logarithmic in a compact car

[Senna Jawa]

I don't want Literotica to change my title to the upper case. So I'll post my poem here.


  logarithmic in a compact car


        while you wave me in
        like a good hostess should
        your dog growls
        and you close him in a bedroom

        now the food and no food
        now your work on the table
        biology and logarithmic paper

        a problem? no problem done
        good food good to see ... i'll go home

                        *

        free the dog from the bedroom
        which in the past was too small
        for two beasts which nap
        under the sheet of our parting smile


                        H.California
                        1995-08-11


Regards,

 

[_Land]

Im choking

That poem tasted so bad, they couldnt have munched it up any worse then it already was!

 

[Rybka]

Food Fight!!!

S.J. I liked it, but then I have had the pleasure of reading all of your previous posts.and I am beginning to appreciate your style.

Humbly yours, Rybka

 

[JUDO]

SJ -

You paid off and set up some things which I don't find setup or paid-off. Certainly, not all things need to be, but doing so creates confusion, particularly when the reader cannot find another symbolic reason for the items to be present.

Where is the "compact car?"

Where did the "two beasts" come from?

What is the symbolism from "napping under the sheet of our parting smile"? (Fun words, but the true meaning escapes me).

Is the dog locked up symbolic of something that she hides from her dinner guest? If it is (and I think it should be), I missing that as well.


- Judo

 

[Senna Jawa]

Hi Judo,

after welcoming me to Literotica you hardly noticed me. Your comment is a welcome surprize. At the same time it makes me sad for various reasons. One of them being what I see as a great loss of time in your progress as a poet, perhaps a step back. You have a wonderful talent which you constrain by the kind of easy, way too easy for you, exercises in enjoying your technical skills and ability. While you are doing it even your technical skills suffer, are not really developing. You are mainly doing it to yourself by yourself, somehow you are actively happy with the things which you should brush off as taking you back rather than forward. If easy fun was your goal... but I doubt it that it is. Anyway, the result is that you can't even read my poem. Sad.

I would never say all this but the way you couldn't cope with my not difficult poem shows me the depressing thing about poetry: there is hardly an audience for poetry. My poem is after all just a poem, it doesn't aim at any experiments, at achieving any exotic goals, it belongs to the main road of poetry, it certainly is not obscure and does not aim at any obscurity. And still you were not able to read it, to fulfill your basic reader's duty, to follow the words, the images. Then what about others, who have less contact with poetry and art, who do not have even 1/100 of your talent, not to mention that you know more about science than you let us know.

I am not going to say anything which is not very directly in the poem, I am not going to perform your reader's "work" for you.

Your doubts and questions are truly depressing. They reflect a wrong attitude toward poetry of both the authors and the audience. I think I better say nothing more. Do, Judo, your reader's duty. Forget the symbolic bullshit. Symbolism should come afterward by itself, without any straining (I mean in the case of this poem. In general symbolism in a great poem may occasionally occur to the reader after a long while). Your duty is always to read literally. A car is a car and a dog is a dog. Just honor defaults, follow the words, trust them, use them as stepping stones, that's the poetry way. Also, you know what logarithm does: decimal logarithm of 1000 is 3. I'll stop now, it's frustrating and it's not my fault. You should easily answer your own q's--I am shocked that you didn't before clicking on "Submit Reply" button.

Best regards,

 

[WickedEve]

-

 

[Star At Sunrise]

Poetry and Criticism

I found SJ's response to Judo more compelling than the poem!

But I was most intrigued by the comment "I am not going to perform your reader's 'work' for you."

I believe that poetry is our expression of ourselves, and when our poems get a negative response (even very mild like Judo's) it's far to easy to think that you are being criticized directly.

Serious poets want their expressions to be clear, and they invite feedback so that they can get some idea if they are going in the right direction. If their expression is not clear, that's not the readers fault.

Sorry, SJ, I'm your average poetry reader, I guess, and I thought that all of Judo's comments were constructive. If you're making a reader "work" then naturally you're going to get a smaller audience. I'm not coming up with the idea for the poem, so I shouldn't be expected to assist in its delivery.

