Debrief, rebuttal or explanation.

[GuiltyPleasure]

In this thread we get to respond to comments left on our poems by way of explanation or defense. It's here we can question a poet about his/her intentions, inspiration etc.. It's helpful if you can link the poem in question.

I'll start - YES! It was a stinking typo at the start of Last Lust and I have no excuse.

 

[butters]

this has potential for fun

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

Ya think? It's supposed to be user friendly............

 

[butters]

Ya think? It's supposed to be user friendly............

user-friendly fun, T - but i'd hope that wouldn't automatically exclude humour and witty remarks.

 

[Angeline]

In this thread we get to respond to comments left on our poems by way of explanation or defense. It's here we can question a poet about his/her intentions, inspiration etc.. It's helpful if you can link the poem in question.

I'll start - YES! It was a stinking typo at the start of Last Lust and I have no excuse.

Well I did say I was ignoring it.

What did you think about my other comment? Helpful or no? Rebut or debrief or shall I explain more?

 

[theognis]

In this thread we get to respond to comments left on our poems by way of explanation or defense. It's here we can question a poet about his/her intentions, inspiration etc.. It's helpful if you can link the poem in question.

I'll start - YES! It was a stinking typo at the start of Last Lust and I have no excuse.

I've actually heard "You used to cooked" and similar things said before, so if that had been in dialog I would have thought it deliberate. I think some people speak that way for emphasis, sort of the way some people use double negatives, although the latter is much more common. Made me smile when I read it.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

but your nipple clamps were used to great effect ......

 

[Maria2394]

Hi Tess

I just saw this thread an had already posted this on the other one, but here is good too.


re: pathetic fallacy


Hi poets

On a recent poem I wrote as if inanimate objects had feelings. I did this intentionally. 1201 in his infinite wisdom pointed this out in his comment on the poem Countdown to Green.

I got a couple of emails regarding 1201's comments and that felt bad for him picking on m y poem, so I thought I would mention this here.

What he said, was not an insult ( at least, it did not insult me), he was not being mean, he was ( I believe) making an observation, thinking perhaps I did not know what I was doing when I wrote the poem. I tried very hard to carry that fallacy throughout the poem.

I am enclosing the definition of the term, pathetic fallacy to clear this misconception up.

I was attempting something similar with February's Fear




~~~~~The pathetic fallacy or anthropomorphic fallacy is the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations.[1] The pathetic fallacy is a special case of the fallacy of reification. The word 'pathetic' in this use is related to 'pathos' or 'empathy' (capability of feeling), and is not pejorative.~~~~~

So, as you can see, pathetic has more than one definition., I am sure some people find my work pathetic, but that is not the meaning in that poem.

However, I do appreciate everyone who took / takes the time to read my poetry and those who go the extra mile and comment or email, well, bless you all.

Maria



PS, over the years I have written practically a book about the frogs, toads and other creatures who inhabited what was once the koi pond where I used to live.I gave those frogs the ability to speak, feel and even run away when they felt necessary, and they also had the ability to love. I have most of them posted on my thread, Bug Day afternoon. Ever since I was a kid, I loved nature and felt that the animals spoke, and in fact they do have their own language. IN retrospect, I have made a lot of use of the pathetic fallacy and it has been fun

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

Well I did say I was ignoring it.

What did you think about my other comment? Helpful or no? Rebut or debrief or shall I explain more?

Pointing out the typo was definitely helpful (thanks vrose too) but I don't see another comment - did it go into the blue? All the rest of that particular comment I appreciate very much.

I think that poem could do with a re-write.

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

user-friendly fun, T - but i'd hope that wouldn't automatically exclude humour and witty remarks.

Humour and wit welcomed, bring it on.................

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

I've actually heard "You used to cooked" and similar things said before, so if that had been in dialog I would have thought it deliberate. I think some people speak that way for emphasis, sort of the way some people use double negatives, although the latter is much more common. Made me smile when I read it.

I've never hear that. I try to use language I'm familiar with, I think if I saw double negs etc. it would lower my impresion of the poem but that's just me being fussy.

but your nipple clamps were used to great effect ......

What about those Tiffany lamps?

 

[Angeline]

Hi Tess

I just saw this thread an had already posted this on the other one, but here is good too.


re: pathetic fallacy


Hi poets

On a recent poem I wrote as if inanimate objects had feelings. I did this intentionally. 1201 in his infinite wisdom pointed this out in his comment on the poem Countdown to Green.

I got a couple of emails regarding 1201's comments and that felt bad for him picking on m y poem, so I thought I would mention this here.

What he said, was not an insult ( at least, it did not insult me), he was not being mean, he was ( I believe) making an observation, thinking perhaps I did not know what I was doing when I wrote the poem. I tried very hard to carry that fallacy throughout the poem.

I am enclosing the definition of the term, pathetic fallacy to clear this misconception up.

I was attempting something similar with February's Fear




