CombatWords for July 9, 2010: Binaries ****Critique Expiration: EXTENDED! 6m PST, July 11, 2010****
Jul 09
CombatWords for July 9, 2010: Binaries
Binaries shape the structure of our cognition. Not just as Yin and Yang, Heaven and hell, or zero and one; but also induction versus deduction—self versus other: action, reaction. Riff off this theme. Bonus points should be allocated for those who are able to effectively riff off the theme and also other posters.
Combat Expiration: 6pm PST, July 10, 2010.
****Critique Expiration: EXTENDED! 6m PST, July 11, 2010****
Bonuses: A post gains +1 for every three hour increment posted ahead of deadline. Max +8.
Form Restrictions: None. Prose, poetry, aphorisms; whatever.
RULES FOR COMBATWORDS HERE
Jul 09, 2010 @ 19:03:15
I thought that this poem by Mather was the first post in this combat words because it shows up directly under the post that starts the combat words. I am saying that now because I wrote a poem that riffed off his. So here it is, I included his poem first because without it my poem is nonsense.
_____________________________________________________
A poem: HTML GIANT
They got it figured
out yo
they got it all
figured out:
anything that doesn’t make
sense is profound, and nothing
juxtaposed
with more nothing
is suddenly something.
They know the ever updated
code words, slang, hip-talk
name droppings like Becket
Joyce
David Foster Wallace—
spit balls from the sneakered durf-wads
in the back row.
I guess their words would be interesting
to a sociologist researching
lit-zits:
how it comes to be that certain individuals
expect to be rewarded and admired for
being cock suckers and sock puppets.
Born to luxury they mimic
their professors’ standard
fairy stances
bombastic scorn and snobbery
on the jewel-laden and cum-glistening
internet.
They play doctor
in a cardboard box
and act as if they have invented
a new world.
-Mather Schneider, TWAK
_____________________________________________________________
And here is my response:
Nothing is something
Or you wouldn’t have a word for it
And if you think that’s bad
Hold on cowboy, times will get worse
And those that have it all figured out
Already know it
Yo
Right now a publishing house is making the final edits
On my title-less and blank four hundred page book of poetry
Because I couldn’t write my heartbeat
Or get my swirling chemicals to dry and still look like my idea
So I left it blank
Cover to cover and up the spine
A four hundred page message that I tried
And they ate it up
They reserved a spot on all the best seller lists
Even though its already being plagiarized
By Chinese corporate spies
Who hacked and downloaded an earlier edition
It will be published by Chinese counterfeiters
And by poor college students in their dorms using their printers
Till the proliferation is total
Till there are no more trees
Even The Lorax will be recycled to print more copies
From space, reflected in the satellite’s unblinking glass eyes
The world will look like it is in constant winter
Soon your name dropping literary hipsters-
The ones with beehives for minds, full of nothing but buzzwords
Will add a stretch of silence to their vocabulary
While wading through the ankle deep
Ocean of empty pages
One day the parade will end
And the conefetti will be swallowed by the real sea
To wash up on beaches and to turn into fish feed
And from that murky soup life will crawl again
To evolve into the sentence I never penned
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 9th, 2010 at 9:55 pm
@The Humanist,
Review: HTML GIANT
Pro:
Anti-academic tone (as per the first stanza) serves as effective contrary binary to the supposed academic authority of HTML GIANT (as per: “Born to luxury they mimic/ their professors’ standard”). +1
Total Pro: +1
Con:
Arbitrary line breaks; for example:
“They got it figured
out yo
they got it all
figured out:
anything that doesn’t make
sense is profound, and nothing
juxtaposed
with more nothing
is suddenly something.”
Would be more effective is:
“They got it figured out yo [completes the sarcastic thought]
they got it all figured out: [if they have it figured out, complete the thought on one line]
anything that doesn’t make sense [complete the thought]
is profound, and nothing [line break here adds extra meaning]
juxtaposed with more [the whole point of this line is the 'wait for it...' moment]
nothing [now highlighted w/ extra meaning due to altered line breaks]
is suddenly something.”
Why for example, does the original highlight ‘juxtaposed’ as the one word line, when the whole intention of the stanza is to highlight ‘nothing’ with an actual juxtaposition of nothing, as the sentence suggests? It’s a bad choice and every stanza is filled with bad choices like the aforementioned ones. -1
The poem breaks anti-academic tone to assert intellectual superiority in a manner just as arbitrary
as it accuses authority-minded ‘intellectual’ HTML GIANT of being (“They play doctor/in a cardboard box/and act as if they have invented/a new world. ”). -1
The turn is filled with curses and insults, which offers the same nothingness the poem criticizes HTML GIANT for offering. -1
Curses and insults don’t earn the judgment of the final stanza. -1
Nonsensical argument, the academics worship nothing, but then the poem goes on to list someones—who are clearly NOT nothing, for the poem depends upon the reader to identify them. -1
Mixed metaphors of nothingness, zits, turds, cum, spit balls, cardboard boxes and playing doctor. These images are all so disconnected, they lack any poetic focus whatsoever. -1.
