The King Has No Clothes

[vagantes]

We have to win in Afghanistan. Barack Obama: October 2008.

In the interests of moral and material improvement interference in Afghanistan has become a duty. Sir Henry Rawlinson:1868

Our proper course is not to advance beyond our present border, not send troops into the different states of Central Asia; but to put our own house in order. Sir John Lawrence: 1869.


No war ever achieved material improvement for the victor.
All wars were and are preventable.
When we honour the illustrious dead,
Who lie at Arlington and in the quiet cemetries of Normandy
And the villages of England and Germany,
Not to mention Vietnam and Iraq and a thousand other places,
We honour the stinking refuse created by old men's lies and cupidity.
When the veterans tell their stories to children, we smear their faces
With blood and crap spilled to benefit the moneymen
Sneering with their whores in comfortable towers.

The King is in the altogether.
He's altogether as naked
As the day that he was born.

Look at the King, the King, the King.

[blazeofglory]

This is a wonderful poem in point of fact it unravels the thing war creates.

[qimissung]

When I think of war I always think of the lines from that 80's song "99 Red Balloons": "The war machine springs to life, opens up one eager eye."

Very savage and very accurate, vagantes.

[breathtest]

It is good to see a protest poem on this sight, especially one so gracious.....

[paperleaves]

"When the veterans tell their stories to children, we smear their faces
With blood and crap spilled to benefit the moneymen
Sneering with their whores in comfortable towers."

This is a wonderful end to the poem, a dark view that seemingly illuminates the disgusting nature of man when plagued by manifestations of greed, lust, etc. Wondrous work, yet again, and keep posting, my friend!

[MANICHAEAN]

"All wars were and are preventable"
Come on. Gengis Khan & the Goldern Hoard, the wars that saw the decline of the Roman Empire. In World War II appeasement was tried & Hitler saw it as a sign of weakness.
In Bosnia the UN played upon the vacillating until forced to take action.
In the playground, the bully will intimidate you until you take him on.
All the stuff about: old mens lies & cupidity, benefiting the moneymen & sneering with their whores shows a total lack of historical perspective. Your intentions are most probably sincere and I have always maintained that there is no such thing as a negative virtue with regard to self expression, but brother you are "dan la lune!"

[vagantes]

History tells us there was always an alternative to slaughtering other human beings.

The epigraphs to the poem deserve some attention in the way they undercut each other as well as the poem.

Obama represents the world view that the Afghan state must be fixed to counter global terrorism. The US and its allies have humanitarian and security objectives which mutually reinforce each other. Moreover, as opposed to Iraq, intervention is sanctioned by international law. Al-Qaida has shed the blood of innocent people and it is right to prevent them. We need to defeat the Taliban to build a state and we must build a state to defeat the Taliban: " security and humanitarian concerns are all part of one project".

This policy rests on misleading ideas about moral obligation and the relationship between moral objectives and the value of a sovereign state.

Sir Henry Rawlinson was a member of the Council of India and his comments were about the threat of a Russian presence in Afghanistan in 1868. He wanted to promote the modern idea of governance, which is to do with interference in the affairs of a state.

In 1869 Sir John Lawrence the new viceroy of India spoke against Rawlinson's ideas. He produced an argument which was contingent, empirical and local, rooted in a specific landscape and time. Here he imagines what would happen if the Russians invaded:
"let them undergo the long and tiresome marches which lie between the Oxus and the Indus; let them wend their way through poor and difficult countries among a fanatic and courageous population, where, in many places, every mile can be converted into a defensible position.....".

He concludes with the sentiments expressed in the epigraph.

Lawrence is writing literature disguised as formal prose. The adjectives are emotive. There are repetitions which mirror the subject matter. The concessive subjunctive reflects uncertainty.

And as the body bags start to come home it is highly prophetic about the fate of military adventures in Afghanistan.

Wars are begun for profit; they are also wasteful.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Not only has the king no clothes but he desires that we be naked as well.

[MANICHAEAN]

Sorry Vagantes.
If the poem is going to represent a denoted act, (war) not as a fact but as contingent, or viewed emotionally, fine. But then we get: "History tells us there was always an alternative to slaughtering other human beings". We have now jumped out of the subjunctive. You know a word by the company it keeps. What are the alternatives: negotiation, compromise, surrender, turn the other cheek, fatalism, embargoes, sanctions, the UN, Star Wars, the Great Wall of China, jaw/jaw is better than war/war?
In many cases in the modern context these might be both feasible & desirable. But I've mentioned possible historical scenarios where they were not.