~~~~~The pathetic fallacy or anthropomorphic fallacy is the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations.[1] The pathetic fallacy is a special case of the fallacy of reification. The word 'pathetic' in this use is related to 'pathos' or 'empathy' (capability of feeling), and is not pejorative.~~~~~

So, as you can see, pathetic has more than one definition., I am sure some people find my work pathetic, but that is not the meaning in that poem.

However, I do appreciate everyone who took / takes the time to read my poetry and those who go the extra mile and comment or email, well, bless you all.

Maria



PS, over the years I have written practically a book about the frogs, toads and other creatures who inhabited what was once the koi pond where I used to live.I gave those frogs the ability to speak, feel and even run away when they felt necessary, and they also had the ability to love. I have most of them posted on my thread, Bug Day afternoon. Ever since I was a kid, I loved nature and felt that the animals spoke, and in fact they do have their own language. IN retrospect, I have made a lot of use of the pathetic fallacy and it has been fun

I think it's fine to attribute human characteristics to non-human beings (or even things) in poems. I understand there's times where it's not appropriate. I remember Senna Jawa once castigated a poem I wrote because I was ascribing human traits to some feature of nature and he was basically saying it made the poem dishonest. He was right, in that case. But fantasy can have a lot of truth, too, just hidden in the imaginings. I don't think I could ever go so far as the Symbolist poets, for example, and base everything important on dreams and drink and fever, but where would poetry be without fantasy?

So that's a vote for the pathetic fallacy.

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

Hi Tess

I just saw this thread an had already posted this on the other one, but here is good too.


re: pathetic fallacy


Hi poets

On a recent poem I wrote as if inanimate objects had feelings. I did this intentionally. 1201 in his infinite wisdom pointed this out in his comment on the poem Countdown to Green.

I got a couple of emails regarding 1201's comments and that felt bad for him picking on m y poem, so I thought I would mention this here.

What he said, was not an insult ( at least, it did not insult me), he was not being mean, he was ( I believe) making an observation, thinking perhaps I did not know what I was doing when I wrote the poem. I tried very hard to carry that fallacy throughout the poem.

I am enclosing the definition of the term, pathetic fallacy to clear this misconception up.

