Though I've been quiet for I'm-not-sure-how-long in here, I have been somewhat productive, though more in writing than in reading-responding, as per my usual. However, I know I should be equally serious in both -- come here not with peace, but with a sword (for the ego) -- so starting with this, I'll try to be more giving (again -- as per my usual. Humph). Anyway:

THEOSIS

We are not devils -- we are gods,
once bathed -- washed of the clods
seed-stained -- taste of the love!
Love your Holy Flesh -- from above!

(03-15-2016, 08:30 PM)RiverNotch Wrote:  Though I've been quiet for I'm-not-sure-how-long in here, I have been somewhat productive, though more in writing than in reading-responding, as per my usual. However, I know I should be equally serious in both -- come here not with peace, but with a sword (for the ego) -- so starting with this, I'll try to be more giving (again -- as't q per my usual. Humph). Anyway:

THEOSIS

We are not devils -- we are gods,
once bathed -- washed of the clods
seed-stained -- taste of the love!
Love your Holy Flesh -- from above!

seed-stained is nice for the two levels of meaning. I'd retain once bathed....seed-stained and rewrite everything else around it. The other lines at the moment don't have the same punch.

(03-15-2016, 11:02 PM)Achebe Wrote:  seed-stained is nice for the two levels of meaning. I'd retain once bathed....seed-stained and rewrite everything else around it. The other lines at the moment don't have the same punch.

Sorta sucks, then, since the other lines are the main point. I once thought it was those very lines that should be removed, not your way round -- oh well. I guess when I get too metaphysical, I do end up sacrificing punch for clarity (or the other way round, to equally ill effect).

(03-15-2016, 08:30 PM)RiverNotch Wrote:  THEOSIS

We are not devils -- we are gods,
once bathed -- washed of the clods
seed-stained -- taste of the love! I would choose one of the loves, having two back to back is not working for me.
Love your Holy Flesh -- from above! Phrasing is ambiguous. Is the loving accomplished from above or is the flesh coming down from above to be loved down here? Is it a command to love one's flesh that came from above? And who does 'your' refer to? 

Hello River. I dislike the double dashes in the middle more than anything else. So, picky, I know.

"the love" is vague, and "above" is too, but I can more easily divine the meaning of the second. 

The dashes and exclamation marks made me think for a moment that Emily D had strayed into the Pen.

There's not much here to link me to a concrete world - though 'seed-stained' is good imagery. The distancing of the narrator, from 'we' to 'you', gave an even more fragmentary feeling.

i do lol that you, liz, commented on the two pieces i think were written at the time i was dipped in Dickinson. so yeah, this is me channeling Dickinson, and probably failing, since the compilation i had was one of those edited by her contemporaries, and the way they arranged her works obscured how connected she actually was to the physical world (something i only got when i decided to sing her songs like a madman as we hiked down a mountain this one time). it's been so long, though --- either i've been separated enough to rewrite this, or separated enough to not care about discarding. i guess we'll see. thanks for the feedback!

(02-27-2017, 12:27 AM)RiverNotch Wrote:  i do lol that you, liz, commented on the two pieces i think were written at the time i was dipped in Dickinson. so yeah, this is me channeling Dickinson, and probably failing, since the compilation i had was one of those edited by her contemporaries, and the way they arranged her works obscured how connected she actually was to the physical world (something i only got when i decided to sing her songs like a madman as we hiked down a mountain this one time). it's been so long, though --- either i've been separated enough to rewrite this, or separated enough to not care about discarding. i guess we'll see. thanks for the feedback!

Ha, I actually love Dickinson. A volume of her poetry was the first book of verse I ever acquired. I did a term paper on her in university and got hooked. It's not that I mind dashes, just do the full em dashes!!! It's the -- that I mind. Or --- I can see you have one of those in your response, presumably to ---- irritate.

(02-27-2017, 05:29 PM)Lizzie Wrote:  

(02-27-2017, 12:27 AM)RiverNotch Wrote:  i do lol that you, liz, commented on the two pieces i think were written at the time i was dipped in Dickinson. so yeah, this is me channeling Dickinson, and probably failing, since the compilation i had was one of those edited by her contemporaries, and the way they arranged her works obscured how connected she actually was to the physical world (something i only got when i decided to sing her songs like a madman as we hiked down a mountain this one time). it's been so long, though --- either i've been separated enough to rewrite this, or separated enough to not care about discarding. i guess we'll see. thanks for the feedback!

Ha, I actually love Dickinson. A volume of her poetry was the first book of verse I ever acquired. I did a term paper on her in university and got hooked. It's not that I mind dashes, just do the full em dashes!!! It's the -- that I mind. Or --- I can see you have one of those in your response, presumably to ---- irritate.

tbh, i just don't know the unicode, and even if i knew, i probably can't be bothered.