It's funny that you expect a reader to "work" and then state surprise that there is such a small audience for poetry in general. I would hope that all a poet can hope from a reader is that they read.

But I could be wrong, and most likely am!

 

[Senna Jawa]

Re: Poetry and Criticism

[...] I was most intrigued by the comment "I am not going to perform your reader's 'work' for you."

Yes, each party on the poetry scene has its duties. Authors provide words and images, that's their responsibility. The reader's duty is to follow the words (as they are) and to see the offered images. Then symbolism comes natural most of the time. (It's not the first time I mention these issues on this forum). In the case of my poem there is very little of symbolism and it is simple. Do your reader's work and the poem will pay you generously.

I believe that poetry is our expression of ourselves, and when our poems get a negative response (even very mild like Judo's) it's far to easy to think that you are being criticized directly.

Wrong address, comment returned to the sender. When a naive reader makes irrelevant comments I just smile. In the case of Judo I have a lot of hope for her talent. Thus her comments disappointed me, I expect much more from her.

Serious poets want their expressions to be clear, and they invite feedback so that they can get some idea if they are going in the right direction. If their expression is not clear, that's not the readers fault.

You are talking about a serious person on her/his way to being a serious poet. I did my share of actively inviting comments, of even bothering people to give me their critical comments for years, long before Internet. And I still developed further during the Internet years. Indeed, the developing poets should consider your comment seriously. I can still gain from a comment occasionally, but as a rule the other party has to have really great feel for poetry, has to be advanced (s/he doesn't have to be a poet her/himself). I could still conquer new territories if I had energy and conditions but it would have nothing to do with any comments which can be offered by Literotica audience, that would be a silly notion. I am here already more than three months. I got a large spoon of this soup and I know how it tastes.

Sorry, SJ, I'm your average poetry reader, I guess, and I thought that all of Judo's comments were constructive.

Of course.

Use word "thought" thoughtfully, justify it. You are misrepresenting my response. Please, do not assume things. Please read. Do your reader's duty before you respond.

If you're making a reader "work" then naturally you're going to get a smaller audience. I'm not coming up with the idea for the poem, so I shouldn't be expected to assist in its delivery.

It's funny that you expect a reader to "work" and then state surprise that there is such a small audience for poetry in general. I would hope that all a poet can hope from a reader is that they read.

But I could be wrong, and most likely am!

Different poems for different audiences. I included Judo into the potential audience of my poem. I never cared about having any audience. A poem has to be what it has to be. If it happens to appeal for a large audience--so much better. But I wouldn't change a thing in my poem just to get a larger audience. (I'll have to find mine old poem about this issue).

In short, it's nice to have an audience but poems come first.

Regards,

 

[_Land]

Re: Im choking

That poem tasted so bad, they couldnt have munched it up any worse then it already was!

Actually, Senna I didnt really think it was that bad, I found it leaving me baffled at best. I just had to get that out of my craw, you remind me so much of my wife that I did almost gag, Do you ever see the positive in anything anybody else posts? Some of us here are at best novices, Like myself. I never claimed to have written a masterpeice. But I do use what i write as an expression of who I am. I believe that is the reason Poets take critique so poorly, because it is hard to seperate what you have written from that part of who you are, so in a sense it feels like you are personaly being critiqued. Opinions are like ass holes everyone has one and most of them stink. Perhaps if you could possibly find anything positive in the work it would give the writer something to build on, instead of making his effort and even his feelings seem worthless. The glass should always be half full not half empty. Respectfully Yours _Land

 

[Star At Sunrise]

You win

Originally posted by Senna Jawa to Judo
the way you couldn't cope with my... poem

Originally posted by Senna Jawa to me
Please, do not assume things.

No mas, no mas... I give.

SJ you are right and I am wrong. Please forgive me.

I had thought that the writer bears at least responsibility for making his point clear, and if it isn't clear, I had a difficult time pointing the finger of blame at the audience. A very naive viewpoint, I am sure you will agree.

I understand now that it is the Reader's Duty to understand, and not the responsibility of the writer.

(Hands Senna Jawa a Coke and flower.)

