What tha fuck does this mean?

[vrosej10]

Hi guys,

This poem was the result of last nights freewriting and as is generally my policy i try not to load my own work with my interpretations, but this one's got me stumped. I suspect it's about polyamory. Yes? No? Something different? Enlighten me wiht you wisdom.

Wildflowers
In the fields spring flowers are blooming
My sweetheart
Their heads tipped to the sun
And the sum of us together
Could be gathered like these flowers
Carefully cut for long stems
Air dried so they might linger
Hanging from the ceiling
Certainly no longer themselves
Never to be the lovely amongst the waving weeds again
But I think I’d rather they weather the rain and winds instead
Changing with the days
And finally exploding in a froth of seedy fluff
To fly and grow somewhere else
In some other lover’s spring.

 

[romeothethird]

Hi guys,

This poem was the result of last nights freewriting and as is generally my policy i try not to load my own work with my interpretations, but this one's got me stumped. I suspect it's about polyamory. Yes? No? Something different? Enlighten me wiht you wisdom.

Wildflowers
In the fields spring flowers are blooming
My sweetheart
Their heads tipped to the sun
And the sum of us together
Could be gathered like these flowers
Carefully cut for long stems
Air dried so they might linger
Hanging from the ceiling
Certainly no longer themselves
Never to be the lovely amongst the waving weeds again
But I think I’d rather they weather the rain and winds instead
Changing with the days
And finally exploding in a froth of seedy fluff
To fly and grow somewhere else
In some other lover’s spring.

My first thought is that it's an expression of a preference -- between civilization, control, holding onto things despite the inevitability of death and decay versus the wild joy of facing all the intensity that life has to offer. Then I look on the level of sex, and I see it's the dried out echo of beauty and passion that makes most long-term relationships versus living in each moment, allowing the new passions to be born with new lovers in their fullest living intensity. So perhaps you're not far off that it's an ode to polyamory. Nice work!

 

[vrosej10]

My first thought is that it's an expression of a preference -- between civilization, control, holding onto things despite the inevitability of death and decay versus the wild joy of facing all the intensity that life has to offer. Then I look on the level of sex, and I see it's the dried out echo of beauty and passion that makes most long-term relationships versus living in each moment, allowing the new passions to be born with new lovers in their fullest living intensity. So perhaps you're not far off that it's an ode to polyamory. Nice work!

Very cool analysis. I like very much!

 

[bronzeage]

The flowers are memories of a love which ended before it reached full maturity. The love affair was cut off before lovers truly knew each other and now the memories are tinted with hopes which died with the love. The experience left you better able to understand love and later love affairs were better for what you learned.

 

[vrosej10]

The flowers are memories of a love which ended before it reached full maturity. The love affair was cut off before lovers truly knew each other and now the memories are tinted with hopes which died with the love. The experience left you better able to understand love and later love affairs were better for what you learned.

Interesting interpretation. I love how you can ask three people about a poem (unless it is obnoxiously obvious) and get three wildly differing opinions. I just wrote this thing as a stream of consciousness freewrity kind of thing and it had no particular meaning for me. Frankly I was just enjoying the sound of the words and the metaphor.

 

[fridayam]

For me it was about preferring the moment over the memory--after all the flowers "could" be cut and dried but aren't. I wasn't sure where the polyamory came in

(btw, and I have no other way of telling you, your very kind 5 for "Cheap Music" just vanished--it was the only vote so I kind of noticed, lol>)

 

[bronzeage]

Interesting interpretation. I love how you can ask three people about a poem (unless it is obnoxiously obvious) and get three wildly differing opinions. I just wrote this thing as a stream of consciousness freewrity kind of thing and it had no particular meaning for me. Frankly I was just enjoying the sound of the words and the metaphor.

There is no such thing as "no particular meaning."

 

[twelveoone]

Hi guys,

This poem was the result of last nights freewriting and as is generally my policy i try not to load my own work with my interpretations, but this one's got me stumped. I suspect it's about polyamory. Yes? No? Something different? Enlighten me wiht you wisdom.

Wildflowers
In the fields spring flowers are blooming
My sweetheart
Their heads tipped to the sun
And the sum of us together
Could be gathered like these flowers
Carefully cut for long stems
Air dried so they might linger
Hanging from the ceiling
Certainly no longer themselves
Never to be the lovely amongst the waving weeds again
But I think I’d rather they weather the rain and winds instead
Changing with the days
And finally exploding in a froth of seedy fluff
To fly and grow somewhere else
In some other lover’s spring.

