Not very good advice considering what happened to George Michael. Much safer reading poems at the forum....................
Georges
Creation
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
To Neveranygood
I am a right bad ass, dankish prince and I love my Violet to bits.
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
To Liz
George Michael was the english singer caught in an LA toilet block accussed of lewd behaviour and convicted. So Liz it is safer reading poetry at our forum section notwithstanding the thought police that patrol here.
Filppantly yours..................Georges
Filppantly yours..................Georges
I am a right bad ass, dankish prince and I love my Violet to bits.
-
peter danielsen
- Posts: 921
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 3:45 pm
Ring the bells
As I said: teen pornography is an example of how the sexindustri uses one week person only to give pleasure to another stronger person. This is what we see all over our culture, not only in the sexindustries, but also in the sexindustries (old black joe still picking cotton for your ribs and bones). Teenpornography is therefor a symbol of what is wrong in our culture: Each is concerned with her/his own needs, and not the needs of the other. We refuse to accept the two basic values of the primitive christian religion, Love of neighbour and renunciation of status. The renunciation of status concerns the relationship between those in high position (the stronger) and those in low position(the weeker). The renuciation of status requires people to renounce the display, establishment or possession of a superior status. The Bible consist of texts which again and again displays that exactly this demand of renunciation of status is so extremly hard to accept. Every human is so deeply interessted in her/his own heart.
Now is it true that Linda compared my text with teenpornography? No she did not. What she did was tell the story of how her granddaughter was forced to see teenpornography that she (and linda) did not want to see, and how they were not able to get away from those pictures. But then she ends her thread but saying: Something is wrong, when there seems to be a need to throw pornography at you. The meaning is evident. My text is pornography that gets thrown at people who do not want it. It is just as bad as any other pornographic display, and therefor can be put in the basket with those types of disgusting things. Men and women like Linda thus insist on deciding what is pornography (and therefor evil and disgusting) and what is poetry.
And by the way another perspective on this subject is offcourse the ironi that when the christian religion took over in cultures which til then was profoundly a naturereligion, it was in many cases women who insisted on the continuing worship of the fallos symbol, of the sexuality. I was men who came up with the awful idea that man should be released not THROUGH Eros but FROM Eros.
And Lizzy, If you dont see anything funny in my text, well I dont think it will help much to try to ague that this was a very important part of its intention. My female friends got a laugh out of lines like "with a rose in your butt" and the kliche "oh sailor, Im so terribly hot" is taken directly from the wonderfull film by David Lynch "wild at heart". Furter on "moaning and growling the deepest bass" should be read with a lighthearted smile.
Let me end this tread by wishing those who agre with me and those who dont a wonderfull life full of high hopes and joy:
Ring the bells
that still can ring
forget your perfect offering
there is a crack in everything
thats how the light gets in
Now is it true that Linda compared my text with teenpornography? No she did not. What she did was tell the story of how her granddaughter was forced to see teenpornography that she (and linda) did not want to see, and how they were not able to get away from those pictures. But then she ends her thread but saying: Something is wrong, when there seems to be a need to throw pornography at you. The meaning is evident. My text is pornography that gets thrown at people who do not want it. It is just as bad as any other pornographic display, and therefor can be put in the basket with those types of disgusting things. Men and women like Linda thus insist on deciding what is pornography (and therefor evil and disgusting) and what is poetry.
And by the way another perspective on this subject is offcourse the ironi that when the christian religion took over in cultures which til then was profoundly a naturereligion, it was in many cases women who insisted on the continuing worship of the fallos symbol, of the sexuality. I was men who came up with the awful idea that man should be released not THROUGH Eros but FROM Eros.
And Lizzy, If you dont see anything funny in my text, well I dont think it will help much to try to ague that this was a very important part of its intention. My female friends got a laugh out of lines like "with a rose in your butt" and the kliche "oh sailor, Im so terribly hot" is taken directly from the wonderfull film by David Lynch "wild at heart". Furter on "moaning and growling the deepest bass" should be read with a lighthearted smile.
Let me end this tread by wishing those who agre with me and those who dont a wonderfull life full of high hopes and joy:
Ring the bells
that still can ring
forget your perfect offering
there is a crack in everything
thats how the light gets in
Last edited by peter danielsen on Wed Oct 02, 2002 5:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
To Peter
Good answer, Peter.