I was attempting something similar with February's Fear




~~~~~The pathetic fallacy or anthropomorphic fallacy is the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations.[1] The pathetic fallacy is a special case of the fallacy of reification. The word 'pathetic' in this use is related to 'pathos' or 'empathy' (capability of feeling), and is not pejorative.~~~~~

So, as you can see, pathetic has more than one definition., I am sure some people find my work pathetic, but that is not the meaning in that poem.

However, I do appreciate everyone who took / takes the time to read my poetry and those who go the extra mile and comment or email, well, bless you all.

Maria



PS, over the years I have written practically a book about the frogs, toads and other creatures who inhabited what was once the koi pond where I used to live.I gave those frogs the ability to speak, feel and even run away when they felt necessary, and they also had the ability to love. I have most of them posted on my thread, Bug Day afternoon. Ever since I was a kid, I loved nature and felt that the animals spoke, and in fact they do have their own language. IN retrospect, I have made a lot of use of the pathetic fallacy and it has been fun

Nicely done Maria, it's easy to take offence in ignorance, you looked further than the face of a comment - lemonade. Pathetic fallacy and instilling inanimate objects with feelings is just fine in my book. 1201 is an educator, I'm always learning something from him. I have to say, I appreciate that he tells me he hasn't enjoyed a poem of mine, I know then that he's read it at least.

 

[GuiltyPleasure]

What did you think about my other comment? Helpful or no? Rebut or debrief or shall I explain more?

Do you mean on Antipathy? where you said "I think it needs a few different word choices, maybe not open warfare or battle cause they're too direct."?

I used "warfare" because of "jaw" and "before". "Battle" is a bit direct but "let battle commence" is recognised phrase, I hope. Also the poem is about a marriage in a state of demolition so some directness felt right.

That's my rebuttal. and, as always, I appreciate your comments, suggestions and advice.

 

[theognis]

I've never hear that. I try to use language I'm familiar with, I think if I saw double negs etc. it would lower my impresion of the poem but that's just me being fussy.

I don't think that's being fussy. I think rules should be followed, unless there's a good reason for breaking them.

I do think it's interesting how often we understand intended meaning when people say things that don't make sense if taken literally.

This is neither here nor there, but once I overheard two old farmers talking in a country store about how their crops were doing. One asked the other if he was getting a good yield (not in those words) and I found the reply understandable, but later I wondered why. "A right smart," the man said, and somehow I knew exactly what he meant. Later I learned the word 'smart' had a meaning I hadn't known before I searched for it.

 

[twelveoone]

Hi Tess

I just saw this thread an had already posted this on the other one, but here is good too.


re: pathetic fallacy


Hi poets

On a recent poem I wrote as if inanimate objects had feelings. I did this intentionally. 1201 in his infinite wisdom pointed this out in his comment on the poem Countdown to Green.

I got a couple of emails regarding 1201's comments and that felt bad for him picking on m y poem, so I thought I would mention this here.

What he said, was not an insult ( at least, it did not insult me), he was not being mean, he was ( I believe) making an observation, thinking perhaps I did not know what I was doing when I wrote the poem. I tried very hard to carry that fallacy throughout the poem.

I am enclosing the definition of the term, pathetic fallacy to clear this misconception up.

I was attempting something similar with February's Fear




~~~~~The pathetic fallacy or anthropomorphic fallacy is the treatment of inanimate objects as if they had human feelings, thought, or sensations.[1] The pathetic fallacy is a special case of the fallacy of reification. The word 'pathetic' in this use is related to 'pathos' or 'empathy' (capability of feeling), and is not pejorative.~~~~~

So, as you can see, pathetic has more than one definition., I am sure some people find my work pathetic, but that is not the meaning in that poem.

However, I do appreciate everyone who took / takes the time to read my poetry and those who go the extra mile and comment or email, well, bless you all.

Maria



PS, over the years I have written practically a book about the frogs, toads and other creatures who inhabited what was once the koi pond where I used to live.I gave those frogs the ability to speak, feel and even run away when they felt necessary, and they also had the ability to love. I have most of them posted on my thread, Bug Day afternoon. Ever since I was a kid, I loved nature and felt that the animals spoke, and in fact they do have their own language. IN retrospect, I have made a lot of use of the pathetic fallacy and it has been fun

for a garden poem I liked it.
as far as "the pathetic fallacy" it did look like it, however, writing is one word after another, the so-called "pathetic fallacy" is just another technique as far as I'm concerned. I may have blasted the term in a thread at one time. Just tried to point out you may get in trouble with it.
It is certainly not something to over rely on, but Shakespeare probably used it. (Macbeth springs to mind)
But Shakespeare did a lot of things people counsel against.

I see I had a case of typoitis that day.
How shall I compare thee to the best poem ever?
well yours made sense, had consistency, was enjoyable

as far as infinite wisdom, are you being sarcastic?

 

[Maria2394]

for a garden poem I liked it.
as far as "the pathetic fallacy" it did look like it, however, writing is one word after another, the so-called "pathetic fallacy" is just another technique as far as I'm concerned. I may have blasted the term in a thread at one time. Just tried to point out you may get in trouble with it.
It is certainly not something to over rely on, but Shakespeare probably used it. (Macbeth springs to mind)
But Shakespeare did a lot of things people counsel against.

I see I had a case of typoitis that day.
How shall I compare thee to the best poem ever?
well yours made sense, had consistency, was enjoyable

as far as infinite wisdom, are you being sarcastic?

No, 1201, I was not being sarcastic. You ought to know how much I appreciate you and that you take the time to read my work. It's like one of the posts above this one, can't remember whose it was, but even when you tell me you don't like my work, I know you have read it and I do respect your time and intelligence. ( I hope using that word doesn't OFFEND anyone) <----- that part is sarcastic


I have always known you didn't like garden poems, but nature is 90 percent of my life and I have to write what I know, right?