The rhetoric is simply a juvenile anger which works against the seriousness the narrator seeks to be taken with the final stanza, as the poet casts judgment on his rivals. -1
The poem attacks academics and yet cites them in an insult,
“I guess their words would be interesting
to a sociologist researching
lit-zits:”
Which is again an example of rhetoric undermining itself. -1.
Emotional dishonesty, concomitant with intellectual dishonesty. The poet is jealous. That’s all. -1.
Introduces a pivotal theme and doesn’t develop it:
“Born to luxury they mimic
their professors’ standard”
A class oriented anger that’s never resolved in the poem. -1.
The poem consists of many 3 and 4 syllable words that again, undermine the whole rhetorical focus of ‘they think they’re better than everybody else.’ -1
The nothingness HTML GIANT supposedly worships is never defined beyond a few names which were supposed to serve as signposts. -1
The nothingness that the first stanza belabors is never addressed again in the poem. -1
Misc: If I were to allocate negatives for every single instance of aforementioned failings in the poem, it would appear unfair and malicious, though I expect reviewers to hold other compositions to a higher standard than I’m holding this one. After all, he didn’t even ask to play the game. Still, the poem is in the thread and the first poster—as per the ancient and inviolable rules of CombatWords!—sets the focus of the thread. That’s the advantage of initiative and it was The Humanist’s choice as first poster. So like it or not, Mather’s poem is in the combat. So I’m making a compromise here. I despised this poem and I’m assuming others did too. Score it appropriately. I’m not going to be the one to do it. Still, incompetent may not be the nicest way of describing this poem, but it is the most accurate one in my opinion. I only ranked what I could quantify. All the non-quantifiables contingent on taste would have added up to an unwieldy negative number.
Total Con: -13
Total Score: +1 + -13 = -12
Remember, time adjustments are a one-time bonus added after all review scores have been added up. Also remember that you can review a review to modify a score. Also remember that you may not review your own composition.
ps: I have to take care of something and then I’ll review The Humanist’s poem.
React
July 10th, 2010 at 4:08 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, The fact that I am breaking all your rules without even knowing what those rules are feels pretty good.
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 10th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
@Mather Schneider, Those aren’t my rules, those are the rules of language. Sorry you can’t tell the difference.
React
July 10th, 2010 at 4:24 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, It’s ok. It’s not your fault.
React
Sandra Jaye Reply:
July 9th, 2010 at 11:28 pm
@The Humanist,
I love the Humanist’s creation of an empty book and the idea that it’s being plagiarized half the world away, as we sleep. I hope he doesn’t mind that I’m gonna plagiarize his work myself, by stapling some empty paper together. I’ll try to read myself to sleep tonight with our collaboration. Who knows, maybe he’s right. Maybe I need the silence more than the famous words I share my bed with every night. I’ll let y’all know in the morning. Score his poem high for me, would you please, K. ?
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 10th, 2010 at 1:38 pm
@Sandra Jaye, If you’re just saying “I like it” then it’s a +1. If you want to score it higher, that’s up to you.
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 11th, 2010 at 4:36 pm
@The Humanist,
Pro:
Riffs off Mather’s Poem in opening stanza, w/ tone & content. +1
Coherent Narrative. +1
Blankness as symbol. +1
Coherent use of symbol. +1
Humor (“The Lorax”). +1.
This pair of lines:
“From space, reflected in the satellite’s unblinking glass eyes
The world will look like it is in constant winter “ +1
Great finish. +1
Binary of life & death/Light&dark/Blank&something. +1
Total Pro: +8
Con:
No technical errors I can detect. Likewise errors of meaning: all binaries were cleanly closed.
Total Con: 0
Misc:
I think this poem could have stood alone (in fact, in that way, it reads like a much better version of HTML GIANT [the poem]), but it’s made better by riffing off of the original.
My score for this poem: 0 + 8 = +8
React
July 12th, 2010 at 2:18 pm
@The Humanist, Riffing off a poem not intended for contest: -40
No title: -50
Lame first line: -10
Lame use of pronoun “You”: -12 Explanation: whoever “you” is did not invent the word or the concept of “nothing”.
