Incomplete

[Hawkman]

I ought to write, I know,
But nowadays my heart’s not in it.
Every time I have a go
I look at what I’ve writ - and bin it.

Don’t seem to have a thing to say
to anyone, from day to day,
no pictures in the mind to paint
with words in ink that’s far too faint…

Sometimes I will make a start
and think, ‘Ah yes, perhaps it’s good’
then I falter, dreams depart
and I give up, becau

[hillwalker]

Not so much writer's block as w

[Jeos]

Why did you...? I was liking it...! Killjoy ;-)

[paradoxical]

The rhyme seems forced and the words "ought" and "writ" don't seem appropriate; perhaps a bit archaic. Did you chose them for the syllable count?

Also, "words in ink that's far too faint"..."that's", of course, is a contraction of "that is". Wouldn't "that are" be correct and not "that is"? And if these are words in your mind, why would the ink be too faint? Although I guess I can see the metaphor in this.

It also appears that you have a typo at the end. The last line is not complete. But overall, not bad and I thought it was a little catchy.

[Hawkman]

hill: I think you mean writer's b :D

Jeos: for the fun of it, of course :devil:

paradoxical: What on earth is archaic about acknowledging one ought to do something? It's an infinitve expressing an obligation or duty. It seems you have completely missed the point. Forced rhyme? It's playful and humorously ironic, rather emphasised by the incompleteness of a poem called "Incomplete."

Lastly, the ink is singular: ink that is, inks that are. Therefore the contraction of 'that is' to that's is perfectly correct, both grammatically and syntactically.

Thanks for reading.

Live and be well - H

[paradoxical]

[paradoxical: What on earth is archaic about acknowledging one ought to do something? It's an infinitve expressing an obligation or duty.

I agree that the word ought may not be archaic but most people would say they should do something, not ought to do something. But I do believe the word writ is archaic. No one says writ anymore, they would say written. But that would mess up the rhythm of the poem in that line, which is what I meant by forced. You will often advise people to change certain words that you feel don't work, which is why I wanted to point it out to you. You know, what's good for the goose and all that...


It seems you have completely missed the point. Forced rhyme? It's playful and humorously ironic, rather emphasised by the incompleteness of a poem called "Incomplete."

I get that it was playful and about writer's block and all. Like I said, I thought that overall it wasn't bad.


Lastly, the ink is singular: ink that is, inks that are. Therefore the contraction of 'that is' to that's is perfectly correct, both grammatically and syntactically.

The word "that's" seems to be referring to words and not ink, in which case you would certainly not use "that is". The line seems confusing and I think it could be done better but I can see that if you are refering to ink then it is certainly the right contraction. I stand corrected.

[Charles Darnay]

I still use the word ought....but perhaps I am a bit of an archaist myself.

Also, and I apologize to drag technicalities where it probably doesn't belong, the "that's" is referring to "ink." If there were commas to separate "in ink" from the rest of the phrase, then you would be right.

But all this is beside the point.

[Jack of Hearts]

Well





J

[hillwalker]

I agree that the word ought may not be archaic but most people would say they should do something, not ought to do something.

A strange assertion to make. Perhaps you ought to read a little more contemporary English fiction. If you did, you should be able to see that both words are still in current use.

H

[DocHeart]

Can I finish the last line?

"And I give up, 'cause I need food."

Thanks for sharing, Hawk. If you're going to deal with writer's block, that's the way to deal with it!

DH

[Alexander III]

Bravo, I admit I don't lurk this alley of the forums as much as before but this is a fine gem to find. I think this the finest poem I have seen on these boards in a few months.


Also Writ and Ought are perfectly common words, I use them in everyday conversation as do many other people at university. Is it not sad that nowadays "writ" is deemed an archaic word?

[paradoxical]

A strange assertion to make. Perhaps you ought to read a little more contemporary English fiction. If you did, you should be able to see that both words are still in current use.

