»
Archives
»
Critical Analysis #1
»
Sonnet
| Critical Analysis #1 |
|
Sonnet |
|
|
jenni Member
since 1999-09-11
Posts 478Washington D.C. |
[inspired by a recent posting of jerome's] What noble race of goose hath lived of old And molted quills imbued with sentiment! If I had such a pen as this to hold, Expression would not find impediment. I’d scale the garden walls of love’s delight And whisper to my love the words of yore; For Shakespeare’s feet still haunt the moonlit night When gentle hearts try hardest for the score. The calendar doth mark the year as new But parchment and a pen is what I want To lend my words a lofty air; for few Can love without a “thee” or “thine” to flaunt. If this my verse thy ear doth jar, be still, And blame not author’s heart, but lack of quill.  |
||
| © Copyright 2000 jenni - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Vincent Spaulding Member
since 2000-01-16
Posts 59 |
What can I say? I love it. It's light-hearted without getting silly. I think it's technically perfect too. (But that doesn't matter as much to me as it does to some people.) |
||
|
poetry_kills Senior Member
since 1999-12-04
Posts 549new orleans |
what an honor to be mentioned in association with such a wonderful poem (though i assure you, i do not deserve such an honor)... this is brilliant jenni... bloomin' brilliant  i knew you had a poem in the making when you first replied to my so-called-sonnet... i'm glad that you've refined it and made into what i would consider a beautiful work of art... sincerely, jerome the boy with no brain A savage place! as holy and enchanted As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted By woman wailing for her demon-lover! ~Coleridge |
||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
Do thy worst thou knavish Jim, thou will findest not one jot of irregularity in this fair and flowing tale .. A race of magic geese moulting quills of feeling .. quills which, when dipped, live on to guide the writer's hand to wondrous of expressions of love and romance ... (Jenni you should be a writer .. how beautiful and creative is thy mind)."For Shakespeare’s feet still haunt the moonlit night" .... as usual in your writing the "clever" line. I hope this was a dig at the rigidity of traditional Shakespearian metrical feet - because if it wasn't, it should have been .. lol .. take note Jim .A nice "turn" at line 9 ...... If I had any doubts (which I didn't)before Jenni they were dispelled by reading this and the hilarious thread in Jeromes sonnet. Quill or hi-tech pen, magic or no, you are set on the right course, of that I am sure. Philip [This message has been edited by Poertree (edited 01-23-2000).] |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Jenni: Meter, rhyme, syllable count, thematic turn all excellent (Thanks for making that part easy by the way). I love your "noble race of goose" and "Shakespeare's feet" lines, as Philip (unnecessarily) brought to my attention but I absolutely loved the tongue in cheek Line 13. "Jar[ring to] the tongue" was a grand understatement there. It was more like driving over a rumble strip on a highway at 85 MPH. Well done. And base Philip, why for thou prisseth at me so? Though thou art on the mark as to neither jot nor tittle lacking in this noble tale, thy banter proves THEE to be the knave. Therefore I beseach thee to desist in profaning this most comely thread with thy foolish speak unfitting even of the most offensive rabble and offer your apologies to the noble ... er ... good ... er ... competent lady lawyer. Jim "If I rest, I rust." - Martin Luther |
||
|
Honeybee Member Ascendant
since 1999-12-26
Posts 5372Ontario, CANADA |
Dost thine eyes deceive me, or is this one of the best sonnets that I have ever read!! I wish that I could write a sonnet as well as you, Jenni. A solid piece, clever, witty, perfect, brilliant.Technically perfect, meter, rhyme scheme flows so well. My favourite lines are "For Shakespeare's feet still haunt the moonlit night," and I'd scale the garden walls of love's delight and whispers to my love the words of yore." Kudos, girl! I look forward to more of your writing. Take care, Melissa Honeybee |
||
|
John Foulstone Member
since 2000-01-01
Posts 100Australia |
jenni: 10. |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Excellent. This is really getting to be fun. I just love sonnets anyway. Thanks. Pete What terms shall I find sufficiently simple in their sublimity -- sufficiently sublime in their simplicity -- for the mere enunciation of my theme? Edgar Allan Poe |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
Jenny, e tu? Yes, they are fun to read (all of them actually) but since I rail consistently against the use of archaic language in poetry, all of you are making a mockery of my words and actions. Are you happy now? Question: Should Brad lighten up? the ogre, Brad |
