|
5992. NuPlanetOne - 10/30/2007 10:40:00 PM Seamus...that one evokes memories of one I wrote a few years back for/about the loss of my brother. Although, yours evokes quite a few more losses on a few different levels. When I read it the first time it appeared here, I thought, hmmm, he will be pleased with that one. It's fairly pretty much all done, even by your standards. I like it. Tons of good stuff in there.
5993. NuPlanetOne - 10/30/2007 10:40:39 PM At some point last year my daughter and I took it upon ourselves to stop in at Salem, Ma. We had time to kill, as one of my brothers lives not far from there. I had recently imposed upon her to read some Hawthorne and she loved it. No Rappaccinni's daughter her. (Plus I wanted to see the statue of Liz Montgomery, after all.) I have always lived within an hour or so of the place and have seen all the changes through the years. It is quite the trap now. Anyway, it was a weekday afternoon fairly close to Holloween, but not crowded. She challanged me to write some kind of epic poem in the style and language of Hawthorne, Poe, et.al. Being a rhyming fool, I took her up. So in the Halloween spirit I composed, over the next few months, most of a little contrivance I've entitled 'The Ascension of Rachel.' I swore to finish it by last week. It is raw, and has holes, but it had the desired result, I think. Cut and paste to http://freewebs.com/zeezo99xx. Click on Rachel. The lenghth of the damn thing demanded its own space. Let me know if it has the Halloween feel....
5994. Crafty Critter - 11/1/2007 2:25:22 AM Hi Seamus,
As Wonkers, I have a couple of questions about your poem "The Theory of Almost Everything". First, I'm not really sure what the poem is about ( not being a sarcastic here) but the codes you have in there totally have me stumped. Such as "Gtsmmor smf Ko;;, " and "[4e6e,
inching closer to Y_R. "...Can you enlighten me ? I also know that the word "jays" is used symbolically for several things, do you mind expounding a bit on this one for me ? Thanks, Crafty_Critter 5995. alistairConnor - 11/1/2007 2:55:20 PM Hullo Critter!
Just as a starting point, have a look at your keyboard. The F and J keys most likely have bumps on them. 5996. Seamus - 11/1/2007 8:18:57 PM Yes, thank you AC, that would be it.
I hope it is clear we aren't talking deep meaning here--that was a lark and I have been having fun with it.
In fact, the more I reflect on the title, the more I think it fits the arch overwroughtness of the whole thing. It takes itself seriously because it must, but I hope the reader isn't made to feel they must take it seriously. I most certainly do not. Other opinions welcome. 5997. wonkers2 - 11/1/2007 10:36:47 PM We need an annotated version like the Wasteland! 5998. wonkers2 - 11/1/2007 10:37:41 PM Seamus, check the video I just posted in the Movie Thread. I think it might be up your alley, so to speak. 5999. Seamus - 11/2/2007 5:04:49 AM Thank you, Nu. Of course, you know I had a big laugh because of this:
It's fairly pretty much all done, even by your standards.
Scary how well you know me, my friend.
BTW, that url you gave to your epic Halloween poem doesn't work for me. Am I missing something?
And wonk, I looked at that video. Thanks...I think. Looks like I've made a less-than-flattering impression if that's what my poem brings to mind ;) 6000. Seamus - 11/2/2007 5:05:39 AM The crown? woo? 6001. Seamus - 11/2/2007 5:14:00 AM I'd like to thank the Mote, the Mote Academy of Poetry, fellow lovers of poetry, and all my peeps, you know who you are ;)
arky, you are a true sport. thank you for this honour.
Hullo mom! 6002. arkymalarky - 11/2/2007 11:47:41 PM Yay! (confetti) Yay! 6003. Crafty Critter - 11/3/2007 12:00:51 AM Hi alistairConnor,
Thanks for responding. I wasn't sure of the codes here and it worried me because of the seeming heaviness of the lines. I know you can't respond FOR him, and as I said earlier, I wasn't trying to be mean or sarcastic, I was just trying to "understand it" a bit better from the author's view point. Thank goodness it wasn't what I had envisioned it to be which was a hatred of women or worse. Sorry for the confusion I suppose but with these lines
"In the beginning, I goosed those bumps
on Frannie and Jill
just to watch them die
Gtsmmor smf Ko;;,
but as you can see, even then
I couldn't completely erase them. "
to an untrained eye such as mine, you could see how I would suppose he was talking of ACTUALLY erasing them ? Kind of like a confessional thing. Anyway, thank you for being so kind to answer me Alistair. I appreciate your insight on the poem. I still don't understand the other coding ( if they have any meaning at all to them ) but oh well. I have enjoyed reading some of the work done here. Chao to all
6004. concerned - 11/3/2007 12:52:35 AM I think 'Crunchy Critter' is a more evocative handle. 6005. Seamus - 11/3/2007 1:10:06 AM Thank goodness it wasn't what I had envisioned it to be which was a hatred of women or worse.
Yes, because after posting hundreds upon hundreds of comments and poems here and the predecessor to this place for more than ten years, I could certainly see how one might think I was a misogynist.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but sheesh. CC drops in from nowhere, no introduction, no past or present with me, not one single previous interaction, not one hello nice to meet you...and I am under some obligation to assume this was a well-meaning set of questions? I didn't think so after the first post. And after the goodbye message, I'm certain of it.
