Is this a poem?

[osho]

Can you confine poetry within your definitions or preconception? That is what you love to do in the name of style, language, grammar and regional differences like parole, langue, dialect. This is trash and though it has to do a little to do with these outer veneers. Poetry rise above and beyond these peripherals. You through your pedantic sophism try to define it within certain borderlines. But it flows like a stream traversing your tapering tapestries.

Poetry is your heart unfurled
Your bone uncovered

Poetry is the Buddha manifest
A third coming of Jesus

Poetry is all your unknowns documented
And parceled in articulations.

Do not smear it with your logical claptrap

Do you want to see beauty in nudity?

The sky can be contained in your palm

That is in your verbosity in a juxtaposed context.

I am here to share with you the feeling muffled within me

For want of your rejoinder

In wait eternally to answer the riddle of life and reality


You think all my ideas of poetry is ludicrous
So be it

[cl154576]

I suppose you could call it one, but I don't see the point of labeling forms so precisely. Anything is fine as long as it's good writing.

The beginning 'paragraph' sounds more like part of an essay, though. The sudden shift in style from there on comes rather awkwardly, and the last 'stanza' isn't convincing. Overall, the 'poem' is far too preachy. This would be more suitable for an essay topic, but if you rephrased all of it and cut some words out it could probably be somewhat poetic.

[osho]

I crazed for your comment and that proved my tipping point.

I never wanted to systematized my lines in the commonplace poetic parlance. I wanted it to be un-poetically impacting. This has gladdened me, your pressing comment.

Poetry needs to transcend the set parameters, something above and beyond the usual. There are zillions of poems and that did not impress me and I wanted to break through those casualness.

I do not opt for a mass of commentators and literary pundits to critique it. A few who can penetrate the inside or the soul of it suffices.

[hillwalker]

'un-poetically impacting' - you write that there are zillions of poems that failed to impress you then give us this.

Unfortunately it's like so much that's passed off as pseudo-mystical pearls of wisdom when in fact anyone could come up with similar stuff. It's not poetry as such - although the first line of the opening couplet has potential - but what follows are little more than aphorisms really, hardly earth shattering or enlightening. Not so much 'logical claptrap' as 'illogical claptrap'.

H

[cl154576]

I crazed for your comment and that proved my tipping point.

I never wanted to systematized my lines in the commonplace poetic parlance. I wanted it to be un-poetically impacting. This has gladdened me, your pressing comment.

Poetry needs to transcend the set parameters, something above and beyond the usual. There are zillions of poems and that did not impress me and I wanted to break through those casualness.

I do not opt for a mass of commentators and literary pundits to critique it. A few who can penetrate the inside or the soul of it suffices.

I like innovation in writing, but there are innovators, and then there are weak writers who excuse their weakness by calling it an innovation.

I'm sorry, but your piece does not convince me.