How clever. Perhaps you should not make assumptions about me. I can assure you that I am well read and I continue to read contemporary English fiction. With that said, what do you mean by contemporary? Texts which are 50 years old or older may be considered contemporary but they often continue words and phrases which have fallen out of fashion.

I realize the word is still in current use. I use it myself at times. However, I still think that it is both more formal and less commonly used then should. Beginning a poem with "I ought" just doesn't sound right to me and I think most modern readers would find it old fashioned. That's my opinion and if you diasgree, that's cool.

You mentioned that if I read more I should be able to see that this word is in current use but perhaps you prefer older texts in which words like this are more common. I could see it being used in contemporary prose but not for dialog set in the present time unless you wanted your character to sound more formal. Some people still use words such as shan't or shall. However, you wouldn't use this in modern fiction unless your character was eccentric or something. For contemporary dialog, you want your characters to sound as believable as possible, slang and all. That's just the way I see it.

[hillwalker]

'I ought to punch you on the nose' or 'You ought to take a chill pill,' are both examples of perfectly normal, contemporary dialogue. And by contemporary I mean 2012 not 1952. My response was merely a light-hearted way to show that 'ought' and 'should' are both still in common usage.

The fact that you don't use the word 'ought' is hardly proof that 'most people' would say 'they should'. Strange that I can't make assumptions about you but you can make unfounded assertions about everyone else.

H

[Hawkman]

My thanks to all of you who have read, commented, or just joined in the debate on the relative contemporaneous merit of certain word choices. :D

Particular thanks to Doc & A3: Doc, you are more than welcome to conclude the poem any way you like, I kind of hoped someone might suggest their own ending :)

A3: that's very generous of you, I'm not sure it's the best thing here for a while, but I'm genuinely pleased that you enjoyed it so much. I was just riffing :)

Jack: a word from you is always welcome, especially a deep one...

Thanks again to CD, hill, and the Pink Floyd fan. For all the bumps

Live and be well - H

[Jack of Hearts]

Jack: a word from you is always welcome, especially a deep one...

Groan.









J

[Jerrybaldy]

Errrmm. Is it just me or is EVERYTHING getting over analysed on here lately? Nothing like a group of poets to rip each other to shreds :D

When there is some preaching going on I am all for it. This was a poem about being unable to write a poem wasn't it? Thats a testiment to our errmm art. Is there a picture drawn in reference to being unable to draw? Plenty I have seen :D Happy days. Fun to read Hawk and of course highly relateable. So I am told haha.
best wishes
JB

[paradoxical]

'I ought to punch you on the nose' or 'You ought to take a chill pill,' are both examples of perfectly normal, contemporary dialogue. And by contemporary I mean 2012 not 1952. My response was merely a light-hearted way to show that 'ought' and 'should' are both still in common usage.

Sorry, but to my ears, your dialog sounds stitled and unauthentic. Speaking for myself only, nobody, and I mean nobody I know would ever say anything like "I ought to punch you on the nose," or even "You ought to take a chill pill." "You oughta take a chill pill," or "I oughta punch you right in your ****ing mouth!" or something, yea, practicaly everyone I know says things like that, but there's a difference. Remember how I mentioned slang? That's what I would use for dialog: What someone my age and in my location would actually say. That's just me, but it's also pretty much what you would hear across America and on movies or TV. Maybe it has to do with the age difference as well. If someone said, all proper like, "I ought to punch you on the nose," I would think they sounded out of touch and a bit silly.


The fact that you don't use the word 'ought' is hardly proof that 'most people' would say 'they should'. Strange that I can't make assumptions about you but you can make unfounded assertions about everyone else.

Well I told you that I do use the word. Ocassionaly in the proper way if in a formal setting, but mostly the slang word oughta. Otherwise, I just use the word should. I'm not making assertions about everyone else, and they should write what they know so that it sounds authentic to them and their culture and time. This is all just my opinion and a reflection of what I hear in the media and what everyone around me says. That's what I meant by beginning the poem with "I ought." I didn't think most modern readers would go for that, but I suppose I'm wrong. I'm sure that it's different in Britain and I don't doubt that the people around you probably say "ought" rather then "oughta" or "should."