||
|
Wordshaman Member
since 2000-01-17
Posts 110Illinois, USA |
This is the only sonnet I will bother responding to, since I am entirely against the use of BOTH ARCHAIC LANGUAGE USE (Brad, if you lighten up, I'll have to just take over for you...) AND ARCHAIC FORMS OF POETRY. My free verse is entirely transitional, of course--a reactionary form to the strict slavery that writers have had throughout the years to the geniuses of old. I cannot tell if it's flattery or a lack of self-esteem that keeps writers from breaking new ground. Jenni, to comment on your piece singularly, the archaic words kept me from examining a goddamn thing. The words went so far as to become a jumble in my head because I was thinking "I'm reading archaic words..." over and over again during the whole thing. I don't know if it had "proper rhythm" or anything like that. I don't waste my time with that sort of crap. Truth be told, I only notice it when I DO notice that the piece is written in a crappy rhythm. If it had rhythm, my congratulations. It slipped under my radar. As for the content, I guess it could be witty without the archaic words. I know that you were writing with the intention that the words would add something to the piece (sort of an homage to Shakespeare, who wrote with the quill pen), but it only ended up detracting from it. I noticed nothing in the way of an homage first off. I only noticed that the words were old. I would recommend that you write with the words that are in your heart, instead of these words, which are clearly in your head. Wordshaman |
||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
Hey c'mon Wordshaman and Brad this is all a bit of tongue in cheek fun, don't you think we have quite enough of the "from the heart serious stuff" as it is? Even CA can surely take a little archaic levity once in a while. So "yes" to you Brad .. as if you didn't know.. Philip PS Brad .. just read your post on mine, and see that you've capitulated .. or should that be "Capuleted" ..lol [This message has been edited by Poertree (edited 01-25-2000).] |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
Golly gee guys, if poetry can't be a little fun, why sould we waste our time with writing or even reading it. I mean it's surely not like any of us are likely to become wealthy from writing the blessed stuff. (Or should that have been bless-ED) Philip? And I think these things are just great BTW.Pete What terms shall I find sufficiently simple in their sublimity -- sufficiently sublime in their simplicity -- for the mere enunciation of my theme? Edgar Allan Poe |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Jenni: I appreciate the "tongue in cheek" touch the use of archaic language gives this piece. I thought it was fun to read. I had no problem getting past the anachronisms in seeing both the seriousness and the subtle humor in this. I think you executed this nicely. Personally, I don't buy into this head/heart dichotomy I keep hearing about. Poetry isn't singularly a regurgitation of facts just as it isn't singularly an outpouring of feelings that make you want to regurgitate. I think it is both. And the best poetry, in my opinion, interweaves thought and feeling seamlessly (that is the way it is in real life, right? Except maybe for Vulcans).Just my two cents (a bargain compared to my usual hourly rate). Later, m'lady.Jim "If I rest, I rust." - Martin Luther |
||
|
jenni Member
since 1999-09-11
Posts 478Washington D.C. |
question: should brad lighten up? better question: should wordshaman lighten up? even better questions: was jenni's poem written as a gentle, lighthearted satire on the use of archaic language in poetry today? does wordshaman really think that by attributing the 'words of yore' to quills molted from 'noble geese', jenni intended the piece to be an homage to shakespeare? does jenni really believe that "few can love without a 'thee' or 'thine' to flaunt"? answers: yes; YES; yes; apparently so; and no, lol. this is in no way intended to be critical of jerome's orignal piece, which i truly did like. but in reading his sonnet, i was struck by how it seems so natural for one to use 'archaic' language in expressing love. shakespeare's "feet" (and yes, lol, i knew what i was writing there) still haunt us. i'm not entirely sure that's a bad thing; shakespeare's quill certainly looms large in shaping the language of many subjects, and why should a poet or any writer limit expression to only those words in current circulation? i generally agree with you, brad, and wordshaman, on the use of archaic language. i see a poem like jerome's, though, as saying to his auburn-eyed beauty not only "i love you", but something more; i see it as saying also "you awaken in me all the best and most sublime