“Hold on cowboy” cliche: -20
“and those that have it all figured…” should be “those ‘who’ have it…”: -5
Second stanza begins with a complete lie: -10
and an unoriginal concept: -10
3rd stanza says “even though” in a way that doesn’t make sense. -10
Chinese spies don’t plaigarize blank pages: -10
Lorax an attempt at humor that fails: -10
“buzzwords” too obviously playing off “beehives for minds”: -5
fifth stanza: mention of parade. What parade? No explanation of parade: -5
confetti can’t be “swallowed” by a sea. A sea is not an animal with swallowing capabilitites: -5
“Real sea”: as opposed to what? Fake sea? Fake sea not mentioned, thereby not complteting the binarism of the thought: -12
Why would something that “washes up from the sea” turn into “fish food”? Fish live in the sea. Therefore they can’t eat what is not in the sea: -20
Ending completely cliche: -15
Misc: it’s sad to see these anonymouses write poems for Wessington, and for compassion I am going to give him a +10.
Total score: -227
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
@Mather Schneider, We’ve seen what you write so first off, I think all outside observers will consider the source when examining your ‘scoring.’ 2nd: you posted after the time limit expired, so your ‘critiques’ are invalid. You posted after the time limit because you are afraid (or incapable) of following simple rules. 3rd: You couldn’t even follow the other rule, each critique is good for +1 or -1 each. I think we all know why you score your response the way you do–you know your words lack their own authority. 4th: You don’t do a close enough reading to support your pat judgments. It’s almost as if you’re proud of how clownishly incompetent you are as a reader (and writer!).
You don’t like that the game has been stepped up around here and that there are some people posting here capable of more than word salad. I know! Where’d all this talent come from and what does it mean for hacks like you?
I like many of the people affiliated with TWAK, but if they’re too passive to smack you on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper when you try snatching the roast off the dinner table, then maybe I should take combatwords back home. You are so foolish, you don’t even know how foolish you come across. The fact that nobody else here is stepping in is more indicative that they don’t want to get on the bad side of either of us than anything else.
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, Ridiculous acusation because I knew my scoring would not be taken seriously: -35
I posted after the time limit, shit…yes I was afraid: +23
Lame metaphor of comparing me to a dog that is trying to snatch a roast off a table: what roast? what table? Or are you still gloating on your use of the cliche “word salad” and thinking you’re reall clever by continuing the “dinner” theme. -890
Idle threat of taking your ball and going home. -967
Misc: putting quotes around “critiques” as if the author (me) didn’t actually mean them to be “critiques”. -80
Total score: 1,097
React
July 12th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, “Where’d all this talent come from and what does it mean for hacks like you?” Well, I think all this talent must have come from Litfo or some other literary forum where writers go to get support because they can’t get support anywhere else. As for what it means to me: it means a lot of fun on a boring afternoon.
React
Valerie Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 2:48 pm
@The Humanist, not feeling the whole first stanza, -5
couple of typos that bugged me, -2
trashing hipsters is too easy, -1
all other lines awesome, +28
total = +20
React
Jul 09, 2010 @ 23:16:24
Trinaries are the new binaries. Though just how new the Trinity is, or mind-body-soul, makes new/old rather irrelevant. Binaries are restrictive that way and take no account of the no man’s land that isn’t one or another.
Da Vinci said “God created man but man is a machine so it can be copied.” There’s another happy threesome. In the medicine of our day, it’s become the organic, synthetic and the combination of both. That makes trinaries a more viable construct: reality is an integrated model, a fluid relationship. Binaries by their nature, separate.
The biggest virtue of trinaries, though, is that they introduce messiness, unpredictability.
The Two Stooges just wouldn’t cut it.
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 11th, 2010 at 4:43 pm
@Sandra Jaye,
Pro:
Sets up three vs two, thus creating a binary out of an argument going for trinities. +1
Da Vinci quote. +1
Conclusion ties up prior arguments. +1
Humor at the finish. +1
Total Pro: +4
Con:
Is there such a thing as a synthesis of organic and synthetic? Wouldn’t that be synthetic? I worry that you’re imposing your thesis on a perhaps lackluster metaphor, but I’m not sure. You also should have mentioned Philip K Dick when you talked about organic synthetic distinctions. Heh. I originally put this comment in misc, but come to think of it, all this adds up to maybe a failing in your piece. -1, but I’m glad to retract it if I’m just being a careless reader.
Total Con: -1
Misc:
Good job.
Final Personal Score: -1 + +4 = +3
React
July 12th, 2010 at 2:27 pm
@Sandra Jaye,
I felt that this was not part of the contest but a comment: + 10
Daring to contradict Wessington: +10
General hippy mentality: -10
Misc: you sound medicated but you at least stand out in this little crowd: +10
Total score: +20
React
Valerie Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 2:52 pm
@Sandra Jaye, some good ideas, +3
nice final line, +1
not digging on the lack of imagery, so, -4
I’d love to see this expanded so that the ideas take a more concrete form, but as is this gets 0 from me.