[paperleaves]

MANICHAEAN, I don't want to sound rude, but I don't understand what it is you are getting at? I would like to give my opinion, but I don't fully picture your point. Please do explain. I believe the poem is a wonderful expression of the DEEPER motives to war. The greed, the lust, the savage manner in which man thinks at times...I'm not a big history buff, but it seems apparent to me that this is accurate in portraying many scenes of war and conflict..

[billl]

I'm not wild about how it seems to be saying we can't honor the illustrious dead without honoring those that profited financially. What are we supposed to do? Shake our heads like those people effed-up trying to turn back Hitler or whatever? There are a-holes on all sides, and sometimes, it isn't all about monetary greed. There are other sicknesses, insecurities, and power-plays involved in conflicts great and small.

I think this poem derives its power from over-simplification, I think that's pretty clear. It's just a poem, and I was able to appreciate it, and think about how some fat-cats got fatter, and stole some bonus "justification" from the sacrifice of fallen conscripts. That's an excellent point. But it isn't the whole story.

[MANICHAEAN]

paperleaves
Sorry. We just appear to be at different ends of the spectrum on this. I appreciate your looking at this contribution from Vagantes via the perspective of: meaning, depth & emotion.
I'm a more hard nosed, "history buff" & should perhaps stick to that. If you read my initial response you will see that I am simply giving examples of where war is inevitable, that it should be faced up to for what it is and that there is nothing dishonourable in doing so.
War profiteering is a different issue. There is an ugly side to most things and this is even more perverse when some men are dying, whilst others are making money from the whole process & "sneering with their whores in comfortable towers!"

[vagantes]

To begin with: nothing is inevitable - that is like saying that everything is pre-ordained. So if we abandon the idea of inevitability we celebrate intelligence which coming from humanity would of necessity shy away from the extinction of life, because there is no benefit and where is the logic in doing something which can only cause self-harm.

[MarkBastable]

The moral of the poem seems to be that a sensible person should strive to become one of the moneymen sneering with their whores in comfortable towers. I'll work on that.

[vagantes]

There is a genre of poetry which comes out of Laurence Binyon ("For the Fallen") that seeks to muffle pain, evil and death in an undemanding poetic version of patriotism which has transcended art to produce an affirmation of over-simplistic attitudes toward war which appears to be dangerously self-perpetuating.

My poem denies this vision.

Far be it from me to provide history lessons, but it might be as well to point out that the Second World War grew out of the humiliation imposed on the German people at the end of the First World War which created a climate ripe for the patriotic excesses of Hitler.

My poem seeks to deny this outcome.

[MANICHAEAN]

Good. You have grasped the essence of the conditions imposed by the Allies on the Germans at the end of World War 1, which facilitated: hyper-inflation, unemployment, national humiliation and the man himself. As phrased by Churchill;"After the end of the First World War there opened up in the life of the German people a tremendous void, and, after a pause there strode into that void, a maniac of ferocious genius, the repository and self expression of the most virulent hatred that has ever corroded the human breast. Corporal Hitler."
Now answer a simple question. How do you stop him?

[vagantes]

By writing a poem like mine.

[MarkBastable]

By writing a poem like mine.

Well, that should have the moneymen cowering in their comfortable towers.

[billl]

I think the post-war humiliation experienced by Germany is definitely deserving of criticism, and is largely (but I really doubt entirely) a result of economic greed/selfishness.

Would you say that your poem also supports the idea of surrender to Hitler's ambition? Would your poem have been a suitable defense against him, in reality?

It is fine to look at history, and say bad things shouldn't have happened. But those who are wronged have a right to seek a way, apart from just accepting harm from oppressors. What did Poland do wrong before WWII? Didn't the British try appeasement?

Anyhow, I think it is an interesting poem, and it seems to me an instance of emotion, and very powerfully done. Really, too much analysis does harm to the art, and I tried to stay away. :) Whatever the complicated truth is, I would definitely say that your poem expresses a part of it.

[MANICHAEAN]

Dear vagantes
Truce.
If I have in any way been offensive in this debate, I apologise.
Best regards
M.

[vagantes]

Can a poem deflect a dictator?

Here is Shelley trying to answer your questions:

"Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration, the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present, the words which express what they understand not, the trumpets which sing to battle and feel not what they inspire: the influence which moves not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the World".

[MarkBastable]

Can a poem deflect a dictator?

Here is Shelley trying to answer your questions:

"Poets are the hierophants of an unapprehended inspiration, the mirrors of the gigantic shadows which futurity casts upon the present, the words which express what they understand not, the trumpets which sing to battle and feel not what they inspire: the influence which moves not, but moves. Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of the World".

This is a poet talking, of course.

