[continued from previous message]   
      
   >>>>> assign a childish name to him and claim he   
   >>>>> can't write."   
   >>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/EA_   
   CO9_BDk/m/DWT2Fq0TBwAJ?hl=en   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> How do the possibilities justify our lives if they are decreased to   
   >>>>>>> irrelevancy by years?   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> GD: As I already explained: they're restored in the next generation.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> MMP: And as I've already explained, the next generation's possibilities   
   >>>>>> are as limited as those of their forebears.  Since time and circumstance   
   >>>>>> will *always* conspire to decrease their possibilities by the time they   
   >>>>>> reach adulthood, the seemingly unlimited possibilities at birth are   
   >>>>>> necessarily an illusion.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Nonsense; people can and do realize possibilities in their lives,   
   >>>>> including those their ancestors never did. No one can do everything, of   
   >>>>> course, but plenty of people have done enough to justify their existence   
   >>>>> {many of whose ancestors did nothing to justify theirs, beyond - wait   
   >>>>> for it - having families).   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Roughly speaking (i.e., ignoring the incoherent pseudo-sentences),   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> GD: I do hope we've spent enough time on Edward's pseudo-sentences.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> MMP: LOL! If Mr. Dance actually meant what he said, he wouldn't have   
   >>>>>> reopened a two-year old thread in order to bitch about Mr. Rochester's   
   >>>>>> "edits" to his poem a second time.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> LOL right back. I've already explained why I commented on the thread   
   >>>>> Will reopened. But I'm serious; we've advanced the debate. MMP has not   
   >>>>> disputed that all "illiteracy" he discovered was caused by Mr. Chimp,   
   >>>>> but he's sticking to his story that the poem is still "illiterate"   
   >>>>> anway, as per his editorial philosophy: "When [someone] is seen as an   
   >>>>> adversary, you assign a childish name to him and claim he can't write."   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> your   
   >>>>>>> poem is saying that we are all born with unlimited potential, but that   
   >>>>>>> the years conspire (with circumstance) to undercut our ability to   
   >>>>>>> achieve it.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> What is "it"? No one realizes "unlimited" possibilites, but plenty of   
   >>>>> people realize some, including ones their parents failed to realize.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> As compensation for our wasted lives, we can always take   
   >>>>>>> solace in our families (ignoring the fact that our children's potential   
   >>>>>>> will be as unrealized as our own.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> GD: Nothing in the poem about "compensation" - the word I used was   
   >>>>>> "justification". A person who has children has not completely wasted his   
   >>>>>> or her own life, no matter how much he or she hasn't done.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> MMP: Sentimental hogwash.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Nothing sentimental about it. You or I have no idea what those children,   
   >>>>> or their children, or their children will do. That gives one a reason to   
   >>>>> value other people, to judge them to be at least worth not harming - but   
   >>>>> it's a reason based purely on self-interest, not sentiment.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> I point to the example of "Joey"    
   >>>>> - and I'll snip it, because it looks like another attempt to flame Will   
   >>>>> and/or to change the subject. Instead, I'll give an example of my own.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> One justifies one's life by adding value to the world.   
   >>>>> Did Edgar Allan Poe add value to the world? I'd say yes, by his writing.   
   >>>>> Did John M. Poe add value to the world? I'm not aware of anything he   
   >>>>> did, but I'd say yes for him as well, because he was EAP's   
   >>>>> great-grandfather - without him, there'd have been no EAP.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> That's a good (if downbeat) topic for a poem.  Unfortunately, your   
   >>>>>>> attempt to force it into triolet form at the sake of clarity undermines   
   >>>>>>> any possibilities ;-) it might have had.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> GD: It's sad that Michael's opinion of the poem (which, as noted, he   
   >>>>>> previously published in his "literary journal") has fallen so much since   
   >>>>>> he put me on his enemy's list. I'm sure that was just a coincidence,   
   >>>>>> though.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> MMP: Again, Mr. Dance is confusing the purpose of The Sunday Sampler,   
   >>>>>> and A Year of Sundays which is its current incarnation.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> A Year of Sundays was created to provide a showcase for the best poetry   
   >>>>>> of each of AAPC's members. My opinion regarding Mr. Dance's poem has not   
   >>>>>> changed: it is without doubt one of Mr. Dance's better works.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Really? MMP claimed just days ago (in the post I'm replying to) that the   
   >>>>> poem was "illiterate". Now he's saying that he thought it was   
   >>>>> "illiterate" when he published it in AYOS? Why would he publish an   
   >>>>> "illiterate" poem? And why, FTM, what is holding him back from showing   
   >>>>> why he allegedly thought it was illiterate?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> (Those are rhetorical questions, of course. I think MMP is bullshitting,   
   >>>>> and that his stated opinions did change, when he switched me from   
   >>>>> potential ally to open adversary. But he is free to prove me wrong by   
   >>>>> supplying credible answers.)   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> Nor is Mr. Dance on my imaginary "enemies list."   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> There is no need to even look for a quote. There is no other reason why   
   >>>>> MMP jumped into this discussion, two years ago or now, other than to   
   >>>>> protect Mr. Chimpfrom me? Or why his Mr. Chimp even started it? One   
   >>>>> that's better than this Team Monkey vs. Team Donkey thing you now claim   
   >>>>> to have no memory of?   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>> *****Speaking of A Year of Sundays... I'm currently compiling our 2024   
   >>>>>> print volume, which features the work of such (usenet) AAPC favorites as   
   >>>>>> J.D. Senetto, NancyGene, Ash Wurthing, Kevin Fries, Bob Burrows,   
   >>>>>> Hieronymous Corey, Karen Tellefsen, Richard Oakley, Wenceslas Kabeba,   
   >>>>>> and my oh-so-humble self; along with FB AAPC favorites, Louise Charlton   
   >>>>>> Webster, Scott Thomas, Bruce Boston, Robert Payne Cabeen, Paul Cordeiro,   
   >>>>>> ruth housman, Trinity-memyandi Venter, Jefferson Carter, Joseph Danoski,   
   >>>>>> Stephen Brooke, & Devin Anderson.*****   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> Congratulations; that's at least 19 people who'll buy a copy. Make that   
   >>>>> 20; I'll probably get one to see what Bruce Boston wrote.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> But I digress   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> (backthread snipped)   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> 1) There is nothing particularly difficult about writing a poem in any   
   >>>>>>> given form.  One doesn't even have to memorize the structure of a   
   >>>>>>> triolet.  All one has to do is use a triolet for a model and copy the   
   >>>>>>> format.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> GD: It certainly seems to be too hard for some people.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> MMP: What a childish and petty thing to say!   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> MMP and his Mr. Chimp may believe they can write really wonderful   
   >>>>> triolets if they felt like it. There is absolutely no reason for me to   
   >>>>> humor them, of course.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>>>> 2) As previously noted, I don't like writing in pre-fabricated forms.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> See above.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> If I write a sonnet, it's because my Muse dictated a 14-line poem to   
   me.   
   >>>>>>>  Poets who write from inspiration rather than formula don't limit   
   >>>>>>> themselves to someone else's rules.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> GD: The "Muse" is a charming idea, which I've heard of; but I don't   
   >>>>>> remember ever seeing Her invoked to evade responsibility for one's   
   >>>>>> writing until   
   >>>>>> now.   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> MMP: Why do you lie so much, Mr. Dance?   
   >>>>>>   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)