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 2:59 pm
@Valerie, 1) Scoring is only a +1/-1. 2) So you have to itemize each idea you found compelling. 3) Likewise, if you don’t like the imagery, you need to explain where and why this is a problem. You can -1 per instance.
0 isn’t so bad actually.
React
Valerie Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, I don’t really want to take -1 for every sentence without imagery, so I’ll make it an even -1 for that and leave it at +3 if that’s okay?
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:37 pm
@Valerie, No, not okay. What are you, stupid?
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
@Mather Schneider, BERSERK! BERSERK! ATTACK ALL TARGETS IN RANGE! EXTERMINATE!
React
July 12th, 2010 at 4:54 pm
@Mather Schneider, Sorry. I should have said: No, it is not okay. What are you, mentally challenged?
React
Jul 10, 2010 @ 00:50:45
Okay, well, this is my first time trying this sort of thing, so I’m uncertain if I did this correctly. Not exactly an exact response to Mather and The Humanist, but inspired by their pieces. Here it goes…haha.
ANYTHING
He said, “I know everything:
From sea-stained shores,
To plastered, painted palaces-
I touch them- see them, and they are:
Everything.
And I know them.”
And she said, “I feel something:
There’s a heart beat in my fingers,
And your sea-painted smile-
Keeps me from frowning, and that’s-
That’s something.
Because I feel it.”
But you said, “There’s nothing:
These shores are fleeting sand,
Among crumbling palaces,
And nothing stands behind them-
There’s nothing.
We are the end.”
So I said nothing-
To me this sand feels warm,
And stains a history on walls.
They and us- we’re anything:
Pieces of something,
Corroding- or not?
React
The Humanist Reply:
July 10th, 2010 at 2:33 pm
@TasteTheWine,
Reacting to tastethewine:
She said, “Shut your kissing, sucking mouth
there is nothing you can say
to make me feel here”
I bit my kissing, sucking, lips
And went to that place
Where I thought about my mom’s suicide
On the wall there is a picture
It is my brother when he was younger
When I was much younger
And it is wrapped in the glow of memory
But the wadded up and close to destroyed tissue
In his hand
Is still holding the first tears I have seen him cry
Here on the beach
I would cry
But she is so far gone
My tears can’t reach her
They would only roll down my face for some escape
Jumping like business men from a building fire
Seen in old black and white footage
That makes your stomach drop
When they fall out of frame
She can’t look at me anymore
Her eyes are married to the breaking waves
From behind her I speak
Into the sounds of the ocean my voice goes
Into the shells held up to childrens ears
They listen with wide eyed wonder
At the story of love
Which is the story of loss
That is so beautiful
It heals what it hurts
(writing this poem made me well up at the memory I describe as a picture on the wall, I feel amazing)
React
TasteTheWine Reply:
July 10th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
@The Humanist,
This stinging salt could cure my wounds,
If I’d let it fall into them.
But it catches upon my upper lip,
And trickles onto dry tongue,
That tastes like rancid meat.
My mouth consumes that anecdote,
But it marinates the tongue in silence,
And leaves me parched and wanting.
That whispering breeze of sea-salt,
Could very well be the end,
As it erodes away myself,
And sweeps me across cold sand,
Far from a memory I once lived.
But my mouth still thirsts and festers,
A silent testimony to the unquenchable,
That no amount of salt can cleanse.
React
The Humanist Reply:
July 10th, 2010 at 6:37 pm
@TasteTheWine,
Hoarse Whisperer
Broken on the rocks
With the upturned eyes
And mouth full of salt
Pray a silent prayer for blindness
Because the sun is about to go down
And this beauty would break you
You who live with your pain on display
Like a dry boxed butterfly with pins in your wings
The continuation of the poem below is only for TasteTheWine, please do not score it for combatwords.
The story of the sea is not for you
Keep the shells far from your ears
You have felt the song in your bones
It’s written in your spine
You have the language
To ease your pain
It drains from your fingers
And through transformation
Looks beautiful out in the light
On the page
React
July 12th, 2010 at 2:37 pm
@The Humanist,
“Hoarse whisperer”: you should be shot just for saying that: -400
Misc: cutsiness of the special poem meant just for the other guy: -25
Total score: -425
React
July 12th, 2010 at 2:36 pm
@TasteTheWine,
the image of salt in wounds, cliche: -20
“rancid meat” cliche: -20
“My tongue consumes that anecdote”…no anecdote present: -30
“parched and wanting”: -45
“whispering breeze”: -45
“as it erodes away myself”: cliche, and besides it should be “my self”: -50
Ending lazy: -10
Misc: you are a shmuck: -30
Total score: -250
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 4:05 pm
@Mather Schneider, BERSERK! BERSERK! ATTACK ALL TARGETS IN RANGE! EXTERMINATE!
