From: cook368@NOSPAMcomcast.net
"Peter J Ross" wrote in message
news:slrnd2cj3j.43r.gadfly@nntp.petitmorte.net...
> On Wednesday 02 March, Karla wrote in rec.arts.poems:
>
>> On 2 Mar 2005 11:41:45 -0800, "Will Dockery"
>> wrote:
>
>>>Jane Asher's Vagina wrote:
>>>> On 2 Mar 2005 09:07:09 -0800, Will Dockery wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Jane Asher's Vagina wrote:
>>>> >> On Wed, 02 Mar 2005 06:20:40 GMT, Karla wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >>> Caring for Others
>>>> >>>
>>>> >>> Vestibule smelling of old potpourri,
>>>> >>> coat hooks above a mash of rubber,
>>>> >>> and in one corner, a tumbled umbrella.
>>>> >>> Flocked wallpaper, deep blue,
>>>> >>> electric candle sconces along the walls,
>>>> >>> shadow couch and shadow pillows. The nameless
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Nameless? Let me help. Pure CatShit.
>>>> >
>>>> > Karla's poem, while it had some interesting and sometimes
>>>disturbing
>>>> > moments, is basically a convoluted mess.
>>>> >
>>>> > She desperately need to focus, and *edit*.
>>>> >
>>>> > As it is, *catshit* works as a one word critique: bad, over-written
>>>> > "poetry".
>>>>
>>>> She has, again, marred the wart known as the Cabal. Slurpette
>>>Obnoxious,
>>>> rip a stripe of your sleeve.
>>>
>>>Heh. Kabol's lack of commentary on this very flawed poem noted.
>
>> I didn't post this to alt.arts.poetry.comments OR alt.poetry. Why did
>> you
>> publish this to other groups?
>
> Apparently, Dockery's newsgroup software doesn't allow him to post to
> fewer than three groups.
>
>> Also, it's hard to respond to your comments. You sit on the fence. In
>> your
>> opinion, there are "interesting and sometimes disturbing moments" -
>> comments
>> which refer to the narrative only. Later, you tag onto Jane Asher's
>> Vagina's
>> (a usenet handle which remains unchallenged by you; who's in a clique?)
>> comments and stamp this draft catshit. I don't know about you, but I
>> scoop
>> and dump my catshit. Help me out here! I'm the dumb one, remember? Do
>> I
>> dump the whole lot or do I redeem the "interesting and sometimes
>> disturbing
>> moments"? And if I keep those, what are they? Help! I "desperately
>> need to
>> focus, and *edit*".
>
> You count the adjectives in the first strophe and wonder whether the
> adjective/noun ratio suits the methods of a poet who isn't Horace or
> Spenser (nor, presumably, would wish to be). Potpourri is old by
> definition: those petals are ex-petals; they have gawn to meet their
> maker. Whether the blue is deep or not can be left to the reader's
> imagination, if (unlike Dockery) he or she has one. And any reader who
> really wants to know whether the wallpaper is flocked or not needs to
> get out more.
>
> If "shadow" is a verb, the comma after "walls" is wrong. If it's a
> noun used as an adjective, I wonder what a shadow couch or a shadow
> pillow might look like. Shadowy, I suppose, but not interesting enough
> to be talked about twice.
>
> "Tumbled umbrella" has excellent sounds, but they're rather speedy
> sounds for something that's lying unmoving on the floor. If you really
> must use so many adjective, consider the sounds of "torn umbrella",
> with a long, passive vowel to set the scene. (Then find a better word
> than "torn".)
>
> In line 3, either a comma after "and" or no comma after corner would
> be logical.
>
> In general, conventional sentence structure may not be a bad thing, ya
> know?
>
> I haven't yet read what's already been snipped.
>
> I'll be posting a LIST of people who agree with this critique of the
> leisurely beginning of your draft as soon as they've received the usual
> bribes. (Jim, I've temporarily run out of 18-yo virgins. Will a
> natural blonde 20-yo do, just this once?)
>
> PJR :-)
> --
> alt.usenet.kooks award-winners and FAQ:
> http://www.insurgent.org/~kook-faq/
>
> To reply by email, remove "NOSPAM".]
i agree
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