feelings of one truly in love, those distantly 'remembered' feeings of a 'remembered' past that you and i both share; my heart resonates with the words of shakepeare and all the poets who have ever lived and loved and wrote about it, and i am calling upon them to aid me in the expression of my love for you." the argument against the use of archaic forms of speech is often "shakespeare wrote in the language of his day, you should write in yours." yes, very true as a general principle, one which i follow in my poetry. but shakespeare wasn't writing AFTER shakespeare, like we are, and i think we lose something if we try to pretend that he never existed. is this the ONLY way love should be expressed? certainly not. is it the BEST way? heavens no. is it often overdone? certainly. but, even in the year 2000, does cupid have but one arrow in his quiver? in my opinion, no; and i gotta tell ya, a poem like jerome's, if written for me, would certainly work its magic, and have its intended effect, lol. oh, most definitely. anyway, i intended the sonnet (the first i have ever tried) to reflect a certain ambiguity about my thinking of the use of archaic language. i wanted it to be playful (gently teasing the modern-day romeo 'try[ing] ... for the score', lol) and somewhat satirical, but also to acknowledge that this form of expression -- such as jerome used so beautifully in his piece -- still holds alot for us all. alot of freight for a little sonnet to carry, perhaps it was too much? jenni |
||
|
poetry_kills Senior Member
since 1999-12-04
Posts 549new orleans |
wordshaman: i respect your opinions and preferences on poetics, but your post is more like an attack than a critique... you say that it is a great harm to write using the language of old because such words do not come from the heart (and also perhaps because you find such words difficult to read)... shame shame sir, for i swear to you that my words come straight from my heart... what wrong be it if such high language incites certain noble concepts of love and passion in ones mind? will you presume to tell me that my heart cannot be where my pen is simply because you disagree with my word choice? if so, then you are no poet at all... nor any respecter of love... therefore, i bid you hold your tongue and let me love... jenni: in my mind and heart, the use of archaic language (and "archaic" form) makes your poem that much nobler (on the literal level) and that much more humorous (on the comedic)... don't let such nay-sayers discourage you... sincerely, jerome the boy with no brain A savage place! as holy and enchanted As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted By woman wailing for her demon-lover! ~Coleridge |
||
|
Wordshaman Member
since 2000-01-17
Posts 110Illinois, USA |
poetry_kills: No, archaic words are not difficult for me to read. I'm upset that you would think, much less say so. Let me pose a question: is something noble because it's old? Do we keep a computer years beyond its usefulness because it's old and so therefore noble? Evolution happens for a reason. Allow it to, rather than fight it by going back to see what these old writers did. Did those writers that you look back on have anything to look back on? They are read today because of their innovation, because of their blind searching for a taste of water in a blistering desert. STOP QUENCHING YOURSELVES ON THE WATER THEY FOUND!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I don't mean to come across like this, and I don't mean to get upset by it. Jenni, of course, writes wonderfully. I loved the Verona piece. Looking back on that (wonderful) piece, I have to sit back in agape wonder that she would regress into the ancient past like this after a wonderfully ingenious piece like the aforementioned one. THAT is why I felt the need to attack this sonnet. She had a more natural style to her writing when she was just writing a JENNI piece as opposed to this, which I feel to be a little ingenuous. The intellectuals and the ivory tower lookouts can write sonnets until their well-studied heads explode. That's great. I'm happy for them. But I like Jenni's work. Think of this as an attempt on my part to simultaneously attack all the sonnet work that's been posted on this site and to stop Jenni from making what I feel to be a mistake--continuing on with someone else's words and furthering work that was carried to its fullest hundreds of years ago. I think it foolish to think you can innovate a sonnet. It's done. It's over. Shakespeare said it best. He captured the moment. It's OVER. Let it die. I don't know why we keep trying to dig up the past and revive it. I think of it as a way to avoid living in the moment, writing for your generation. Why bother with anything else but writing for the times? All the people who could REALLY appreciate this poem are DEAD. Wordshaman |