Hit ignore\trash\turn off if it offends
others may take a diffrent view
that what makes up the tapestry of life
light from the crack can also illuminate filth and the divine
where that light comes from is the wonder
what it illuminates you may ponder
Georges
Hit ignore\trash\turn off if it offends
others may take a diffrent view
that what makes up the tapestry of life
light from the crack can also illuminate filth and the divine
where that light comes from is the wonder
what it illuminates you may ponder
Georges
I am a right bad ass, dankish prince and I love my Violet to bits.
Hi Peter,
Actually, I didn't take Linda's comment [though I may have missed that secondary implication] as being a reference to anything other than the photographs on the screen being "thrown" at the viewer...literally. Then, dodging one, there comes another! Likewise, it's being "thrown" at the viewer, in that it wasn't even what her granddaughter was seeking, but what by most likely trickery was suddenly there and could not be gotten away from. In addition to that, the aggressive sexuality that I'm referring to does impart the feeling of being thrown at the viewer, from many directions. I'll answer the rest of this, after I attend a required meeting.
[Meeting time has changed, so I'll continue.] Nope. Humour never occurred to me. As I've mentioned previously, "knowing" you allowed for me to read further, whereas I otherwise would likely not have. Knowing you in person, as your friend does, may have given her an inroad to what might constitute humour to you. However, my response to the first line you mentioned was confusion. Then, when you clarified what it was and that lust was your intent [which I took to be a serious exploration of the physical merged with the spiritual], I wouldn't have seen humour as part of that either.
"Humour" causes me to question it even more....making a mockery of her role? I don't get it. In regard to fulfilling one's own needs, it would seem to me that the male's [not female's] "need" [his own amusement? his visual eroticism?] is being fulfilled there. As for pornography, etc., the exploitation of innocent children is often used purely for profit [not a need in any sense of the word].
The renunciation of status [biblically/religion] I would see not as being the status of adult/child.....but status in terms of rank. Renunciating that would put everyone on a level playing field, absent privilege. To renunciate "status" in terms of age would have removed the roles of elders and teachers, both time-honoured roles in societies. These roles I've not seen as superiority-based, but pragmatic for learning purposes. Those with a lifetime of experience are generally going to have accumulated valuable knowledge/experience to impart to the younger. Not always. And not always that the younger doesn't have lessons to impart as well....books are written about these younger people, wise beyond their years.
Back to the humour, which I broad-brush missed ~ other than being reminded of the "typical" sailor reference, but presuming you were giving it a more serious application. Was your female friend, by any chance, any chance at all, laughing out of a sense of embarrassment or sense of the ludicrous, regarding the rose?
The deepest bass line I took to be rather literal as a sensual reference. Trying to reframe the whole poem in terms of humour makes it even more awkward for me than it is from a serious bent [other than the end verses, which I think are fine as is].
Geesh, "what to do, what to do"
~Lizzytysh
Actually, I didn't take Linda's comment [though I may have missed that secondary implication] as being a reference to anything other than the photographs on the screen being "thrown" at the viewer...literally. Then, dodging one, there comes another! Likewise, it's being "thrown" at the viewer, in that it wasn't even what her granddaughter was seeking, but what by most likely trickery was suddenly there and could not be gotten away from. In addition to that, the aggressive sexuality that I'm referring to does impart the feeling of being thrown at the viewer, from many directions. I'll answer the rest of this, after I attend a required meeting.
[Meeting time has changed, so I'll continue.] Nope. Humour never occurred to me. As I've mentioned previously, "knowing" you allowed for me to read further, whereas I otherwise would likely not have. Knowing you in person, as your friend does, may have given her an inroad to what might constitute humour to you. However, my response to the first line you mentioned was confusion. Then, when you clarified what it was and that lust was your intent [which I took to be a serious exploration of the physical merged with the spiritual], I wouldn't have seen humour as part of that either.
"Humour" causes me to question it even more....making a mockery of her role? I don't get it. In regard to fulfilling one's own needs, it would seem to me that the male's [not female's] "need" [his own amusement? his visual eroticism?] is being fulfilled there. As for pornography, etc., the exploitation of innocent children is often used purely for profit [not a need in any sense of the word].
The renunciation of status [biblically/religion] I would see not as being the status of adult/child.....but status in terms of rank. Renunciating that would put everyone on a level playing field, absent privilege. To renunciate "status" in terms of age would have removed the roles of elders and teachers, both time-honoured roles in societies. These roles I've not seen as superiority-based, but pragmatic for learning purposes. Those with a lifetime of experience are generally going to have accumulated valuable knowledge/experience to impart to the younger. Not always. And not always that the younger doesn't have lessons to impart as well....books are written about these younger people, wise beyond their years.