And I didn't see anything light-hearted in your comment. In fact, you seem pretty angry to me. Wasn't it your anger that caused you to "leave the building" in the first place?

[Jerrybaldy]

Litnet has disappeared up its own a ss and will return to normal service after these words from our sponsors. Tony the Tiger says "they're Grrrreat". Now back to our main feature..............

[Bar22do]

I was just riffing, as you say, the result is entertaining, for you can rhyme as you breathe, even about the writer's block. Though the subject here is loosing momentum, is it not.
For the rest, I've always loved more your serious (not meant for entertainment) poems that had the guts to stand here without make up and were dazzling.

[qimissung]

R e m i n d e r

Please refrain from posting in this section of the Forum

if you feel you are unable to show respect towards those who do not share your thoughts and beliefs.

Posts containing personal and/or inflammatory comments will be removed without further warning.

[miyako73]

I agree with paradoxical. Ought is not a commonly used word. I'm very observant when it comes to English since it is my second language. In all my writing classes in the US, I seldom heard "ought" in our workshop readings--poetry or short fiction. "Should" is very common. Maybe in Britain, it's a different case; I don't know.

Also, "writ" is a noun. Maybe "could've writ" is an archaic expression. The "writ" I know is a legal document.

I don't really care if archaic words are resurrected as long as purpose and consistency are evident.

[hillwalker]

Maybe in Britain, it's a different case; I don't know.

Perhaps now would be a good time to note that the OP and I both live on this side of the puddle where the word 'ought' is still widely used. End of discussion.

H

PS


Wasn't it your anger that caused you to "leave the building" in the first place?

Not so much anger as total frustration at being stalked by a dimwitted troll. :devil:

[Alexander III]

I agree with paradoxical. Ought is not a commonly used word. I'm very observant when it comes to English since it is my second language. In all my writing classes in the US, I seldom heard "ought" in our workshop readings--poetry or short fiction. "Should" is very common. Maybe in Britain, it's a different case; I don't know.

Also, "writ" is a noun. Maybe "could've writ" is an archaic expression. The "writ" I know is a legal document.

I don't really care if archaic words are resurrected as long as purpose and consistency are evident.

To be fair if one were to aspire to the language of the common man, one would have to write like one had never read a book in their life before, as the common man is prone to be utterly ignorant when it comes to poetry.

[Hawkman]

JB: thanks for reading. Actually I wouldn't say this poem has been analysed at all - though a lot of guff has been spouted based on ignorance and erroneous assumption. Glad you enjoyed it anyway :D

Bar: I like to entertain people. The world needs entertainers. It's a serious business. As far as writing some seriously unentertaining poetry goes, I just don't feel up to it at the moment. I lack the inspiration and I'd rather write something amusing well than write a bad serious poem. It's better than not writing at all.

Live and be well - H

PS continued thanks to all the other contributors to this thread who've given me a good laugh.

H

[Jack of Hearts]

I lack the inspiration and I'd rather write something amusing well than write a bad serious poem. It's better than not writing at all.

Never fear M Hawk. Jack of Hearts can show you how to write some seriously bad poetry!






J

[Hawkman]

Fortunately Jack, you can also write some that is seriously good.

Live and be well - H

[Jack of Hearts]

Well thanks. But let's not forget who started the Great 'Ought/Should' Controversy of 2012. This reader hasn't seen the word 'ought' take such a beating since David Hume had his way with it.








J

[Hawkman]

LOL! Well considering Hume was writing in the 18th century then I guess it could be argued that his opinions are archaic :lol:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is%E2%80%93ought_problem

Live and be well - :devil:

[miyako73]

I found this one arrogant:

"though a lot of guff has been spouted based on ignorance and erroneous assumption."

If I were a "back-scratcher", I would say your poem was brilliant. I always avoid joining a patronizing chorus.

