Are we known by the way we write?
Recently, I have had the opportunity to observe a great deal of verbal give and take, all revolving around the use of language. Disclaimers to the contrary, we know each other only through our words because of the very nature of this medium, and consequently form an opinion of other people solely on what is said and the manner in which it is said. In truth, both of these are open to interpretation. Some here claim to want honest, constructive critique, but when it is offered -- when specific flaws are pointed out -- they react angrily and vengefully, indeed in ways unjustifiable to any reasonable mind. You see this is not a matter of reason so much as one of emotion, of identity; many who write poetry do so solely because they feel the need for self-expression. I can scarcely find fault with such a motive; indeed, self-expression lies at the very core of why I am now writing this brief passage. However, this is not poetry, but it appears in the poetry section because it is the place where recent history suggests that it has become most compelling -- the question of the moment. Others write poetry of a more structured nature, perhaps of greater or at least different philosophical concern, because they are by nature drawn to such matters, and the adherence to forms represents for them a challenge, something they enjoy, a reflection of the way their minds organize, through habitual practice, the multifarious phenomena of the world. Must it be that the two worlds, and the multiplicity of shades that connect them, remain forever hermetically sealed one from another, at odds with one another. It is one thing to disagree, quite another to lack the acumen and reasoned judgment to at least consider a different perspective. And yet this lack has become all too prevalent. Many will say that they find this question off-putting and will question why it is here at all; shouldn't we be posting poetry here, you say?! Right you are; and reading it too! And accepting the fact that others will be different than us (so obvious, non?), not only in style and aesthetic judgment, but also in opinion. So my questions to you are these: Are we more than words; do we deserve the dignity of people too? Are we justified in feeling anger towards others merely because of stylistic differences, or must we find some other justification (and what do you think that a reasonable justification would be)? Should we reject and cast away in frustration the things that frustrate us, or recognize in that frustration our longing to change, to embrace, to be better? Are we more than words, and are we ever known by the way we write? These are important questions that all poets, indeed all educated and responsible people, must answer for themselves -- again and again...
Please answer the question, address the issue... you only serve to illiustrate my point, and it needs no illustration.
neonman, I'm sorry for your confusion, but I'm not the person you speak of; of that I am certain.
I see faces here that I've never seen at one of my poems; you are welcome there too.
Thank you all for your wisdom (or whatever you remembered to bring, as the case may be). I am sure you have all done your best, and for that you are to be commended...
You are all known by the way you write, and yet each is a mystery, especially to himself. That is the tragedy and triumph, the illusion and inescapable reality, the majesty and utter poverty of language. The best things are unspoken, the second best misunderstood... life here, and elsewhere, is a temple of texts, and all should be opened, all should be read. Good evening...
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavorite Answer
You express yourself so well that further comment from me seems almost superfluous (and that's a first). You pose your question in such a way that it provides the heart of the answer in the asking, so if I may, I shall address some of the responses. The truth of what you say has been validated by the inane comments of some of your respondents so far. For Nonman to talk of credibility when he has just demolished any shred of his own by saying that all your/our multiple identities have been "tracked back" when such a thing is an impossibility is utterly ridiculous. Why is it impossible? I've given them the truth on a plate on numerous occasions, but still they refuse to believe it. That's an important factor in this discussion; their inability to recognize the truth when it is staring them in the face and has been confirmed to them many times by various people.
And what is this truth of which I speak? Simply this: None of them have ever encountered me under any identity other than my own - Iano. I am not Ari, An Honest Man, quaere verum, Alfred, Lord Tennyson, A Perfect Mirror, letmeout, Donny, Zelda Fitzgerald, AC Tesla, jack d, A Voice in the Wilderness, Robert Harrison, David M or, indeed, even ONE of the many other people I am suspected or accused of being. I DO have many other aliases, but they exist for another purpose than replying to my own questions, awarding myself best answer or "invading" their postings.
A simple point of logic should suffice here. I often award An Honest Man best answer, simply because it IS - completely on merit, as it were. He sometimes awards me the same recognition. If we were the same person and had been tracked back as is claimed, Yahoo would have taken steps to prevent this by now. The fact that it has not yet happened, will not happen, indeed, simply CANNOT happen, should put an end to that particular lie. Should, but won't, such is the unreasoning mob mentality that pervades this site. What I am saying (take note AM, I am spelling it out for you AGAIN) is that, as I am none of the aliases that some people think I am, there is nowhere to track back to. It is a trail which leads nowhere.
However, I am beginning to realize that wise men should not waste their wisdom on fools, they simply cannot appreciate it; it is like trying to teach Algebra to a 3 month old baby - a complete waste of time. Hence my ignoring the pointless and pathetic prattling of certain other of your respondents. (Apart from saying that a particular individual would have difficulty "detecting" her mouth with her fork at meal-times.)
Your question is one of the most thought-provoking ones ever to be aired on these pages - it's a shame that, with a few worthy exceptions, it will probably not receive the quality of answer it deserves. I hope my response at least touches the "hem of the garment".
- AngbeenLv 44 years ago
Mirrors The Amityville Horror The Eye The Exorcism of Emily Rose Sinister
- 1 decade ago
We are the words we speak even if it is in stumbling idiocy or brilliant poetry. We are the only ones who can express what we feel, the key is to find the tools to do so and make sure that we use them properly.
