soda springs

[mikebauer]

all around
tree twigs
are breaking —

gray sticks split
in copse
and furrow,
random twigs.

boulders
guide us
through this desert...
glide between them,
happy to obey.

once, lip to lip,
i talked beyond
believable —
lands of mound
and dune: red
desert sands.

so many white-splashed
wishes
cross the river boulders —
twigs and stickers
wedge between
the granite breaks,
accumulate
into each rock,
his
red-root [dik].

8.12.03



.

[billy]

all around
tree twigs
are breaking —

gray sticks split
in copse
and furrow,
random twigs.

boulders
guide us
through this desert...
glide between them,
happy to obey.

once, lip to lip,
i talked beyond
believable —
lands of mound
and dune: red
desert sands.

so many white-splashed
wishes
cross the river boulders —
twigs and stickers
wedge between
the granite breaks,
accumulate
into each rock,
his
red-root [dik].

8.12.03



.

so it's about sex then.
It's what i see in the poem anyway .

i like some of the imagery, and it's original, to me at least.
the metaphors work well and it isn't a sloppy fuck fest poem with the usual cuddly stuff which is okay when done well. works on more than one level which is good for any poem. where the reader may not see the real story non-the-less there's a story to for them to see.

if tree twigs are breaking refers to young people or virgins i'd have plumped for a sapling in there somewhere.

the 2n stanza feels too ambiguous. could it be a little be less-so.

no worries if i got the content wrong. it's what i saw and maybe what i thought was there isn't. anyway. apart from Lines 3-6 pulling me away from the body of the poem i think it works really well.

jmo. thanks for the read. is [dik] needed

[mikebauer]

thanks. it's, yes, coming down to dik, but the way to it is a trip through your history and attitude. the landscape of this poem is supposed to be this landscape where you get to know your body through the years, and maybe get to realize that it's not much good by itself, when it comes to these urge-to-merge things, and i'm way gay-scsi terminated and was i love with this guy and it didn't happen. so, it's, yah, everything's wonderful, the grand canyon, but what about him ?

but, really, it's about how fun it is to write a poem. i really liked writing this one, and i let it go and pulled it in and it found its ending when it needed it. the intuitive part was to bracket and bend the word 'dick', so that it didn't look like that thing that people use to rape with... just this part of my friend that was kind of compelling...

yes, i'm fucked, but so what.

[billy]

yeah but will you do any edits on it?

it's as good as most poems i've read but i think it could improve a little.

[mikebauer]

ok... but, notice that i'm using the landscape as a body and walking my brain over the body, and when it gets to the point where i can't play metaphor anymore, i bring in 'dik'. it's an expressionist poem, not a naturalistic write, and i'm trying to provoke the reader's imagination into following the poem, just as the narrator is following between boulders -- big round things -- happy to obey the leader. it's a totally homo poem, woven inside a sensibility. but, i'd expect any poet who's a poet to want to re-write something which seemed even semi-poetry into a real poem. so, i'm easy with your re-write, if you want to do it.

yeah but will you do any edits on it?

it's as good as most poems i've read but i think it could improve a little.

[billy]

thats well shown (the landscape) it's why i suggested saplings for twigs.

sometimes an overabundance of metaphor can be too much. i'm not saying thats the case for me here. i like what you have. what i'm saying is... for me one of the stanza is a little ambiguous in the theme of the poem. namely the 2nd one. i'll take that back. it's too out of touch with the rest of the poem. it's an opinion. mine and it will stay mine till something in the poem changes. not till the author tells me that i missed something. if i don't get what you intended or you think i didn't get what you intended one of us is missing something. if you think it's the reader then that's okay. (because it's your poem) it doesn't mean it will be better for me because you explain it to me. in truth i don't want it explained.

[mikebauer]

it's not for you. i think that's the truth in this -- that it's too trippy for you. there's nothing i can do about that except turn you on to words.

thats well shown (the landscape) it's why i suggested saplings for twigs.

sometimes an overabundance of metaphor can be too much. i'm not saying thats the case for me here. i like what you have. what i'm saying is... for me one of the stanza is a little ambiguous in the theme of the poem. namely the 2nd one. i'll take that back. it's too out of touch with the rest of the poem. it's an opinion. mine and it will stay mine till something in the poem changes. not till the author tells me that i missed something. if i don't get what you intended or you think i didn't get what you intended one of us is missing something. if you think it's the reader then that's okay. (because it's your poem) it doesn't mean it will be better for me because you explain it to me. in truth i don't want it explained.

[billy]

it's not for you. i think that's the truth in this -- that it's too trippy for you. there's nothing i can do about that except turn you on to words.

[/quote]
come on mike. isn't that a cop out. if it's not for me i'm capable of making my own mind up. i already said i really enjoyed it. i just don't think it as good as it could be. it's irrelevant how you see me taking it. and you don't have to change it. a critique is just that. a comment is just that. it isn't a plea to be educated. as for too trippy, if anything , in places it's too obvious. (i'm saying in some, A stanza; it isn't obvious enough) i'm not asking you to change it just pointing out my take. a take only i can comprehend. and believe me, if i thought it were too trippy i'd say so, i'd say "this is too trippy for me as the reader. but i haven't.