Archaic words in contemporary or informal themes and issues? According to one of my published poet teachers, "Thy and Thou sound arrogant to me if you are writing about the red buttons of your white shirt."

[Jerrybaldy]

'Ought' is as common here as mother****er is there. It is completely every day language, surprised to find its not everywhere. Or maybe I ought to be surprised. No, I actually am. Its used by everybody I know. Just another transatlantic difference then. I have to report though that we have switched Gaol for Jail and we are consuming Mcdonalds like we all want to wear checked trousers and build more golf courses.

[AuntShecky]

Also, "words in ink that's far too faint"..."that's", of course, is a contraction of "that is". Wouldn't "that are" be correct and not "that is"? And if these are words in your mind, why would the ink be too faint? Although I guess I can see the metaphor in this.

.

Actually "That's" is correct, not "they are." The last previously mentioned noun is "ink," which of course is singular. I mention this cautiously because I'm often a prime offender when it comes to noun/pronoun (or noun/verb) agreement. Not only do my nouns and verbs disagree-- sometimes they engage in out-and-out warfare!

As the the OP's verse itself, I think it's a good example of light verse, in which rhyme and archaic expressions can be used for comic effect. I loved the truncated ending as well!

[paradoxical]

I found this one arrogant:

"though a lot of guff has been spouted based on ignorance and erroneous assumption."


You're absolutely right. I thought this comment was way out of line.

[miyako73]

For some reason, I feel like I'm being challenged, and it's a good thing. So let me do my close-reading.

I ought to write, I know,
But nowadays my heart’s not in it.
Every time I have a go
I look at what I’ve writ - and bin it.

You look at what you've written, and it's obvious you can read it. So, no ink problem there.

Don’t seem to have a thing to say
to anyone, from day to day,
no pictures in the mind to paint
with words in ink that’s far too faint…

In my reading here, the "far too faint" are the words. So, "that are" is appropriate. It can't be the ink. The ink being "far too faint" sounds verbally tortured and less poetic. It's the words that are far and faint because they are spoken and heard, and the theme is writer's block or writer's lost voice. Besides, it's previously said that "no pictures in the mind", and ink is an image. I don't think you have that image in mind. C'mon let's be honest here.

If you want consistency and clarity, this one will definitely help your readers:

no pictures in the mind to paint
with words in ink that are far too faint…

[Hawkman]

Hi Auntie, thanks for reading and for your comment. Glad you enjoyed it. :)

Live and be well - H

[miyako73]

I know your style is to ignore, but I won't stop. It seems writer's block is not your problem but the "far too faint" ink. Buy a new pen.

[Haunted]

A fun light read and despite the writer's block standing in the way of a more meaty subject, it redeems itself with a clever ending and totally portrays a brain freeze.

But holy jamoly, what's all the back and forth over what is archaic and what is not? It reminds me of an incident where I was in the office and the A/C was blasting and I said, "I"m cold." A woman who was not the sharpest knife in the drawer replied, "You are not cold."

DUH.

OK, in case anyone missed the point, some things are unequivocal. Like how you feel. Or THREE native and local speakers saying "ought" is widely used where they live. What's to argue? It's a fact for crying out loud.

Personally I didn't notice any irregularities with the language. "Writ" stopped me for a second but rhyming poems have more leeway with a archaic usages as rhymes go back like, forever. It's a matter of style in this case.

And of course, the poet has explained the reason for using "that's" and resident teacher Auntie verified it's grammatically correct and handed it an A, so let's accept it and stop beating a dead horse.

and that's my 2 cents.


I know your style is to ignore, but I won't stop. It seems writer's block is not your problem but the "far too faint" ink. Buy a new pen.

:beatdeadhorse5:

This disparaging remark is a bit uncalled for, methink.

@miyako73
In polite society, when one doesnt' agree but deem it pointless to argue, the rule of engagement is "no comment". You hear it a lot on TV, rather than getting into a shouting match. To you it's "ignore" but it signifies the end of conversation and I suggest that you take it as a hint and leave it alone graciously.