Carefully cut for long stems
Certainly no longer themselves

Do you want a Freudian interpretation?
now that would be "a froth of seedy fluff"

 

[The_Fool]

In general, you are willing to let your lovers stay or go as their destiny requires rather than pick them and dry them for some static monument. To a certain extent, I think you are expressing the thought that love has a beginning, an end and some form of rebirth, just not necessarily with you. I do think you feel that there will always be love, because there will always be a field of flowers. If you considered the loves in parallel rather than sequential, then you could get the polyamory. But if you consider them sequential, then it is a lifetime of lovers.

 

[twelveoone]

Hi guys,

This poem was the result of last nights freewriting and as is generally my policy i try not to load my own work with my interpretations, but this one's got me stumped. I suspect it's about polyamory. Yes? No? Something different? Enlighten me wiht you wisdom.

Wildflowers
In the fields spring flowers are blooming
My sweetheart
Their heads tipped to the sun
And the sum of us together
Could be gathered like these flowers
Carefully cut for long stems
Air dried so they might linger
Hanging from the ceiling
Certainly no longer themselves
Never to be the lovely amongst the waving weeds again
But I think I’d rather they weather the rain and winds instead
Changing with the days
And finally exploding in a froth of seedy fluff
To fly and grow somewhere else
In some other lover’s spring.

Seriously, you wrote it, you interpret it. You figure out, what is the inner logic of this, once you do that, chop out what doesn't support, strengthen what does.
i.e. where is the "I" in the storm

As it is it works, but that is because the brain is very good at organising information and assigning meaning. Just imagine how much better it would be if you were in full control of it, leading the reader.

This: "last nights freewriting and as is generally my policy i try not to load my own work with my interpretations" if I may say, is your biggest drawback; where you need to work most.

 

[emma_tate]

Seriously. if YOU wrote it and do not kno whwat it means, just what does that say about YOU as a writer?

think about that.... if you just want attention, like 99.9% of the rest of the people here,, whine long enuf and you'll get it

 

[vrosej10]

Seriously. if YOU wrote it and do not kno whwat it means, just what does that say about YOU as a writer?

think about that.... if you just want attention, like 99.9% of the rest of the people here,, whine long enuf and you'll get it

You know, I was gunna reply to your accusation meaningfully, but I you know what, you ignorant and rude and not worth my or anyone else's time.

 

[vrosej10]

Seriously, you wrote it, you interpret it. You figure out, what is the inner logic of this, once you do that, chop out what doesn't support, strengthen what does.
i.e. where is the "I" in the storm

As it is it works, but that is because the brain is very good at organising information and assigning meaning. Just imagine how much better it would be if you were in full control of it, leading the reader.

This: "last nights freewriting and as is generally my policy i try not to load my own work with my interpretations" if I may say, is your biggest drawback; where you need to work most.

Hi twelveoone

I am a fan of reader response criticism and at least partially buy the idea of the myth of authorial intent. I am incline to believe there is the meaning the author strives for and the one that actually arises in a kind of 'if you build, we will come' way. Because I do believe in reader response, my work is a literary inkblot test. What you see is what you are mirrored back at you. For what its worth, I do have my own take and meanings for my work, I am just more interested what others might make of it.

 

[twelveoone]

Hi twelveoone

I am a fan of reader response criticism and at least partially buy the idea of the myth of authorial intent. I am incline to believe there is the meaning the author strives for and the one that actually arises in a kind of 'if you build, we will come' way. Because I do believe in reader response, my work is a literary inkblot test. What you see is what you are mirrored back at you. For what its worth, I do have my own take and meanings for my work, I am just more interested what others might make of it.

you fuck around too much meaning two things at once?
or you accidentally put bleach on that cool Jim Evans t-shirt, so that now it just looks like some floral print?

or this is just another love poem to Russel Crowe?
you do know I look like Russel Crowe? No, really!
you just didn't see 'cause I was wearing shades

 

[vrosej10]

you fuck around too much meaning two things at once?
or you accidentally put bleach on that cool Jim Evans t-shirt, so that now it just looks like some floral print?

or this is just another love poem to Russel Crowe?
you do know I look like Russel Crowe? No, really!
you just didn't see 'cause I was wearing shades

I am laughing my arse off! I do tend to hold two conflicting opinions simultaneously on a regular basis. Tis my nature to be odd and a bit of a pain. Love poems to Russell Crowe don't work, he's always too busy watching the footy (he owns a major football team and is a RABID supporter).