[mikebauer]

nope, because this one gets a lot of reading and a lot of good responses to it from several kinds of reader. it's ok with punk and with old writers, and people read it as a song and like the ending: it works for them. i'm thinking you're not ready for a song-poetry yet, because you're so serious about saying what's what, and i can't really see how i'd change this to work for you...

his body iz like a fuckable thing,
and i look at it in the moonlight
and his prick is a little ghost
and casper is sukking it.

something like that... and, there's just no need.

i don't need you to tell me you don't think it's as good as it could be, i need you to show me the actual direction it's supposed to go to work for you. if you really get the poem, re-write it in your own voice. that's the honest and poet thing to do for another poet. but, remember, lots of people think poetry is just saying shit to say shit, and when they get to know what's what they read it for what it is. that's why i think this is too trippy -- that you're not finding the language i wrote this in.

it's not for you. i think that's the truth in this -- that it's too trippy for you. there's nothing i can do about that except turn you on to words.

come on mike. isn't that a cop out. if it's not for me i'm capable of making my own mind up. i already said i really enjoyed it. i just don't think it as good as it could be. it's irrelevant how you see me taking it. and you don't have to change it. a critique is just that. a comment is just that. it isn't a plea to be educated. as for too trippy, if anything , in places it's too obvious. (i'm saying in some, A stanza; it isn't obvious enough) i'm not asking you to change it just pointing out my take. a take only i can comprehend. and believe me, if i thought it were too trippy i'd say so, i'd say "this is too trippy for me as the reader. but i haven't.
[/quote]

[billy]

i don't need you to tell me you don't think it's as good as it could be, i need you to show me the actual direction it's supposed to go to work for you. if you really get the poem, re-write it in your own voice. that's the honest and poet thing to do for another poet. but, remember, lots of people think poetry is just saying shit to say shit, and when they get to know what's what they read it for what it is. that's why i think this is too trippy -- that you're not finding the language i wrote this in.

i did mike. about a shitload of posts ago. i gave my take on it. how stanza 2 didn't work as well as it should for me and why.

one thing must be clear between writer and critic. they don't, can't know each other. you have no idea how i feel, what i think or how i think. i tell you, you don't cant tell me.

i can't write your poem. i can only tell you what i get from it. you can't tell me why i get or don't get something from it. you don't know me.

i can't tell you to re write. i can only tell you it's my opinion that you should re do certain aspects. (the one i pointed out)

if i don't get the language then the poems already alien to me and beyond hope to me the individual reader. i don't care if the whole world understand a part of it, and why it was done that way. i don't, i didn't i told you where and why. end of. change it or leave it but don't read my thoughts...you'll fail not only will you fail you'll fail implicitly. accept my comment as mine. not yours not everyone or anyone else, as i accept the poem is yours.

it's pointless me commenting on your poem and then you commenting on how my comment is wrong. it's my opinion leave it alone.

heres what i said.for me one of the stanza is a little ambiguous in the theme of the poem. namely the 2nd one. i'll take that back. it's too out of touch with the rest of the poem. i will not tell you how to write your poem only where it affects me negatively or positively and why. i also mentioned the twigs. and placed a thought of sapling there. twigs have a connotation of age. and i presumed rightly or wrongly the early part of the poem was the early part of the adventure.

[mikebauer]

it's only about poetry here, for me. i don't need to know you. but, i need to know if you're a poet or a poser. for my world, writing out how i should write the poem is exchange, the thing which makes us real. that's why i asked you for it specifically. i still need to know if you can't write it or if, instead, you're afraid of looking silly. my take on that is that you can't look as silly as my poem looks, since it's a failed poem... you understand? a real poetry workshop works to invent poetry together, not to invent ego.

i don't need you to tell me you don't think it's as good as it could be, i need you to show me the actual direction it's supposed to go to work for you. if you really get the poem, re-write it in your own voice. that's the honest and poet thing to do for another poet. but, remember, lots of people think poetry is just saying shit to say shit, and when they get to know what's what they read it for what it is. that's why i think this is too trippy -- that you're not finding the language i wrote this in.

i did mike. about a shitload of posts ago. i gave my take on it. how stanza 2 didn't work as well as it should for me and why.

one thing must be clear between writer and critic. they don't, can't know each other. you have no idea how i feel, what i think or how i think. i tell you, you don't cant tell me.

i can't write your poem. i can only tell you what i get from it. you can't tell me why i get or don't get something from it. you don't know me.

i can't tell you to re write. i can only tell you it's my opinion that you should re do certain aspects. (the one i pointed out)

if i don't get the language then the poems already alien to me and beyond hope to me the individual reader. i don't care if the whole world understand a part of it, and why it was done that way. i don't, i didn't i told you where and why. end of. change it or leave it but don't read my thoughts...you'll fail not only will you fail you'll fail implicitly. accept my comment as mine. not yours not everyone or anyone else, as i accept the poem is yours.

it's pointless me commenting on your poem and then you commenting on how my comment is wrong. it's my opinion leave it alone.

[billy]

it's only about poetry here, for me. i don't need to know you. but, i need to know if you're a poet or a poser. for my world, writing out how i should write the poem is exchange, the thing which makes us real. that's why i asked you for it specifically. i still need to know if you can't write it or if, instead, you're afraid of looking silly. my take on that is that you can't look as silly as my poem looks, since it's a failed poem... you understand? a real poetry workshop works to invent poetry together, not to invent ego.

for me writing how another poem should be is a little presumptuous.
where do you get it's a failed poem from? and looking silly has never bothered me. i do it all the time. and no emphatically i can't write it. in this instance i'm the critic and you are the poet. and looking at this exchange if anyone did try to rewrite it you'd hang them, commit suicide or both....no offense meant.

for me a workshop is a place where we help each other to write. not a place where we do the write for each other. i told you where it didn't work and to some extent how (for me). that's it. but the dialogue is way off topic. the topic is your poem. was your poem. my say on it has been had. have the last word by all means, dismiss what i say by all means. arguing as to why a person who gives feedback is wrong is not workshopping (not from my pov anyway)