When I write, I am doing it for pure pleasure and not for critiques. If I should want someone to critique my work then I would ask for it.
What everyone needs to do first before asking for a critique is to understand that constructive criticism is part of growing. They must be able to accept the critic's words and gracefully work the ideas presented or kindly decline. Just because it is given does not mean it always has to be taken.
If all the inquisitor was doing in the first place was fishing for compliments, then they have brought themselves to the wrong place, because more oft than not, they will get the negative they do not desire.
In my opinion, we are what we write- the content comes from within, simplicity can be the most beautiful thing, or the most horrid if put together in the wrong manner. If one should want to be complicated and overly wordy or use colorful and descriptive words when expressing themselves then they need first to know how to do so or it turns out like a train wreck.
Good post even though you are also getting a few critics yourself. Interesting read if they actually make it through to the end, which I doubt some of them did.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Going straight to your questions 1. Yes we are more than words, even if we write about ourselves things which we are not. Words are only part of our make up. Remember the saying that action speaks louder than words, also that all of our our actions are preceded by a thought. 2. As for deserving dignity, everyone deserves dignity for there is good and bad in everybody. 3.Anger is never justified no matter the circumstance, if anger is warranted then it must be righteous anger.
4. Casting off that which frustrates us only leads us to passing up the opportunity of further learning, of accepting the challenge to resolve whatever is frustrating us. 5.To a certain degree we may be known by what we write, but our writing may also be a disguise as to who we really are, even to say that may render some truth as to our identity.
There is always something which is a part of us in what we write.
Something which is deep down inside of us and never reaches the surface except on the odd occasion when it rises to the surface in what we write. And as the thought always precedes the deed so I suppose "I think (write) therefore I am".
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Andrew MLv 61 decade ago
Well when critiquing some of the poetry on here Their are those who slam and belittle the poem and or the person ,,,Is that person justified in doing so?? ,,,
No,,,He or they enjoy doing it Most of the people that post here ,,could take some critiquing,,,And some cannot,,,, And most will not be kicked over a cliff They will stand up and say that person is wrong ,,,Have things gone too far ,,Sometimes,,,And I'll leave it at thatSource(s): As far as being Back-tracked The Mighty Mouth is wrong as usual Yes you could be back tracked
- Chara PointshotLv 41 decade ago
Before I answer your question(s), I would like to first applaud the brilliant Andrew M for an actual thought, however wrangled and indecipherable it is. He tried his very best and we should give him some modicum of credit.
TML is correct. There is a "mob mentality" around here. Almost McCarthy-esque. A state of mind that constantly has users accusing others of faking their identities. I can speak only for myself. I have one other alias. Sonnyboy Slim. I use him sometimes when the arrogant "poets" decide to "block" my critiques. Many of those offenders have responded to this question. Though I liked many of Neonman's poems. Sometimes cliques ruin it for everyone.
Yes, we are more than words and all of us deserve dignity when we earn it. If you are a deplorable human being like one sluething, blonde-haired witch above, who showcases her horrid soul everytime she shares her thoughts, then no; you don't deserve dignity.
Sorry for the jumbled response, but I am rushing to get to Halloween party. Had to answer, though.
- 1 decade ago
I think it is about emotional maturity. Who has it and who doesn't. Since we live in a world with others of different ages, socioeconomic, religious and cultural backgrounds it is reasonable to expect some conflict. Anger is not bad so long as you use it correctly. This is one way of determining where a person is on the 'maturity scale'.
You sound like a person who is constantly 'evolving', remaking yourself. That's interesting.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
Triumph's most well-known catch phrase is "... for me to poop on!", usually spoken to negate a compliment that precedes it, which normally appears at the end of a long diatribe or roast. An example would be, "But seriously, you've been a great audience ... for me to poop on!"
Another of Triumph's catch phrases is "I keed, I keed!", usually said at the end of a diatribe to imply that the puppet was only "kidding" when he made the insults. This is usually followed immediately by yet another string of insults. "I Keed" is also the title of a rap song written by Smigel in which the puppet lambasts celebrities, in a style similar to that of Eminem. The song appears on Triumph's solo album, Come Poop With Me.
At times Triumph will depart from his usual shtick and heap (perhaps sarcastic) praise on a particular celebrity; the highest honor Triumph bestows on those he thinks deserving is asking to sniff that person or character's butt. The very short list of people Triumph has deemed worthy of this honor includes Jennifer Lopez and the aforementioned Rickles
- neonmanLv 71 decade ago
Ari, you and your multiple personalities/aliases have simply lost credibility with most that frequent this forum. I find you gifted, knowledgeable and well read. Critiques from you would be valued except the past shenanigans of you and your various aliases have forever tainted any possibility to me of creating a meaningful dialogue in the future. I thank you for the question. This is my response. No further discussion is warranted.Source(s): Oh, but you are. Your have been tracked back.
- Anonymous1 decade ago
and the circle jerk continues.....I agree, yes agree, with TML, there will never be disclosure or exposure. As YA has "employees" in "places" here, their insular status and granted impunity, allow total freedom to behave in any fashion seen fit.
How odd, to point this out, in a statement denying it's existence. Or is it just brazen gall protected by the facts?