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 11th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
@TasteTheWine,
Re: ANYTHING
Pro:
Binary riff. +1
Using four and playing w/ binaries off it. +1
Excellent stanza usage. +1
Scene described without slowing narrative. +1.
Transcendental finish. +1.
4 states of material ontology. +1
Loved the movement of thought. +1.
Excellent shifting of rhythm to match sea. +1
Total Pro: +8
Con:
None.
Total Con: 0
Misc: Delicious poem.
Final Personal Score: 0 + 8 = +8
React
July 12th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
@TasteTheWine,
Lame race-horse anonymous name: -20
rest of poem: -400
ridiculous end note: -25
Misc: what’s the beach got to do with it? -10
Total score: -435
React
Jul 10, 2010 @ 09:37:48
Here’s my attempt at riffing on The Humanist’s poem.
What You Left Me
When you count on your fingers, nothing
is a closed fist,
a number that wasn’t always a number.
Add it and nothing is a homeless person slipping
into a swelling crowd, subtracted
as invisibly as it appeared.
Multiply
and atomic bonds dissolve as everything remembers
how simple it is to be dust.
Nothing never built a city
but helps them run smoothly
or topples them
like air shifting the empty spaces in a house of cards.
Nothing separates
planets and stars from each other
so the universe can spin lazily ad infinitum
without collapsing under its own weight.
Nothing is a doorway
without a door,
a cup unfilled, stark shadows
inhabiting corners in an unfurnished house,
empty closets, dark windows, the space
between waking and sleeping
when nothing fills the bed beside you.
React
The Humanist Reply:
July 10th, 2010 at 6:44 pm
@Valerie,
Sorry this took so long Valerie, I was struggling with Tastethewine.
Advanced Math Theory:
My voice is an equation
Repeating like the tortured circle
Picked apart to give up its secret
Pi
I never knew till now
How we both fit like variables
On a chalkboard of constellations drawn out in the sky
Before it was a source of wonder
Now the emperor wears no clothes
And makes the entire court uncomfortable
Everyone watching what they say
Full of fear that their arithmetic is wrong
There are so many problems I have failed to solve
And I am sure that somewhere in my work
There is a period out of place
An
incorrect line break
Buried deep in years that slide past with a click
Like beads on an abacus
React
July 12th, 2010 at 2:57 pm
@The Humanist,
false self depracating apology preceding poem: -20
“chalkboard” and “sky” mixed metaphors: -25
“emperor wears no clothes”: a cliche and everything that comes from it is also not worth reading: -50
“There are so many problems I have failed to solve”: more false self deprecation, as if the author has solved his fair share of problems but he is not above admitting that he has not solved ALL the problems of the world. Well, give him time. -100
He then admits that it might be possible, barely possible, that he has made an incorrect line break one time in his life, or put a period in the wrong place. -40
Mention of one of the most cliche images in modern poetry, the abacus: -50
Misc: capitalizes the first letter of each word in each new line, as if that means something: -10
Total score: -295
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
@Mather Schneider, BERSERK! BERSERK! ATTACK ALL TARGETS IN RANGE! EXTERMINATE!
React
The Humanist Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 4:11 pm
@Mather Schneider,
Thanks for reading I guess. The line preceding the poem that you called false and self deprecating, was not false. It may have been self deprecating, but only unintentionally. I was honestly having a hard time coming up with a response to Tastethewine and I have a couple pages of notepad to prove it.
I do appreciate the fact that you read all of these poems, and even critiqued them. Even if you weren’t taking it seriously.
You get +1 for participation.
React
July 12th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
@The Humanist, Your condescension is impeccable, The Humanist. Oh, you have two pages of notepad to prove it! Well, save that and sell it on ebay.
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 11th, 2010 at 4:55 pm
@Valerie,
Re: What You Left Me
Pro:
Opening image is metaphor. +1
Opening image is expository. +1
Riffs off Binaries. +1
“a number that wasn’t always a number.” +1
Structure like a math equation. +1
Dense, coherent, effective poetic argument. +1
From the nothing of a fist to the universe collapsing. +1
Metaphors serve as shadows; description through omission. GRE style. +1.
Material nothing versus material something. +1
Loneliness vs company. +1
Total Pro: +10
Con:
No con.
Total Con: 0
Misc: Loved it!
Final Personal Score: +10
React
Jul 10, 2010 @ 13:32:25
Sorry for the delay everybody. TWAK needs an admin to approve posts, so I apparently need to babysit this thread. Maybe it doesn’t and I just need to play with thread settings more.
