A few lines composed upon eparting from a Brothel

[Alexander III]

A Few Lines Composed Upon Departing From A Brothel In Antwerp


I sat her on my lap. She began to cry and scream and tear her hair with thin arms. She kicked her feet and spat in my face, as I placed a laurel on her brow. She bit down into the flowers of blue and yellow and purple, ripping off their petals with stained and moonlit teeth. Petals shrieking, as they touched the sandy ground.
Wine and honey wither on the sand, beneath her shifting eyes. Eyes wide as a thought, engulfing stars like atoms between emptiness.
I fall to my knees and beg and cry like the coward that I am. She walks away, one step at a time vanishing into that endless tapestry of sun and sand - shimmering whiteness like a gasping suffocation. She has abandoned me in the desert, so that I may squirm, like I saw her squirm during my nightless banquets. The denouement of our dream.

[hillwalker]

One surmises the narrator mistook this brothel for a theatre where he was hoping to take part in a rather melodramatic Greek tragedy.

A classic case of style over content.

H

[PrinceMyshkin]

I'm reminded of Rimbaud's Le Bateau Ivre. This is furious and vividly disordered!

[Jack of Hearts]

Well this reader doesn't really know what it's about. Some of the figurative language is questionable- it's already given at the expense of basic comprehension, but understanding how the images link together seems impossible. Then there's general clumsiness in phrases like 'moonlit teeth.' No idea why the narrator is a 'coward' or why whoever 'she' is is mad at him.

This reader is reminded of a quote by Thornton Wilder:


“If you write to impress it will always be bad, but if you write to express it will be good.”






J

Yikes. As an edit, this reader must apologize. He doesn't like the implications of his last response.

What he was mostly trying to say was that the piece seems to focus too much on trying to be 'beautiful writing' rather than genuine expression. What he didn't mean to imply was that its author or its author's skill was inferior in any way.

Mea culpa.







J

[Alexander III]

Do not worry Jack, I know all points made on this forums are critiques of technique and art soley, not the person.

As always I thank those who responded for showing me alternative perceptions of my work. It helps me mature as a writer, so I assure you there is no need to apologize.

[Jack of Hearts]

Well another thing is this reader doesn't want to discourage you from sharing. That would detract from the better nature of these boards. Your writing is not worthless. This reader hopes you'll share again; hopes you'll try to grow as a writer like the rest of us try to do as well.




All the best,




J

[WolfLarsen]

This is great! I think this guy really rocks! This piece is beautifully disturbing! I don't understand why some of the above readers say they did not understand what was going on. Anyway, this guy can write. One of the many things I like from this poster is that I never know what delirious words will flow when I click on one of his pieces. I like that. I like the unpredictability. Pay no attention to some of the harsh words of the above critics. In fact, I won't mention names, but when certain people hate a piece you know it's going to be good!

[xtianfriborg13]

I can make out the images you portrayed in your work. I liked it so much!

[cacian]

Ha! I wondered what EPARTING meant now I know.:p

[miyako73]

I like the tone and the style. It evokes a certain period-- maybe during the time of Rimbaud. I like to think the writer was high from opium or hashish or drunk from absinthe when he wrote this one. It seems like a long babble of an expressive writer who struggled to convey his thoughts.

[WolfLarsen]

I read this piece again. I love it again! There are so many people throughout the Internet trying to write in this kind of style (neo-romantic) and it usually comes out so lame and stale. But Alexander makes it work over & over again! His writing is fresh!

I have no idea if it's Alexander's intention to be neo-romantic. Maybe what I just said about neo-romantic is a bunch of nonsense. It's better not to get hung up on labels, and just throw all the demons inside of you on the page and worry about labels later! That's what those idiot critics are supposed to do anyway – come up with labels like Impressionism, cubism, fauvism, etc.