Back to the humour, which I broad-brush missed ~ other than being reminded of the "typical" sailor reference, but presuming you were giving it a more serious application. Was your female friend, by any chance, any chance at all, laughing out of a sense of embarrassment or sense of the ludicrous, regarding the rose?
The deepest bass line I took to be rather literal as a sensual reference. Trying to reframe the whole poem in terms of humour makes it even more awkward for me than it is from a serious bent [other than the end verses, which I think are fine as is].
Geesh, "what to do, what to do"
~Lizzytysh
Dear George,
So you want to illuminate filth, do you?
It's curious that if one objects to saturnalian poetry one is accused of being a member of the infamous "thought police". But those who defend the same corybantic poem regard themselves not as "thought police" but as the righteous upholders of public discourse.
Now there's a double standard for you.
eeey
So you want to illuminate filth, do you?
It's curious that if one objects to saturnalian poetry one is accused of being a member of the infamous "thought police". But those who defend the same corybantic poem regard themselves not as "thought police" but as the righteous upholders of public discourse.
Now there's a double standard for you.
eeey
Peter,
Linda is more than right when she speaks of a sex-saturated society. The world really is as it is, even if we pretend otherwise. I am going to quote something from a writer (NOT LEONARD) that may illustrate this point. This was written long before the internet.
"You can get a large audience together for a strip-tease act -- that is, to watch a girl undress on the stage. Now suppose you came to a country where you could fill a theatre by simply bringing a covered plate on to the stage and then slowly lifting the cover so as to let every one see, just before the lights went out, that it contained a mutton chop or a bit of bacon, would you not think that in that country something had gone wrong with the appetite for food? And would not anyone who had grown up in a different world think there was something equally queer about the state of the sex instinct among us.
One critic said that if he found a country in which such strip-tease acts with food were popular, he would conclude that the people of that country were STARVING..."
Linda is more than right when she speaks of a sex-saturated society. The world really is as it is, even if we pretend otherwise. I am going to quote something from a writer (NOT LEONARD) that may illustrate this point. This was written long before the internet.
"You can get a large audience together for a strip-tease act -- that is, to watch a girl undress on the stage. Now suppose you came to a country where you could fill a theatre by simply bringing a covered plate on to the stage and then slowly lifting the cover so as to let every one see, just before the lights went out, that it contained a mutton chop or a bit of bacon, would you not think that in that country something had gone wrong with the appetite for food? And would not anyone who had grown up in a different world think there was something equally queer about the state of the sex instinct among us.
One critic said that if he found a country in which such strip-tease acts with food were popular, he would conclude that the people of that country were STARVING..."
"Nor is the hypothesis of "starvation" the only one we can imagine. Everyone knows that the sexual appetite, like our other appetites, grows by indulgence. Starving men may think much about food, but so do gluttons; the gorged, as well as the famished, like titillations.
You and I for the last twenty years, have been fed all day long on good solid lies about sex. We have been told, till one is sick of hearing it, that sexual desire is in the same state as any of our other natural desires and that if only we abandon the silly old Victorian idea of hushing it up, everything in the garden will be lovely. It is not true.
They tell you sex has become a mess because it was hushed up. But for the last twenty years it has not been hushed up. It has been chattered about all day long. Yet it is still in a mess. If hushing up had been the cause of the trouble, ventilation would have set it right. But it has not."
So, Peter, are you starving or are you a glutton?
You and I for the last twenty years, have been fed all day long on good solid lies about sex. We have been told, till one is sick of hearing it, that sexual desire is in the same state as any of our other natural desires and that if only we abandon the silly old Victorian idea of hushing it up, everything in the garden will be lovely. It is not true.
They tell you sex has become a mess because it was hushed up. But for the last twenty years it has not been hushed up. It has been chattered about all day long. Yet it is still in a mess. If hushing up had been the cause of the trouble, ventilation would have set it right. But it has not."
So, Peter, are you starving or are you a glutton?
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
To eeey
But then life's full of double standards just like the divine masquarading as the filth or the filth as the divine.
Thought police have no more right to be called righteous than the obscure poet's, Lorca was shot for being a homosexual.
The inquisition tortured the good for not being their style of good and hitler gassed non jews for not being perfect.
I think the great big trading standards officer in the sky knows his light will illuminate everything.
