to the human race.
— ltdtoogirl
wtf?
— divinity
ah. i love how much hype 3 line of words can get. it amuses me. :)
i like how one can read the poem as the girl just PICTURES herself giving the guy head, or that there ARE pictures of the girl giving him head.
i also like how the title throws in another twist. when we read the poem after reading the title, it adds another version of how this scene might have gone. she is either taking herself, or taking pictures of herself, or...maybe something else....?
very nice work.
— woman_power
surely this could be expanded. it's just a snapshot of no importance. what's with the dash between self and giving? this is really bad or my bulb is going dim.
i pick the first.
— cruellshoos
Where was your head at when you wrote this? Well, it is a heady experience though. Heads up ladies, you'd better watch out!
— wamblicante
this is lazy....so lazy i'm not going to rate
— unknown
bollocks
— ProzacNation
omg! so THAT's what they meant!
— Meep
Very nasty didnt like it
— unknown
Maya Angelou says that "poetry is the essence of a feeling." I like the essence and the feeling. I especially like how the title kinda goes along with "the pictures" as in "taking pictures of herself" or the fantasy aspect of "pictures herself giving him head." I like it. And I tend to be one who favors poetic license, so...good for you (the anonymous writer) for taking the license to write what you feel and feel what you write. 4 + 6 = 10, so here's your 4 and here's your 6 and I rate it a 10. It's abstract and it's forward and that's what makes it so cool.
— starr
sorry...forgot to post the "10." here it comes...
— starr
oh dang
— unknown
why anyone would want to make such a convoluted mess out of an idiom
beats me!
not to mention make such ridickulous ass umptions:
most would agree that the person getting the head, is the receiver in that situation. it is the other, who is self-giving. the person who is giving head, is making a discrete sacrifice. they are being kind to the other one. they are literally giving a little bit of themselves.
did you take a pole?
persona lly, i doubt most would agree wid chew on dat.
i am a woman. and when i suk dick i do not consider myself sacrificing. but if you want to talk tit for tat quid pro qou exchange -- then it would be a huge mistake to overlook the caloric value of semen
yum
look honay. lets discuss the post industrial capitalistic puritcanically imbued evolution of english expression? (preferably while you tweak my clit)
look. sweet pea. why on earth anyoen would fuk with an idiom like that when they could have just as much fun with a word like 'fellatio', borrowed from our italian movas, beats me.
look fella.
i have nothing left to say cept:
blow
Big Vertha
— unknown
Big Wertha!
you swuk
woger
— unknown
lol moth funny
— unknown
this is great I love it and find it less insulting than ...apparently everyone I see it to be much deeper than a lot of other stuff I've read I give it a well deserved 8********
— turtlepoet
great exploonation.
y'know that sometimes the comments become more important to "posterity"
than the "poem" itself.
title suggest breaking into 3 words...
— unknown
also on the title-
why not go with parentheses (in) there
somewhere, while you're at it?
keeping with (of) thingy and all...
then you can have a whole 'nother 'splainin' tooo dooo
Lucy
— unknown
What the heck? Why even post a JOKE like this on a POETRY website? Get a life.
— mylifestyle
I like this, because it's ambiguous.
I dislike this, because I can't decide if it's misogynist or not.
"self-giving" makes the act sound generous, but at the same time, the idea of objectification (as in pornography) implies someone objectifying herself, without any qualification.
— Ossan
didShe
take'um?
cool enough, and economical -- didn't try to prove this was poetry, just wrote some.
— joey
looking at the comments, this has to be the best retard-museum on the site. i'll add to it: maya angelou is a retard, cause poetry is the creation of the essence of spurt in the head of the flirt. getting out of flirt, reader, you can write your own and, as it is, "blow". this is a nice clean writing piece, unpretentious and not at all lifestyle channel or soap sob. probably the sexist vector wants the dumb-passive "head-getter" to be in masculine control? except, he's busy blowing jeff, and jeff is otherwise involved. that the author of this poem didn't mention all that is a tribute only to poetic discipline, and a slap ( like it?) in the face of cretinous unknown commentators and moth.
ten for me, and also one each for jeff and "x".
— joey
thank you joey for putting things in perspective. that said, i enjoyed this poem, its simplicity, its controversy, and the authors attitude of not giving a shit what some overly-sensitive people may think of the subject matter. i thought it was effective. i think that the punctuation and line breaks do much for this poem. and for the people that use the comments section to insult each other and compete to see you can come up with the most clever smart-ass remark, concentrate on poetry and keep an open mind because you're giving poets and poetry a bad name and making us sound like arrogant assholes. sorry for the rant, now ill dismount my soapbox. good poem. 7.
— kimhamner
not as fun nor provocative as that little masterpiece I like to call "Cancer Fucks Ass"
— friedMnoodle
this is way more intelligent writing than that booger boo-hoo.
— joey
no its not.
and the fact that your looking at this in terms of 'intilligence' says everything.
— friedMnoodle
yes, i think writing as art is the image of mentality. there's no other manifestation of life as lively and believable.... you can't fake orgasm with poetry. this is so intelligent, this "taking herself". look how the image is presented in one frame and there's no escape into irony... "irony" is the children's "subtle"; this poem is simply subtle and you're probably one of those delicate jocks who thinks he can't be friends with a girl, that the idea of girl writing better than you and showing you how to write never occurred to you, never entered your mouth, so to speak. :)
— joey
I feel like analyzing this into a corner is impossible; as an image, not enough clue is given about the authors intent to draw any robust conclusions about it. I'm pretty sure that this was intentional, though.
It could imply all sorts of things, and it is maddening precisely because it refuses to resolve its own image.
— unknown
"draw robust conclusions".. but, the poem is the object for us to draw conclusions on. it's not a moralism or a legal argument. it's a word image... and i'm saying this because i think you don't sound sophisticated to know and appreciate the history of the image in poetry. i think you're thinking it's supposed to be some comment on life. it is, but in a way that makes the reader involved and responsible for their own opinion and understanding. you can't just feed on a poem and grunt in ironic appreciation or disdain. the author invented a poem here. learn how to read this kind of poem.
— joey
wow this is a poem lol
— teddy
|
|
|