Aw... bullshit! I can't make myself say that. It's a lie. SJ, do YOUR readers duty and realize if you're going to be so damn sensitive about a critique of your poem (from Judo) and a critique of your POST (me)... you could somehow do it without appearing so humorless and superior. I've never had an exchange with you before, yet you are "smiling" at my "naive" and "irrelevant" comments. It seems that you took what I had to say far too seriously and in no way invited discussion.

And if you don't like the soup, get the fuck out of the kitchen. I like the soup here, that's why I keep coming back.

But then, that is only my opinion offered for feedback and discussion, and my opinion is probably wrong. In fact, I'm sure it is.

 

[Rybka]

Senna Jawa is a spicy cup of soup, not to everybody's taste. He does not suffer fools gladly, rather the converse.

The glass should always be half full not half empty.

Me, I just think I got the wrong size glass.

Regards, Rybka

 

[JUDO]

SJ -

I gave you my honest criticism. Your dramatic response is not surprising.

I leave you with this quote -

"In this world...you must be oh, so smart or oh, so pleasant. For years I was smart - I recommend pleasant."

- Elwood P. Dodd

See you in the funny papers.

- Judo

 

[Senna Jawa]

SJ -

I gave you my honest criticism.

Sure. But you didn't read the poem.

Your dramatic response is not surprising.

I leave you with this quote -



See you in the funny papers.

- Judo

I get stereotyped and labeled on Literotica more and more. How easy for you. (What a pity that poetry is not equally easy. Actually, how wonderful)!

You are, Judo, just cutting cupons off your ability, just getting into bad habits of cranking poems one after another. Nothing wrong with being prolific, it is a way to train oneself. But you are not applying yourself, you are satisfied with fulfilling some requirements of the form or some other selfimposed constrains. Yes, it helps sometimes, and it's impressive, but poetry is not about circus acrobatics alone, that should be but one aspect only of the work.

Perhaps I sounded dramatic. Perhaps I should be smart, which I am not. Sure, what do I care. Go on Judo, be happy, don't let me spoil your fun, feel good. I won't bother any more.

Regards,

 

[Rybka]

Poem Interpretation

I am probably way off base, but here is how I read SSJ's poem"

logarithmic in a compact car

Have you ever tried to make love in a compact car?

while you wave me in
like a good hostess should
your dog growls
and you close him in a bedroom

Self explanatory, and more obvious than much of SJ's work.

now the food and no food
now your work on the table
biology and logarithmic paper

SJ is not only a guest/friend he is an excellent mathematician.
It should be obvious why he was invited, or at least one reason why,
maybe two.

a problem? no problem done
good food good to see ... i'll go home

Again, obvious, as was the solution to her problem/s. He was happy
to see her again, happy to help her.

*

free the dog from the bedroom
which in the past was too small
for two beasts which nap
under the sheet of our parting smile

To me, this implies a previous more personal relationship. The "two beasts"
is reminiscent of the "beast with two backs" and probably refers to our
carnal natures which we hide under the veneer/sheet of our formal social
behavior.

This is how I interpret the poem, after just enjoying its metre and imagery.
Now Senna will tell us all that I am totally wrong and am "assuming" much
too much. - Oh Well!

Regards, Rybka

 

[Senna Jawa]

nothing but straight reading

Rybka did decent job on reading my poem. He's of course joking in the KarmaDog style about the title, and, still for jokes, Rybka identifies the subject of the poem (its "I" or narrator) with the author. I am glad that I didn't make narrator a mass murderer or a terrorist or I woud have police and FBI crashing through my door and windows. In my poem the subject and the author, like in most of the poems, are two separate guys, even if similarities might be not accidental. (Did I say "terrorist"? -- sorry Reuters, "militant").

OK, I'll read my poem. I will not interpret, I will not say "what did the author have in his mind?". I'll stick to the text stricktly as is.

Words "logarithmic" and "compact" in the title should please a reader, as well as the sudden connection between logarithm and a car, via "compact" as the bridging word. Otherwise a phrase (the title) is just a phrase so far.