One thing that's changed for me is that I'm less naive than I used to be.
That was an easily identifiable hit post from the moment I read it. The people who can tell me that they are reacting negatively to something I've said and expect me to care are the ones who have a history with me here. Not posters who've never said a word to me before and then make hit-and-run posts.
CC, you want to stalk here and jump in with a faux "not sarcastic" set of questions, that's your perogative. I won't play that game with you. But of course, you won't be reading this, will you? 6006. Seamus - 11/3/2007 1:10:06 AM Thank goodness it wasn't what I had envisioned it to be which was a hatred of women or worse.
Yes, because after posting hundreds upon hundreds of comments and poems here and the predecessor to this place for more than ten years, I could certainly see how one might think I was a misogynist.
Sorry for the sarcasm, but sheesh. CC drops in from nowhere, no introduction, no past or present with me, not one single previous interaction, not one hello nice to meet you...and I am under some obligation to assume this was a well-meaning set of questions? I didn't think so after the first post. And after the goodbye message, I'm certain of it.
One thing that's changed for me is that I'm less naive than I used to be.
That was an easily identifiable hit post from the moment I read it. The people who can tell me that they are reacting negatively to something I've said and expect me to care are the ones who have a history with me here. Not posters who've never said a word to me before and then make hit-and-run posts.
CC, you want to stalk here and jump in with a faux "not sarcastic" set of questions, that's your perogative. I won't play that game with you. But of course, you won't be reading this, will you? 6007. Seamus - 11/3/2007 1:10:28 AM sorry for the double post. 6008. Seamus - 11/3/2007 1:18:57 AM And Alistair, I *am* grateful to you for speaking up.
I will make some changes to try to make it clearer, just in case someone here who knows me is actually offended by that poem. I certainly don't wish to offend people who actually know me by a poor choice of words. I've had my fill of misogynists recently--to be accused of it myself makes for a deep sigh.
Just for the hell of it:
The out-of-correct-hand-position for the last stanza makes "[4e6e" from "pests" and "Y_R" out of "GOD".
I've been thinking that only the latter one really needs to stay, the pests can go non-coded.
6009. NuPlanetOne - 11/3/2007 2:33:35 AM Seamus,
I think you might have included the period at the end of the url linking to my Rachel poem.
As for this C.C. business, that type of confusion couched in the guise of technical ignorance, is, well, ignorance, perjoratively speaking. That the individual thought perhaps you miskeyed, alone, was lame. I, and a few others got it, or get it. Hopefully C.C cares to take another approach. Your rejoinders are always entertaining. 6010. Crafty Critter - 11/3/2007 6:24:55 AM Hi Seamus,
I would like to answer you in order. You made a statement about your years here and how someone might see you as a misogynist. I have not been here for years, so I don't know about that. As to "dropping in here" I guess a person has to start somewhere and I for one was curious about the poem. Plain and simple.
As I stated each and every time, I was NOT trying to be sarcastic, mean, rude or otherwise. Just curious. You didn't answer me when I wrote to you, Alistair did, and I answered him with what I previously had been thinking about the poem. And yes, it was well meaning.
Goodbye message ? I say Chao all the time.
Hit post ? If you mean "hit" as in kill it, or put it down, no. I don't know you well enough to expect you to "care" . I was only asking you about your poem. Just because I'm new here, you are accusing me of making "hit and run posts" ? Stalking ? Aren't those harsh words just because I asked you some things about your poem that I didn't understand ?
You mentioned that I had never spoken to you before...true. But doesn't a person have to start SOMEWHERE ?? I WAS JUST ASKING YOU A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.
I'm JUST someone who is interested in poetry TRYING to understand different facets, the makeup, the why's, where's and how's of poems that people write. I wasn't trying to "hit" on your work. I suppose people trying to learn more about poetry is not welcome here ? Is that what you are telling me ?
And, just for your personal information, I am a student who is just beginning to write, to learn poetry,to want more out of life. More than anyone in my family has ever done before. At least I am trying. And just because you have issues with me asking you questions about why you wrote certain things in the poem the way you did, does not give you the right to accuse me of "stalking", "hitting", "hit and run posts".And I will say this to each and every ONE of you.......you might think me "ignorant" and "lame" as NuPlanet called me. I don't think so, I'm learning, so I ask questions as anyone would do. And I hope and pray that whenever I meet someone new on a board, that I have enough graciousness about me to give that person the benefit of the doubt before I blast them for something they didn't really do. 6011. NuPlanetOne - 11/3/2007 1:39:02 PM C.C.
Bravo! Excellent account of yourself. That you are neither lame nor ignorant is quite irrelevant. That you have returned and are now properly introduced is what is most relevant. Experiencing a momentary flash of Seamus' ire is well worth the trade-off if you in fact are serious about the appreciation of things poetic. Though he does not instruct, the structure and complexity of some of his offerings, if studied, will become a worthwile learning experience. Therefore, you have the benefit of the doubt and I apologise for my slander.
|