[miyako73]

"And of course, the poet has explained the reason for using "that's" and resident teacher Auntie verified it's grammatically correct and handed it an A, so let's accept it and stop beating a dead horse."

The problem is not the grammar but the elevation of ink that contradicts the previous statements about "no pictures in mind" and "look what I've writ" and ruins the consistency of thoughts.



"This disparaging remark is a bit uncalled for, methink.

@miyako73

In polite society, when one doesnt' agree but deem it pointless to argue, the rule of engagement is "no comment". You hear it a lot on TV, rather than getting into a shouting match. To you it's "ignore" but it signifies the end of conversation and I suggest that you take it as a hint and leave it alone graciously."

So, this one is not disparaging?

"though a lot of guff has been spouted based on ignorance and erroneous assumption."

I guess Kool-Aid is really delicious.

"In polite society, when one doesnt' agree but deem it pointless to argue, the rule of engagement is "no comment". You hear it a lot on TV, rather than getting into a shouting match. To you it's "ignore" but it signifies the end of conversation and I suggest that you take it as a hint and leave it alone graciously."

In a sound and civil discourse, where reason not silence reigns supreme, resorting to ad hominems is not only idiotic but also intellectually barbaric.

[Alexander III]

"In polite society, when one doesnt' agree but deem it pointless to argue, the rule of engagement is "no comment". You hear it a lot on TV, rather than getting into a shouting match. To you it's "ignore" but it signifies the end of conversation and I suggest that you take it as a hint and leave it alone graciously."

In a sound and civil discourse, where reason not silence reigns supreme, resorting to ad hominems is not only idiotic but also intellectually barbaric.

To be fair, he is not arguing you because based on what you said before in this thread, clearly reason is not your strong point. You don't use those words and think them archaic. And you talked as if you were the world. Many others came forth and said those were not archaic but common, and you were unwilling to accept the fact that what you know of the world is the not the same as what others know of the world - thus it is pointless to argue with you or discuss because in this thread, you are the one who has shown narrowness of thought.

[miyako73]

One thing I haven't done in this thread is to slight someone as ignorant. As to archaic words, I based my statements on my experience in workshops where archaic words are frowned upon if the theme is contemporary and less formal where elevated prose and highfalutin poetics will sound arrogant and are uncalled for.

Besides, I even qualified my statement by saying maybe "ought" is commonly used in Britain. If it sounds I am too affected, it's because of this statement:

"though a lot of guff has been spouted based on ignorance and erroneous assumption."

[zoolane]

Everyone get wrong side of grammar in writing once well, some more then other.
Obvious in different countries, you have vary origin of city or town and accent, the slang different.

So big deal if a term or word is used in poem, whether it link into the stanza or mean of poem. Sure writer should be able used what words they think better for their work.

[miyako73]

With that, I'm done.

[hillwalker]

Dear miyako - on more than one occasion I've supported your stand on a variety of issues when I've shared your opinion.

On this occasion I will have to beg do differ:

I'm guessing the word 'ignorance' was aimed at members who made incorrect assumptions based on what they believed to be an universal truth regarding the English language.

And the word 'erroneous' referred to one who's grasp of correct grammar evaded him/her on this occasion. It's a fact not an opinion so get over it.

As for the mutual back-scratching you allude to, we're not drawing battle lines here. Certain members have their fan clubs. You know who they are and who their groupies are. Others can't wait to offer negative responses. Taking the entire issue so personally doesn't make your argument any stronger.

H

[Jack of Hearts]

As for the mutual back-scratching you allude to, we're not drawing battle lines here. Certain members have their fan clubs. You know who they are and who their groupies are.

If you'd like to join the DocHeart fan club, this reader is acting president.








J


EDIT: On the other hand...