||
|
poetry_kills Senior Member
since 1999-12-04
Posts 549new orleans |
wordshaman: again you assume that we write for posterity... neither jenni nor i are writing these sonnets for future generations to read, nor in any attempt to "search for water" but rather to do what literature was meant to do in the first place (until certain high-sounding individuals made it all about making a name for the author) and that is to share and explore the universal ideas of all humanity... in writing of love, what does it matter if i use "thou" or "you"? it makes a difference only to such obstinate individuals such as yourself... you say that these grounds have been tread before... but show me the depths of love... show me where the waters end... tell me of all that is to come, then i will believe... until that time allow my exploration to continue as i see fit... have you considered that some might not appreciate or even LIKE "modern" poetry or its forms? in my sonnets i write of love... what do we see of love in "modern" poetry? i see nothing worth a shilling... when i write as you suggest i write of fear and anger and loneliness... i write of all that is not known... (if you care to, look up some of my old strings)... i am not attempting to dig up the past, i am attempting to explore the truths of human nature and human emotion that still remain a mystery even AFTER all the great writers of history... perhaps if you spent more time living, and less time brooding over insignificancies, then you would understand... now once again i ask you (as before) to hold your tongue and let me love... perhaps this time you will... sincerely, jerome the boy with no brain A savage place! as holy and enchanted As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted By woman wailing for her demon-lover! ~Coleridge |
||
|
merely_a_jester Member
since 2000-01-14
Posts 67Arkansas... that's all you get |
first off let me just say that i enjoyed this piece immensely and i tip my cap to you jenni and please, feel free to write whatever your heart desires, the world will be a better place for anything remotely like this one secondly let me just say how incredibly disappointed i am about some of the disheartening critiques that have come from one certain person in this forum... to cry for the death of an art style, for the destruction of one of the most important and influential forms of poetry that has been created is something i absolutely abhor to say that, just because something newer is present that anything from the past must be obsolete and shunned, is quite a narrowminded statement, especially when this piece is written in a such lighthearted frame of mind if a food was found that provided all of the nutritional needs that one must have to survive and that was quite tasty, would that mean that we should throw out any other substance of substanance that does not live up to this new standard? what would a world without pizza and nectarines be like? i shudder to think i'll stop here, i do not wish to wade into the fray, but merely offer a sideline opinion... and that is that we should not put our personal biasis into our critiques so much that they overshadow what we might say that could actually better the poem that we are reading... poems are made to be read and enjoyed because of the messages and the feelings that they try to embody... if you dislike something to the point that you feel that you must comment on the poem in a way that merely bashes it and it's predicessors then it might be best that you remember the old saying and hold your tongue... i've rambled too much now and i will bow out now... but i still think that this is a good poem merely_a_jester p.s. to quote mr. heston... (though probably not verbatum)"soilent green is people! it's people!" Are scarecrows just like men, and do you hold That a false coin is just as good as gold? Moliere, "Tartuffe" |
||
|
Brad Member Ascendant
since 1999-08-20
Posts 5705Jejudo, South Korea |
I'll leave the archaic/modern debate alone for a moment but just want to say that I enjoyed all the poems and thought it was fun (as long as not taken too seriously ). However, Wordshamen has a right to an opinion and as I read him now, he has not given any personal attacks. He has attacked formalists in general (and, yes, that would include me to some extent, indeed, it would include anyone who wrote a sonnet). He has a 'right' to state his opinion in this forum and it is your or my 'right' to listen (and argue) or to ignore. I've said this before and I'll say this again, nobody knows what makes a poem great, there are no objective rules to this, only personal biases -- anything and everything is possible and let's not pretend otherwise. The guidelines are provided (with one click) anytime you post something (and any problems there should of course be directed to me ).For the record, a personal attack is something along the lines of, 'you know, poetry just ain't your thing, babe. Maybe try painting.' or 'when god handed out poetic talent, you forgot to get in line' and stuff like that. Attacking a poem in this forum is okay (yes, this is a problem with some of the newer poets coming in and, no, I don't have a solution but I am willing to listen to suggestions.) We all have disagreements on poetry (and thank God for diversity) but nobody has the final say, not even me (and some of you think you have a bigger ego than I do. Ha! ). So, let's share opinions, however, heated they may get with the understanding that none of us, none of us, know or can prove that we are absolutely right.jester, While I understand your concerns, this forum is about sharing those opinions (good or bad), not about hiding behind a veneer of 'everybody's good'. I admit I don't quite know how to fix the 'new poet' problem yet (and, yes guys, it is a problem that I sweat about) but I am quite comfortable that Jenni, at least, can take anything any of us can dish out. To the guys, Has anybody else noticed that the best poets around here are women? We have Jenni, Haze, Roxane and a few others (I'm in a debate right now with warmhrt so I won't mention her name ).To the joy of disagreement and learning, Brad |
||
|
Wordshaman Member
since 2000-01-17
Posts 110Illinois, USA |
I hope in the future we can have a debate without all the name-calling. I'm severely disheartened by this website, suddenly. I'll come back if I don't see anything out there with broader horizons--you speak of me opening my mind, but what of your minds? Adieu et au revoir. But by the way, if the pizza or the nectarine were several hundred years old, would you still eat it? Wordshaman [This message has been edited by Wordshaman (edited 01-26-2000).] |
||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
It's rather extraordinary that what was just a bit of lighthearted fun on Jenni's part should have generated so much heat, I'm with you Brad on your comments though. P PS Aren't you over-egging the chivalry a little?!! ...... |
||
|
jbouder Member Elite
since 1999-09-18
Posts 2534Whole Sort Of Genl Mish Mash |
Hello again: I think it's a mistake to disregard venerable forms and styles of poetry simply because they are old. Suggesting that modern man stands to learn little if anything from poets (or any artist, for that matter) who have predeceased us is nothing more to me than hubris. I am the first to admit that I have certain biases and leanings and I suppose I am partially responsible for the number of sonnets in this forum (I am atleast an accessory to the fact ... Brad actually issued the challenge ... remember that Brad? ). Never-the-less, I am certain that everyone who has tried writing a sonnet has left the experience behind with a new respect for those, like the long dead Shakespeare, who were able to explore the many facets of love so beautifully within the "cage" of iambic verse. Furthermore, there is much to learn from dead poets about the effects of meter and sound on the mood of a poem. Poe's "The Bells" immediately comes to my mind. Could it be that learning the discipline of writing structured poetry will improve our free-verse? My answer to this, and this is only my opinion, is absolutely yes.I agree with Philip that most of us are not writing for posterity and I agree with Brad that "good" poetry is often judged according to a subjective standard. For that reason I am also in agreement with Brad that everyone is entitled to voice his or her opinion to the extent that any heat is not directed ad hominem (and while I thought some of what Wordshaman wrote was abrasive, I don't think they were personal attacks). But I think if we are going to lob incendiary grenades at someone's work we ought to be prepared for counter attacks to be launched back in our direction from time to time. Wordshaman: Would you put gas refined from a 100 year old oil well in your car? Would you rather drive a '71 Chevy Nova SS or a '88 Chevy Nova (kinda like a Geo Prism)? Do we put away the philosophy of Plato and Aristotle because it is the philosophy of yesterday? What about freedom minded jurisprudence that was birthed in the Renaissance/Reformation era? My point is that we stand to learn much from those who have gone before us. Much of it may be chaff that can be winnowed away but there are still some good kernals to be found, my friend. The good things of the past are foundational to the good things of the present in many ways. Don't you think it is a good thing to take a close look at your foundation before you decide to take a jack-hammer to it? No hard feelings here. I enjoyed the debate. Just an opinion brought to you live from my Ivory Tower Lookout, Jim |
