04-11-2016, 08:27 AM
What bothers me most about the expression is the contempt held by the writer for his subject.
'little' - a put-down, not a description. The term diminishes the person so described.
'brown' - if this poem is in praise of, why is brown used? Why not an alternative such as amber
bay
beige
bister
brick
bronze
buff
chestnut
chocolate
cinnamon
cocoa
coffee
copper
drab
dust
ecru
fawn
ginger
hazel
henna
khaki
mahogany
nut
ochre
puce
russet
rust
sepia
sorrel
tan
toast
umber
auburn
burnt sienna
snuff-colored
tawny
terra-cotta
The reason that a poet, with an extensive vocabulary, chose to use these words is the disdain in which the writer holds the subject.
I think this attitude is contemptible - to isolate on the grounds of gender and colour, and then use further negative descriptions.
'little' - a put-down, not a description. The term diminishes the person so described.
'brown' - if this poem is in praise of, why is brown used? Why not an alternative such as amber
bay
beige
bister
brick
bronze
buff
chestnut
chocolate
cinnamon
cocoa
coffee
copper
drab
dust
ecru
fawn
ginger
hazel
henna
khaki
mahogany
nut
ochre
puce
russet
rust
sepia
sorrel
tan
toast
umber
auburn
burnt sienna
snuff-colored
tawny
terra-cotta
The reason that a poet, with an extensive vocabulary, chose to use these words is the disdain in which the writer holds the subject.
I think this attitude is contemptible - to isolate on the grounds of gender and colour, and then use further negative descriptions.