But after the first stanza it is clear that the guest came in that car. That's how poetry works, that's how it can achieve its effects, via defaults. By the same token it follows that "logarithmic" of the title refers to the subject of the poem: he was the (only) one in the car, he was "logarithmic". And this should be extra clear after reading the whole poem because obviously the subject (the guest) gets back into his car afterwards.

Let me repost the poem:




        logarithmic in a compact car




                while you wave me in
                like a good hostess should
                your dog growls
                and you close him in a bedroom

                now the food and no food
                now your work on the table
                biology and logarithmic paper

                a problem? no problem done
                good food good to see ... i'll go home

                                *

                free the dog from the bedroom
                which in the past was too small
                for two beasts which nap
                under the sheet of our parting smile




H.California &copy
1995-08-11



Everything is as obvious as it can be all the way until the last stanza, which is no obstacle to understanding either. BTW, a male dog hostile toward a male human friend of his hostess is quite common, I am sure you are familiar with this situation. Some of you may know that logarithmic paper is helpful in biological research (all kind of decay processes, like the level of a substance in blood, tend to be exponential, with negative exponent, of course--I am certain that Judo knows such things ).

Now about the last stanza. Remember defaults. There is only one pair in the poem: the hostess and her guest. We already know that they are friend, that they know each other. Then the poem mentions two beasts. By default they are the only two people who appear in the poem, the guest and the hostess. The texts says that the bedrroom was too small for them. It means that in the past they were sharing that bedroom (or "a bedroom" if one allows for a poetic license margin). The poem is suggestive, it leads you from one word to another:

    bedroom --> past --> two beasts -->

    --> nap --> under the sheet

Those two were intimate enough in the first part of the poem to allow, in the view of the last stanza, that they had some past. While they were nice and pleasant in the present time, the past was something else. Now the guest leaves and gets back to be logarithmic in a compact car. What else? That's not an interpretation, that's the default. No defaults -- no poetry.

If you want to interpret then indeed, you may have a feeling about the meaning of a man being "logarithmic". You may also wonder if that dog was more than just a dog, if it played a symbolic role too. But you don't have too. The poem is fine and does what it does already, even without any extra reflexion.

It is a short poem but you learn about the characters and the scene a lot, you already know them. (They are not generic like in so many other poems, where after reading you are still left with nothing, you can't tell the characters apart from one poem to another).


Thank you Rybka,

regards,

        Senna Jawa

PS. Along the common sentiment on this forum I should rewrite my poem like this:

    Why were you only superficially nice to me
    when my heart was longing for you so bad!
    I wanted your gentle female hand
    to touch my soul. My heart was crying
    red tears. Don't you regret that
    years ago instead of always loving
    one another we were so cruel. We had
    a unique chance which will never repeat.
    Time never goes back. That's how it is in this
    unfeeling cold world.

Yeah, that's the Literotica way! This poem is so brave! So emotional! So moving. So dramatic. So sad and depressing. Well, here and there we may try to fix this and that in the poem. We can work on variations. Everybody get into the act! The important thing is that the author was unfraid to show his true feelings. What a courage! Congratulations Senna!

Senna?! Oh, no, anybody but Senna

 

[Rybka]

Senna Jawa, I enjoy your viewpoints and especially your humor when you choose to express it.

In reference to your title you wrote:

Rybka did decent job on reading my poem. He's of course joking in the KarmaDog style about the title,

I am happy I got something right!
I liked the title for the way it sounded, but I must admit I was looking for a stronger reason. I know Frost said that any meanings beyond the rhyme belong to the reader, but I thought I had found one.

'Log' is a slang name for an erect penis, and 'arithmic ' ('arrhythmic', or 'a rhythmic') does describe the motions of a small car under certain conditions. - Foolish of me to think you would stoop to use a double entendre. - Just because I would!

Regards, Rybka

 

[smithpeter]

I changed my mind.
I am not going to say anything in this thread.

 

[TheDR4KE]

I love the authors who know their own works so well that they can keep telling the world how perfect the poem is, as is. Those authors make me laugh.

I love the authors who go beyond the craft of their learnt, trained and calculated wordsmithing and use art to touch meaning and emotion. They write poetry.

Drake