this poem solely is good because of the title. The title warns you it will be a small poem. Is this even considered a poem? It's a lovely thought and I do like reading it [especially since it takes 5 seconds to do so]. I'm really not sure how I feel about this. I just know in two lines you've conveyed an idea, but not enough for me.
humm, it's saying that when with that-one, special, the author's complete, and without that someone, the world is just a frame waiting for a picture ( as though the context demands a content ).
surely, this satisfies something of the idea of "minimalist" and in a nice way.
joey, was hoping that it said: 'with that someone-complete, without that someone-complete also, in a different way'. that that someone provides completeness while away. context.
wish i could take that last 'comment' away. hate to explain. never does a poem good.
ah, i didn't get that totally, though that occurred to me and i'd thought i was mistaken -- the brief form, and the white spaces are a punctuation.
sustenance and context aren't a rhetorical pair until they appear like this, in a poem, and the opposite of "sustenance" is "hungry", really. when a pair gets set like this, so minimally, it's going to look aphoristic. maybe, "your presence and absence, my sustenance and context", with enough "poetic ambiguity" to make it work, though i don't think anyone would read it as more than a mint on a pillow that way.
mr. hank could you please explain your last statement? this is very intriguing.
the "context" part doesn't fly, otherwise a very good little poem
when a poet, or a person (like me), adds muddling words to other words things always get more muddled.
you shouldn't inhale a smoke ring.
destroys the ring.
shouldn't explain a thought.
here you have presented a minimalists in minimal shiny crystal reflecting many wonders, well a few any who, in me the reader. I did get the idea you were looking for of two completes make you a whole with or without the significant other -- the title certainly grabbed me as the calcinater decanting process of Alchemy uses these allusions -- perhaps this can even be further reducted until your light shines through --
presence is sustenance
within is not without
just playing -- I liked the play here --
the poem is the thought we read, not the thought in the poem, since that's in your head. making us feel what you're feeling is an art and not a confession. telling us isn't going to make us, and making us in a poem is to create you in our head so that we're they're too.
ok. good. relieved to hear that. though i suspect you speak for a small minority when you say 'we'.
and Alchemist, insightful. thanks.
I didn't read an empty frame in the second line. I read a framework. Very nicely expressed.
Whoever this is for, give to him or her on valentine's day and you're pretty much guaranteed to get laid. I'm thinking about stealing it just so I can get an enthusiastic blow job.
nice poem, hank.
would you imagine what would happen if you left out your and my from line 1?
Nicely reduces pared to essentials, invites thought
Larry empty headed Lark
it seems much better after hearing the explanation...but maybe that should all be obvious anyway, or maybe not... I still question if it is just a little too vague. Gave it an 8
should i post the rest ?
ok , thanks mike.
i never post as "unknown".
then you should post as mike
i think you're confusing me with someone you want to impress.
impesss who ?
the person you wanted to sound smart to.