If you were to ask a bagel seller whether bagel sellers could influence the course of history, you'd be told that, were it not for bagel sellers the planet would be a very different place, and that the unseen hand of the bagel seller had steered humanity unerringly for centuries. Bagel sellers, you would learn, are the unacknowledged legislators of the World.

Then again, hierophant is not a word you see enough of these days. At least, not outside the Tarot deck.

[MarkBastable]

If it helps to quote famous people who agree with us, by the way, I'd say that Woody Allen's comment about satire covers all kinds of writing, including poetry.

"Satire is great - but for Nazis you use baseball bats and broken bottles."

[vagantes]

Can you hear the clip-clop of hooves going over the bridge?

You're out of your league my friend.

[MarkBastable]

....double post....

[MarkBastable]

Can you hear the clip-clop of hooves going over the bridge?

You're out of your league my friend.

It really upsets you to be disagreed with, doesn't it?

Incidentally, I don't have any problem with your poem, although I think the premise is a bit adolescent. I do however find your high opinion of it quite hard to take.

[vagantes]

You wouldn't be flaming , would you, old fruit?

[MarkBastable]

You wouldn't be flaming , would you, old fruit?


No, I'm disagreeing with you.

Is it so difficult for you to conceive of the notion that someone might not share your view that you have to put any expression of dissent down to some mischievous and self-serving motive?

Honestly - I simply think you're mistaken, and I'm saying so.

[vagantes]

Can you remember what you were disagreeing with me about?

So far, what you have done is make a series of shallow smart-alec rejoinders which appear to have no purpose other than to wind someone up. Now that may ease the pain you obviously feel, but it doesn't really advance matters , now does it?

Or perhaps it does in the mind of a troll.

Why don't you spit out what's bugging you and it might make you feel better, or do you prefer feeling all hurt and bewildered?

[MarkBastable]

Can you remember what you were disagreeing with me about?

So far, what you have done is make a series of shallow smart-alec rejoinders which appear to have no purpose other than to wind someone up. Now that may ease the pain you obviously feel, but it doesn't really advance matters , now does it?

Or perhaps it does in the mind of a troll.

Why don't you spit out what's bugging you and it might make you feel better, or do you prefer feeling all hurt and bewildered?

Smart-alec, certainly. But not shallow.

However, as you ask....

I don't think that the poem addresses the complexities of the issue that it purports to illuminate.

I disagree that poetry often infleunces the sweep of history, as much as I love the form.

I can't see that an argument is really supported by digging out a quotation from a writer who seems to concur, because all that happens is someone else digs out a quotation from someone else who doesn't.

[vagantes]

Your language is becoming somewhat stilted which reflects strain of thought.

The poem's title might self-reflect, might it not? or has that not crossed your mind?

Shelley is saying that poetry can be a big idea; for instance the National Health Service was a poem.

The quote is there to suggest ways of thinking not to provide ammunition for keyboard warriors, or do you depend upon conflict to provide you with kudos? or are brownie points more to the mark?

[MarkBastable]

Your language is becoming somewhat stilted which reflects strain of thought.

The poem's title might self-reflect, might it not? or has that not crossed your mind?

Shelley is saying that poetry can be a big idea; for instance the National Health Service was a poem.

The quote is there to suggest ways of thinking not to provide ammunition for keyboard warriors, or do you depend upon conflict to provide you with kudos? or are brownie points more to the mark?

As I say, you don't like being disagreed with.

[vagantes]

Of course, only the mediocre are afraid of the obvious.

[MarkBastable]

Of course, only the mediocre are afraid of the obvious.

As supportable propositions go, that's right up there with 'cleanliness is next to godliness' and 'only the good die young'.

[vagantes]

Self-evident then is it not?

[qimissung]

You know vagantes, I liked your poem, but enough already. An argument exists for it's own sake, much like a poem. You do yourself a disservice when you pesonalize it in such an ugly way.

[vagantes]

Which is why we need the small voice to point out that the king has no clothes.

[MarkBastable]

As an observational aside, vagantes - of your fifty-eight posts, about fifty are in threads you started yourself, and the vast majority of those consist either of your poetry, or of your own discourse about your poetry.

[vagantes]

Ahhhhhhh.

I do tend to mind my own business, which is a policy I would recommend.

[MarkBastable]

Ahhhhhhh.

I do tend to mind my own business, which is a policy I would recommend.

It wouldn't be much of a discussion forum if people didn't discuss, would it?

However, if you don't think we should do that, it would imply that you don't post your poems for comment - just for silent admiration.

[vagantes]

I recommend a reading of Bartleby the Scrivener.