Mean Sh!T JoH Has Said About DocHeart's Poetry

'Clog' analysis (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1156950&postcount=123)

Arbitrarily blaming Doc (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1147701&postcount=98)

Xenophobia and name calling (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1114244&postcount=39)

Make sense, you Greek bastard! (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1097737&postcount=28)

Death by nitpicking (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1095068&postcount=25)

Doc's private activities, scrutinized (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1090860&postcount=20)

Write truer poems or we will force you to drink hemlock (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1090323&postcount=16)

Frenemy, Ambiguity (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1155268&postcount=119)

Prescription (http://www.online-literature.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1148759&postcount=107)

[hillwalker]

Keep your friends close, and your enemies closer. (Sun-Tzu)

H

[Jack of Hearts]

Precisely.

Egad, after tracking all those down... it must be said, the sheer amount of crit this poster has written is staggering. So many poems and stories read/analyzed...

And that's still nothing compared to you, hill.







J

[Haunted]

"And of course, the poet has explained the reason for using "that's" and resident teacher Auntie verified it's grammatically correct and handed it an A, so let's accept it and stop beating a dead horse."

The problem is not the grammar but the elevation of ink that contradicts the previous statements about "no pictures in mind" and "look what I've writ" and ruins the consistency of thoughts.



"This disparaging remark is a bit uncalled for, methink.

@miyako73

In polite society, when one doesnt' agree but deem it pointless to argue, the rule of engagement is "no comment". You hear it a lot on TV, rather than getting into a shouting match. To you it's "ignore" but it signifies the end of conversation and I suggest that you take it as a hint and leave it alone graciously."

So, this one is not disparaging?

"though a lot of guff has been spouted based on ignorance and erroneous assumption."

I guess Kool-Aid is really delicious.

"though a lot of guff has been spouted based on ignorance and erroneous assumption."

If I was following the thread correctly, I believe that was said in response to all those petty arguments over facts. It drives the point home that it is a fool's mission.

As far as the ink thing... we write, others interpret. Do what suits you. No need to beat the poet up to make him rewrite his poem to fit your needs.

You ought to, 'cuse me, I meant you should (my bad) realize the workshops you went to where archiac is discussed, is not the whole universe. I think your mistake is you came into a certain foreign culture, took a few courses and think you know everything.

You are mad because while you think you know everything from taking a course here and a workshop there, reality says otherwise.

That said, your Kool Aid remark further betrays such ignorance. You seem to be parroting phrases you picked up in the US especially in the tech circles and use it here to denigrate others. The origin of the expression came from the Jonestown massacre in case you didnt know. It's highly offensive, insensitive and crass.

[miyako73]

Is the Pope Catholic? I know what "drinking the Kool-Aid" means, that's why I used it.

Kool-Aid drinking or back-patting or back-scratching is rampant here. I hate being in a room full of wannabe models chorusing that each one of them is gorgeous.

[zoolane]

Is the Pope Catholic? I know what "drinking the Kool-Aid" means, that's why I used it.

Kool-Aid drinking or back-patting or back-scratching is rampant here. I hate being in a room full of wannabe models chorusing that each one of them is gorgeous.

Who hell said that any of us want to be wannabe? We are all like mind people who like writing and give feedback to others.

If anyone want to be wannabe it sound more like you do.

[miyako73]

Do you really want me to waste my time on you? Please, zoolane, don't take it personal. Go back to your elementary English textbook. I don't care if you are dyslexic or not. Please try editing and re-editing your work. Now, that's an advice not an attack.

Ciao! I should really shut up now before I get a warning. Another advice, do not resort to ad hominems if you want to be taken seriously.

[Jack of Hearts]

I hate being in a room full of wannabe models chorusing that each one of them is gorgeous.

And we hate having you. Or, at least, Jack of Hearts does.

This poster is sick of stumbling across a thread and reading a ****ty post by you. Your interactions are consistently a special brand of awful. It's like a MFA program crawled up and withered in the space where your soul should be. You ought to be locked up and kept in a fiction workshop somewhere, inventing backhanded compliments and feeling cool about yourself with 10 other douchebags and the guy who wrote The Cider House Rules.