||
|
poetry_kills Senior Member
since 1999-12-04
Posts 549new orleans |
i certainly bear no ill will towards anyone... i simply find it of utmost offense that someone would suggest that the expressions of my love are not viable simply because i use the words "thee" and "thou"... i have not argued against the idea that poets of this day and age should use today's language... but i am no poet, gentlemen, i am a lover first and a writer second... and if i use terms that (in my heart and mind) envoke images of ancient loves, then what harm should it be to another?... look at what i have written... i do nothing but defend my love and my right to love with any expression i choose... however, some have decided that to write of love with form and with "archaic" words somehow nullifies the feeling?!? "I really have to commend you on ripping a page right out of John Donne's book and slapping it onto the paper with the utmost skill as you have done." (posted on my sonnet) -- i find this offensive, and excuse me if you do not... i do not find it offensive because it accuses me of plagarism, nor because it claims that my poem is trite and "already done", but rather because it questions the nature and depth of my love, and THAT i cannot and will not stand beside and let pass... i have not claimed that my form is best or even attempted to uphold the "old way", but i do ask that certain people let me love as i will... and they (apparently) are not content to do so... sincerely, jerome the boy with an obselete love p.s. -- if i offend, then it is with my heart and not my pen that do so, therefore take issue with my love if you be so bold... A savage place! as holy and enchanted As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted By woman wailing for her demon-lover! ~Coleridge |
||
|
poetry_kills Senior Member
since 1999-12-04
Posts 549new orleans |
as an attempt to make amends for those who cannot believe in love, i vow never to post another of my sonnets on this forum again... i will save them for one who understands... sincerely, jerome the boy with the plagarized love A savage place! as holy and enchanted As e'er beneath a waning moon was haunted By woman wailing for her demon-lover! ~Coleridge |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
I guess I feel like jumping in here again. Yes, I am somewhat of a newbie here and have mostly kept my strong opinions to myself. As an example, I have little interest in free verse and sonnets are probably my favorite form. Most of what I have written has been sonnets, although there has been some argument about that. To be sure, I have found several of the poets here who often write free verse and some of their efforts I have enjoyed immensely. I won't mention names for fear of leaving some out. Since I don't feel qualified to contribute, I usually don't comment on free verse, except to say that I liked it, if that is the case. Our purpose in CA is CONSTRUCTIVE critique. My approach is to give that only. If I like a poem, I say so. If I don't like it I may say so, but only if I can explain why. If I see something which, in my humble opinion, might help to improve the poem, I will try to explain that. If there is a particular form, subject matter or whatever, that I just do not like, then I don't think I am qualified to make constructive comments. More likely, anything I might say would be just an expression of that bias. Therefore, I may read such a piece but most likely will refrain from comment. As I understand the guidelines, this seems to me to be a reasonable approach to commenting. And no, I don't think we should only comment in the for of praise. After all, that would completely defeat the intended purpose of the forum. In the short time I have been posting here, I have had maybe a couple of slightly negative comments, mostly brought on by my own mistakes. I have had many suggestions on how to improve a particular poem or how to improve my writing in general. Some of these seemed possibly harsh to me at the time but none in the form of an outright attack. I thank all those who have done so and hope that I have learned from them. I continue to solicit all such comments. Now, as for as archaic or old words and forms, I will continue writing structured poems, especially sonnets. From time to time, I will probably use archaic language as I do find it romantic and stimulating. I hope that everyone else here will also be allowed to write what they want and that our critics will not take themselves so seriously. None of us has the power or influence to convert everyone to our own way of thinking. No, we don't live in the past and I don't want to. But the past is there. It is our heritage. And it is important that we revere it. I can't remember the exact quote, nor can I remember who said it but paraphrased it goes something like "Those who ignore the past are doomed to repeat it." < !signature--> Pete What terms shall I find sufficiently simple in their sublimity -- sufficiently sublime in their simplicity -- for the mere enunciation of my theme? Edgar Allan Poe [This message has been edited by Not A Poet (edited 01-26-2000).] |