-KW
React
Jul 10, 2010 @ 13:41:56
Remember you can enter through tomorrow. -1 for posts between 6:01pm PST & 9:00pm PST. -2 for posts between 9:01pm PST & Midnight, etc. A 7am PST post would have an automatic -5 for example.
React
Jul 10, 2010 @ 22:30:54
Not sure I did this right but I am way out of practice
Sirius
Strange attractors dance
in the southern sky,
a stellar parallax;
singular or differentiated
dependent on point of view.
Pulled across autumn night
radial velocity increased
as we approached critical mass;
the unavoidable orbital decay
of love on the event horizon.
What is seen as the brightest
star in the night sky is in truth
two bodies moving together;
a bright main star termed Sirius A,
and her companion white dwarf.
From this eliptcal apex I can see
how your luminosity eclipsed me,
your pull overwelmes; sucks me in,
even as my weakened mass
is drawn once again to your side.
React
The Humanist Reply:
July 11th, 2010 at 2:58 pm
@Steven Marty Grant,
Transmissions to the white dwarf:
The mathematics have split your ribs
Turned your teeth out
And left you frozen
On a monitor
A watcher
Astronomer
Sits on the opposite end of the looking glass
Being the perfect point of view in your parallax
He closes the distance of light years with awareness
And watches you burning off your birth right
While caught in the gravity of your situation
Like every other tombstone in the sky
Proving that in the past
They burned for the future
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:43 pm
@The Humanist, Mathematics can’t split ribs: -29
lack of sentence structure: -50
“opposite end of the looking glass”, cliche: -100 Normally a cliche would only be worth a negative 50, but because it was “looking glass” it is not only a cliche but a pretentious use of outdated language.
Can’t close the distance with awareness: -200
can’t watch someone burning off a birth right: -200
“gravity of situation” cliche: -50
Tombstones are not in the sky, they are in the graveyard: -50
“proving that in the past/they burned for the future”. Poem doesn’t “prove” anything except that the person who wrote it thinks he’s a poet: -50
Misc: again with the first letter of the first word in each line capitalized: -10
Total score: -549
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 4:06 pm
@Mather Schneider, BERSERK! BERSERK! ATTACK ALL TARGETS IN RANGE! EXTERMINATE!
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 11th, 2010 at 5:07 pm
@Steven Marty Grant,
Re: Sirius
Pro:
Ambitious riff off theme. +1
Pulls off metaphysical conceit. +1
Multiple meanings in opening stanza. +1
Multiple meanings in opening stanza all explored & examined. +1
Did I catch a successful pathetic simile in the poem (stars as lovers)? +1
Relationship expressed in stars. +1
Effective stanzas carry the argument in a well contained manner. +1
“Pulled across autumn night
radial velocity increased
as we approached critical mass;
the unavoidable orbital decay
of love on the event horizon.” +1
“What is seen as the brightest
star in the night sky is in truth
two bodies moving together; “ +1
“What is seen as the brightest
star in the night sky is in truth
two bodies moving together; “ Also plays off the binaries theme. +1
Total Pro: +10
Con:
You’re going to get hammered by the clock to a tune of -2 I think, but you add that up after all the respondents have put in their votes.
Total Con: 0
Misc:
So simple, yet so complex. Really clean.
Final Personal Score: 0 +10 =+10
React
Steven Marty Grant Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 3:08 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington,
Thanks KW, I am happy with the first two strophes but it goes sideways from there. I was trying to create parallel poems in alternating stanzas of 3. There is enough here to save until I find the juice I need to work on it. I like format you have set up because it forced me to form something (no matter how lame) and I needed the push.
Next time I will block more time and see if I can’t hang out and insult a few people while I am here
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:18 pm
@Steven Marty Grant,
Using the word “strophe”: -50
Kissing Wessington’s ass: -100
Lame excuse that you don’t have time when you are obviously on here making the time: -125
Empty threat: -25
Misc: your poem still sucks
Total score: -200
React
July 12th, 2010 at 5:25 pm
@Steven Marty Grant, This comment almost makes me physically ill. You truly think of Wessington as a valid judge of your work, or of any work? If you do, my friend (sarcasm) you are in a lot of trouble. Or, more likely, you have never known trouble in your whole fucking life, and think of poetry as just something to “block more time” for, you know, in between the things that matter, like kissing ass to your boss, wife or mother. Wessington is a nice guide and motivator for bored knitters.
React
July 12th, 2010 at 2:23 pm
@Steven Marty Grant,
has the guts to use his real name: +20
signed up on my blog: +30
Rest of poem: puke: -100
Total score: -50
React
Steven Marty Grant Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 2:55 pm
@Mather Schneider,
Wow Puke! That’s not cliché at all.