This reader has read a lot of your work now, which makes this all the more unpleasant. It can't be said Jack of Hearts didn't try for you. But sometimes finding the merit in your output was too hard. Think of a monochromatic Where's Waldo? book. Yeah, sometimes it was that hard.

Your behavior here is convincing; you are no longer worth the effort. Did they teach you this one in university?


"Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya."








J

[zoolane]

I ought to write, I know,
But nowadays my heart’s not in it.
Every time I have a go
I look at what I’ve writ - and bin it.

Don’t seem to have a thing to say
to anyone, from day to day,
no pictures in the mind to paint
with words in ink that’s far too faint…

Sometimes I will make a start
and think, ‘Ah yes, perhaps it’s good’
then I falter, dreams depart
and I give up, becau

I like it because how I feel now. I would like to said sorry to Hawk for any comments I made which add oil to fire. I think how phrase goes.

[Delta40]

Wow your poems really have an effect on the people Hawk.

I've writ stuff too
and there's things I ought to do

but I've had too much fun reading Lit-Net....

[miyako73]

And we hate having you. Or, at least, Jack of Hearts does.

This poster is sick of stumbling across a thread and reading a ****ty post by you. Your interactions are consistently a special brand of awful. It's like a MFA program crawled up and withered in the space where your soul should be. You ought to be locked up and kept in a fiction workshop somewhere, inventing backhanded compliments and feeling cool about yourself with 10 other douchebags and the guy who wrote The Cider House Rules.

This reader has read a lot of your work now, which makes this all the more unpleasant. It can't be said Jack of Hearts didn't try for you. But sometimes finding the merit in your output was too hard. Think of a monochromatic Where's Waldo? book. Yeah, sometimes it was that hard.

Your behavior here is convincing; you are no longer worth the effort. Did they teach you this one in university?


"Don't let the door hit ya where the good lord split ya."



J




As long as I am trying to be objective and do not resort to blind praising, I am okay. By the way, the feeling is mutual. Personally, I am here to develop not to stagnate. Reading blind praises coming from you day in, day out is suffocating. For a change, call a spade a spade. I apologize if my honesty is too loud and blatant. You surely need that.

[Haunted]

I know your style is to ignore, but I won't stop. It seems writer's block is not your problem but the "far too faint" ink. Buy a new pen.



Do you really want me to waste my time on you? Please, (xxxxx), don't take it personal. Go back to your elementary English textbook. I don't care if you are dyslexic or not. Please try editing and re-editing your work. Now, that's an advice not an attack.




I guess Kool-Aid is really delicious.



Reading blind praises coming from you day in, day out is suffocating. For a change, call a spade a spade. I apologize if my honesty is too loud and blatant. You surely need that.



I think you have insulted enough people in one swooping day. Take your meds and go to bed. Let us return to civility and peace and good poetry.

[miyako73]

I don't take meds. Is MDMA a med? Typically, I smoke the best ganja.

[Hawkman]

Right. I've had quite enough of this. Miyako, there is absolutely no point in talking to you because you argue indefensible positions for the sake of it without any concept of what you are talking about. You are incapable of learning because you don't listen. I'm sick of your hijacking threads to fill them with your own particular brand of bile. I am officially requesting that this thread be closed. I thank those forum members who appreciated the poem or merely had something intelligent to say about it. I also thank the many forum members who have tried to reason with you, unfortunately to no avail. Again, I officially request the moderators to close this thread.

End of chat.

[miyako73]

Sure let's end it. Congratulations! This is a brilliant poem that deserves unqualified praises.

[hillwalker]

At least you get the last word, M, so that's probably your good deed done for the day.

H

[Scheherazade]

~

This thread is now closed.

Personal attacks and intolerance will never be welcome on this Forum.

Those who are not willing to have their views to be challenged by others should avoid posting in public forums.

~