I thank you again for reading my stuff and always know I respect and value each and every comment you make on them, and every tidbit of instruction you give and have given me over the years. Plus, I do consider you as being infinitely wise.



julie

 

[UnderYourSpell]

In the dead of night

I stand by my comment but on receiving an email by the author saying that "I have seen very little evidence of any decent poetry on the site. Many of the offerings are a pretentious string of words written by people who, I suspect, have very little writing talent" I wondered what anybody else thinks and perhaps the author would care to come in here and elaborate on this

 

[PhaonsBrother]

In the dead of night

I stand by my comment but on receiving an email by the author saying that "I have seen very little evidence of any decent poetry on the site. Many of the offerings are a pretentious string of words written by people who, I suspect, have very little writing talent" I wondered what anybody else thinks and perhaps the author would care to come in here and elaborate on this

Not only did Al bring us a not-exactly-a-poem, but he submitted hack prose too. It's not easy committing both crimes, even on Literotica.

In the dead of night
byCuddlyAl©

You met her in the early hours. You met and took her slowly. The black-faced clouds concealed your lust. But the peeping moon betrayed you. The heavens high above you wept, when fluids of passion washed through the earth. Waves crashed on rocks to hide her cries. Your semen flowed to swell her demon tide of delight. The wind blew hard and your cheating breaths receded, into the obscurity of the night. You did not hear the footsteps. You did not see the knife. The avenging blade of an angry spouse, who had watched you take his wife.

 

[ishtat]

Daisy

In this thread we get to respond to comments left on our poems by way of explanation or defense. It's here we can question a poet about his/her intentions, inspiration etc.. It's helpful if you can link the poem in question.

I'll start - YES! It was a stinking typo at the start of Last Lust and I have no excuse.

But consider how much worse it is when one commits a blatant 'typo', in the title even. and no-one, but no-one even notices...for years.

http://www.literotica.com/p/dasiys-critique-of-sexist-language

So sorry Daisy.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

But consider how much worse it is when one commits a blatant 'typo', in the title even. and no-one, but no-one even notices...for years.

http://www.literotica.com/p/dasiys-critique-of-sexist-language

So sorry Daisy.

....... or too polite to say so

 

[twelveoone]

In the dead of night

I stand by my comment but on receiving an email by the author saying that "I have seen very little evidence of any decent poetry on the site. Many of the offerings are a pretentious string of words written by people who, I suspect, have very little writing talent" I wondered what anybody else thinks and perhaps the author would care to come in here and elaborate on this

I always avoid writing "decent poetry" from what I've read I've seen little "decent poetry', I've seen some garden poems, I guess they're decent, I saw a dog poem, that was decent, I even liked it. Some of yours, I wouldn't show my mother, that is if I had a mother, they are not decent.
This is a decent poem, I think the Poetguy likes it, I would take out L3,L4,L9,L10 for the sake of decency, as some of those words can lead to impure thoughts.
119. Trees

I THINK that I shall never see
A poem lovely as a tree.

A tree whose hungry mouth is prest
Against the sweet earth's flowing breast;

A tree that looks at God all day, 5
And lifts her leafy arms to pray;

A tree that may in summer wear
A nest of robins in her hair;

Upon whose bosom snow has lain;
Who intimately lives with rain. 10

Poems are made by fools like me,
But only God can make a tree.

 

[UnderYourSpell]

Do you value a persons comments (on yours and other peoples poetry) as much if you think they write dire poetry, especially if you see them handing out accolades on other less than poetic submissions?

 

[twelveoone]

Do you value a persons comments (on yours and other peoples poetry) as much if you think they write dire poetry, especially if you see them handing out accolades on other less than poetic submissions?

I hope you're talking about me.
Cause I'm tellin' chip you're putting flip comments on 1201 titles in New Poems thingie.


If you do want an honest answer from me on this, it depends on the comment, depends on the poem. If somebody likes something, I didn't put in, well I fucked up. If somebody doesn't like something that isn't there, well they fucked up, and after I piss and moan about it for a day or two, I get over it, and resolve to write something they'll like even less.

 

[ishtat]

....... or too polite to say so

Hmm, that didn't cross my mind.