||
|
warmhrt Senior Member
since 1999-12-18
Posts 1563 |
Jerome, Please don't let someone's opinion stop you from writing and POSTING what's in your heart. Remember the cliche, "You can't please everybody ..." What's important is if you please yourself, learn from what you experience, and use it to become a better poet. Jenni, This was a remarkable piece of work! I agree with you on the use of archaic language in romantic poetry ... it only adds to the romance. However, I feel this language has it's place, and is appropriate in few instances, such as your piece. Words, Take it easy and lighten up a bit. No one is attacking anyone else, and this subject is not worth losing a home for your work. Bradley, You are not in a debate with me, and that wasn't very nice to mention my name, but leave me out of your list.  From now on, I'm not speaking to you ever, ever again. warmhrt [This message has been edited by warmhrt (edited 01-26-2000).] |
||
|
jenni Member
since 1999-09-11
Posts 478Washington D.C. |
i for one didn't think wordshaman's original post here was an attack. he raises a very valid point about the use of archaic language, which, as i said before, i basically agree with as a general principal. (WS, you might take a minute to read my reply from earlier, i don't think you've read it yet... maybe email me if you want to discuss it any further?) and i do like these spirited debates. but at the risk of changing the subject... can we get back to the poem? did anyone besides wordshaman (and maybe brad?) NOT see the piece as a "sympathetic parody"? after reading the explanation above of what i was trying to do here, does anyone have any suggestions on how i could make it better? thanks, jenni p.s.: wordshaman, thank you very, very much for your kinds words on "verona". (that was my favorite part of the debate above! )p.s.s: jerome, please keep posting your work here for us, we're all here to exchange opinions, yes, but also to learn from one another's work. one of the best things about this forum is the incredible variety of forms and styles. it'd be a shame to lose even some of your (many) contributions to the richness of stylistic expression out here. (and wordshaman, that goes for you, too... this forum is plenty big enough for both of you. i, for one, hope you don't leave.) p.s.s.: thanks for the confidence, brad, yes, i can deal with anything you guys dish out! but certainly you've been drinking again, and accidently mentioned me in there with haze, rox and warmhrt. the person you REALLY meant, her name is spelled k-a-r-n-e-l-i-a-n-n. |
||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
You’re right Jenni WS’s comments were not an attack on the poem they were an attack upon the use of archaic language per se ....... absolutely nothing wrong with that at all. Equally I suppose he was quite entitled to advise you that you should in future not write poems using archaic language as they “are bad for your health”. As Brad rightly points out you can take it ..lol .. and give as good as you get ... I certainly know that . The only point I was making in my first post was that I thought that WS was rather missing the point of the poem ... Jenni you call it a “sympathetic parody” .. I’d drop the parody if I were you, there was no way this was a feeble or ridiculous imitation ..lol .. it follows that “no” I don’t have any suggestions for a better poem. Yes please post more sonnets Jerome (heh heh to Brad .. well you did start all this!) WS please don’t go I haven’t discussed A Year in the Life with you yet ... Jenni .. modesty does not become you ...... lol Philip |
||
|
Wordshaman Member
since 2000-01-17
Posts 110Illinois, USA |
I like asparagus. (*Looks around.) |
||
|
Buffpimp Junior Member
since 2000-01-23
Posts 39 |
Well I guess you can see that your poem is very good. I dont know what to say. I thought it wsa very well thought and well mannered. You were able to do EVERYTHING right. I gotta try to d othat sometime . Well good luck on your future poems |
||
|
Poertree Senior Member
since 1999-11-05
Posts 1359UK |
pretty funny and masterly (or should that be mistressly!? ) job this.... |
||
|
Not A Poet Member Elite
since 1999-11-03
Posts 3885Oklahoma, USA |
I bumped this one back up one more time because I just loved it. Yes, it was tongue-in-cheek but wonderfully so. I wish Jenni would hurry back; she has been away much too long  Pete |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