Porn as art or poetry still reflects the right of individuals to discuss their feelings and actions, freedom of expression is the issue here eeey, hit your ignore button if you do not like surreal poetry and hang up your patrol hat with Hitler's.
georges
Thought police have no more right to be called righteous than the obscure poet's, Lorca was shot for being a homosexual.
The inquisition tortured the good for not being their style of good and hitler gassed non jews for not being perfect.
I think the great big trading standards officer in the sky knows his light will illuminate everything.
Porn as art or poetry still reflects the right of individuals to discuss their feelings and actions, freedom of expression is the issue here eeey, hit your ignore button if you do not like surreal poetry and hang up your patrol hat with Hitler's.
georges
I am a right bad ass, dankish prince and I love my Violet to bits.
I think you have to wing it here on the Ignore. If you feel you're not interested in a particular person's posts [or the content of anyone's, per your cursory glance], you simply scroll past it and on to the next. If there is no next, you simply don't click on it to begin with, or you return to the listing of other threads or the list of sections to go to the next one of interest. And, who knows, you may be doing that already and miss this suggestion altogether.
Thanks for putting [on another thread] your use of "complacency" into its intended context when you used it, Kush.
What strikes me regarding what eeey said and with the illustration from another author [I recall having read that somewhere previously because it created such a dramatic visual of the silver, covered platter in the spotlight, with black curtains and an empty, darkened stage ~ followed by the flourish of arm movement when the lifting occurred] is that these examples are at the opposite ends of a continuum:
[starvation]___________________________________________[gluttony]
To fling ourselves, or to be flung, from the Victorian to the saturation of today is no more healthy than having remained in the Victorian. The saturation is not the solution, nor intended to be. It is only saturation. You starve, you drown. The healthy state lies in the balance between the two. Whether sex is made dirty by keeping it hidden in shame-based ways ~ or whether it's made dirty by exploitation and insensitivity ~ the result is the same.
I see it as the pendulum phenomena...some healthy examples [which may get deleted by this site] would be that, instead of the euphimisms [which Kush spoke of] and sexually-based derogatory language [that Linmag Linda spoke of], we would not feel embarrassed to make sexual references that use the proper, "real" terms [the clinical and technically correct which I spoke of ~ and which tend to not be very poetic, perhaps due to our discomfort with them] such as vagina, penis, breast, intercourse, etc. [breast seems to have fared better than the others with acceptance and usage, including in poetry] that would be used in everyday conversation, absent the "titillation" effect and "tittering" responses.
Society's attempts to correct things seem to have gone into the over-correction mode. How to bring it back into the healthy mode I have no idea. I guess in many ways it starts at a personal level, by recognizing that sex truly is as normal and at least as important a function as anything else. Shoving everything back into the Victorian closet [Victoria's Closet was not a chance naming] is no more of a solution than continuing to try to drown an already-drowned rat.
Those are my immediate ponderings.
~Lizzytysh
What strikes me regarding what eeey said and with the illustration from another author [I recall having read that somewhere previously because it created such a dramatic visual of the silver, covered platter in the spotlight, with black curtains and an empty, darkened stage ~ followed by the flourish of arm movement when the lifting occurred] is that these examples are at the opposite ends of a continuum:
[starvation]___________________________________________[gluttony]
To fling ourselves, or to be flung, from the Victorian to the saturation of today is no more healthy than having remained in the Victorian. The saturation is not the solution, nor intended to be. It is only saturation. You starve, you drown. The healthy state lies in the balance between the two. Whether sex is made dirty by keeping it hidden in shame-based ways ~ or whether it's made dirty by exploitation and insensitivity ~ the result is the same.
I see it as the pendulum phenomena...some healthy examples [which may get deleted by this site] would be that, instead of the euphimisms [which Kush spoke of] and sexually-based derogatory language [that Linmag Linda spoke of], we would not feel embarrassed to make sexual references that use the proper, "real" terms [the clinical and technically correct which I spoke of ~ and which tend to not be very poetic, perhaps due to our discomfort with them] such as vagina, penis, breast, intercourse, etc. [breast seems to have fared better than the others with acceptance and usage, including in poetry] that would be used in everyday conversation, absent the "titillation" effect and "tittering" responses.
Society's attempts to correct things seem to have gone into the over-correction mode. How to bring it back into the healthy mode I have no idea. I guess in many ways it starts at a personal level, by recognizing that sex truly is as normal and at least as important a function as anything else. Shoving everything back into the Victorian closet [Victoria's Closet was not a chance naming] is no more of a solution than continuing to try to drown an already-drowned rat.
Those are my immediate ponderings.
~Lizzytysh