Perhaps if I explained what the big words mean you might like it better?
I think may favorite thing in the world of poetry is rebellion for its own sake.
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:11 pm
@Steven Marty Grant,
Sorry I was tired and lazy when critiquing yours. You deserve more.
“Strange attractors dance”: completely ineffective intro, non-distinct, with as little of the concret as possible: -40
“A stellar parallax”: you mean a ufo or what: clarity sacrificed for vague language or some love affair with all those “l”s: -50
Stanza two filled with scientific words adopted by poetry to the point of cliche, especially “event horizon”: -25
Stanza 3, a wiedepidia excerpt: -39
Stanza 4: stargazing metaphor taken to the point of exacerbation. Too obvious to laugh at.Luminosity? Eliptical? Sorry, Elipcal? Spelling errors: -10.
Misc: general lack of creativity and passion: -56
Total score: -114
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:19 pm
@Mather Schneider, You see? Your first score was better! Now, just keep your mouth shut and you will rise….
React
Steven Marty Grant Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 3:31 pm
@Mather Schneider,
I was only kidding about explaining the big words but maybe I should have.
So I’m guessing you won’t be buying my next book?
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:49 pm
@Steven Marty Grant, You mean your next Lulu darling?
React
Steven Marty Grant Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 6:11 pm
@Mather Schneider,
Dear Mr. Schneider,
The really sad part of this is that I kind of like the stuff on your blog, or at least I did before I realized you were a complete tool. The difference between us is that I tend to be polite. If I see things I don’t like, I move to the next post. I would never use the relative safety of the internet to say something that I would not say if you were standing in front of me. You might think that you are demonstrating artistic integrity, but, to most people, you just come off as a bitter little dick. Not to me of course, I am shaking in my boots and stand in awe of your erudite and well thought out deconstruction of my meager verse. Your fierce and poignant criticism of my writing has made me reconsider my chosen artistic pursuit. From now on I will limit myself to following truly talented writers like you. The world needs more under-employed hacks (god I love a good pun) cranking out Bukowski wanna be poetry.
Thank you
SMG
BTW way who is Lulu, is she the chick in that stupid poem about flower orgasms?
React
July 13th, 2010 at 5:29 pm
@Steven Marty Grant,
The really sad part of this is that you change your opinion of a piece of work so quickly and so capriciously, based on the fact that you think the author is now a “tool”. There are many differences between us, but thanks for pointing out the most idiotic. You’re polite and I’m not. That’s a real lightning bolt of epiphany there. You obviously don’t move on, because now you’re still here bashing me. Which is fine, as you can see I enjoy it. I don’t think I’m “demonstrating artistic integrity”, how did you come up with that? And “erudite”? Where have I made myself out to be “erudite”? Shit, these other guys are saying I can’t even understand basic language and you’re calling me “erudite”, or more correctly, somehow accusing me of ACTING erudite, when in fact I am not. Shoot…ha, I am not, ok? I can see you got your feelings hurt here and I’m sorry about that, but you came dancing in. Wessington and The Humanist took my poem and put it into this contest simply to tear my poem apart. Just look at W’s response to my poem compared to the rest of his responses. All of this is fine too, but you need to understand what’s going on. If I am forced to play, I’ll play. And you know what? It was better than I thought it would be.
Lulu is a self publishing outfit.
If I had a dime for every person who made fun of the fact that I’m a cab driver I would be able to retire.
React
Valerie Reply:
July 16th, 2010 at 11:50 am
@Mather Schneider, can i just say, i could never, ever drive a cab – i can only imagine. i’m sure you gather many awesome ‘slice of life’ stories and get to observe folks in all elements but fuck that. i can’t stand people in real life. not to kiss your ass, just saying – respect.
React
Jul 11, 2010 @ 11:10:07
This thread is a feast. Well played warriors! Now time to grade each other–if you can bear it. Don’t make me do it alone.
React
Jul 11, 2010 @ 17:15:03
I was really impressed with all the compositions. My guess is that The Humanist will probably win because he wrote the most high quality poems, but Taste the Wine really shocked me by coming here out of nowhere and writing a really fine poem. It’s not easy to write on the clock, to someone else’s topic, but you all did great. I would have to say it’s a toss up whether I liked Sirius or What You Left Me the most, but Sirius was late & What You Left Me was earlier. It’s really cool how quickly these compositions were generated and all active participants in this thread wrote with astonishing speed and quality. Shall I say I was impressed by all of you? I was. I think the audience was too (couple hundred people showed up… way better than an open mic).
React
July 12th, 2010 at 12:07 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, What’s he gonna win? A bible?
React
Jul 12, 2010 @ 03:40:07
I’m going to come back later to score but I wanted to echo what Khak said: you all really rocked my world. Especially The Humanist for sheer quantity.
React
Jul 12, 2010 @ 12:38:06
@Mather Schneider, He won the readers. You couldn’t even get more than 14 people to read your top-posted poem. Yup, sure showed us all up.
I’m surprised they let you bring a computer into your chicken coop. You really should just type: “I’m scared of all these new poets who are all way better than I’ll ever be.” Throwing a tantrum is just losing you the few fans you had.
React
July 12th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, I’m wondering how “What’s he gonna win? A bible” constitutes a tantrum. Not that I’m above throwing a tantrum, but this isn’t a good example of that.
React
Jul 12, 2010 @ 13:15:21
I didn’t even enter the “combat”. It seems funny to me that you guys couldn’t even get the thing going without taking a poem of mine and putting it up first. Why is that? I still can’t believe I got a negative 12! Come on! Negative 12? Shoot!
React
Valerie Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 3:05 pm
@Mather Schneider, if another poem had been at the top of the page, things would have gone differently. Yours was not necessary, merely convenient, but you can still take comfort in the fact that it was the progenitor of so much creative work. And if you weren’t throwing a tantrum before, you sure are now… Don’t get mad, get poetry!
React
July 12th, 2010 at 3:34 pm
@Valerie,
In other words, write poetry devoid of emotion. That’s the feeling I’ve been getting all along with this game, and this crowd. Wonderful. Go for it.
React
Khakjaan Wessington Reply:
July 12th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
@Mather Schneider, BERSERK! BERSERK! ATTACK ALL TARGETS IN RANGE! EXTERMINATE!
React
July 12th, 2010 at 4:40 pm
@Khakjaan Wessington, No more berserker comment than that, Wessington.
React
Valerie Reply:
July 14th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
@Mather Schneider, who pissed in your Cheerios? Get a life. If you’re above “this crowd” then why are you still here slumming it with us Cybermen instead of breathing the rarefied air up in the land of the emotionally gorged? We’ll miss you profoundly, but I’m sure in time we’ll be able to move on with our lives.
React
July 17th, 2010 at 10:43 am
@Valerie, Hey Valerie 1. Wessington pissed in my Cheerios. The “get a life” suggestion is as lame as it gets. I have a life, and from what I can see I’m the only one who’s proving I have a life through my writing. The “combat” was nothing more than a drum circle, delightful to no one but the stoned participants, each poem taking for its reason to be no real life concern or emotional moment, but simply some “prompt” coming from the poem that preceded it. As far as I can see, “this crowd” just showed up a couple weeks ago, spilling out of Wessington’s ass. I was here first (as were you) so why should I leave? I am not asking or hoping that you will leave, or that anyone will leave. I like the action. Like I said to The Humanist, if you want me gone then ban my url.
React
Jul 12, 2010 @ 22:22:39
I enjoyed this entire thread. The poetry was astonishing, though I struggle with much of the imagery (a personal thing, not reflective of the work.) The commentary is nothing short of fun, even when it slides into the snide, because there are some interesting thinkers here.
Oh, I also like how each person has his or her own quirky rating system and categories. Still trying to figure out how Mather called me on ‘hippie.’ How did he KNOW. I give him a +10 for that (though he gave me a -10, I bear no grudge).
.
I will try to score tomorrow; I’m back to roaming again.
React
Jul 13, 2010 @ 00:20:40
I have more time on this computer and so I re-read everything, more carefully this time. The poems responding to each other were a pleasure to read even when I struggled to ‘get’ them at times. The Humanist, Valerie, Steven, Taste of Wine: I hope to read more of your work. .
React
Jul 13, 2010 @ 06:09:07
hi. i’d like to know when the fuck nate is going to go ahead and start a cafe press so i can order a “don’t get mad, get poetry” mug, tshirt, and mouse pad? nate? the cafe press store should totally have a link to redeem points as well…we are on the cusp of a trending fire here people, cash in.
React
Valerie Reply:
July 14th, 2010 at 4:29 pm
@valerie, Hey other Valerie! I can make that line into a shirt if you want. Just say the word.
React
valerie Reply:
July 15th, 2010 at 5:56 am
@Valerie, how bout a fanny pack? i would mos def by the fanny pack ; )
React
Valerie Reply:
July 15th, 2010 at 5:58 am
@valerie, buy. not by. yes, i dropped out of high school.
React
Valerie Reply:
July 16th, 2010 at 6:38 am
@valerie, this is the best I can do at the moment: http://candleinsunshine.spreadshirt.com/get-poetry-A6274927/customize/color/292
React
Valerie Reply:
July 16th, 2010 at 7:01 am
@Valerie, very nice chick, very nice. red compliments me best
React