>It's meant to be left open to the reader, Kent, and the fields of
>imagination. (david.bircumshaw)
Come on, David, that isn't a case for the line in question. Kent's asking you to
think about what you wrote, to enlighten him/us perhaps. What isn't "left open to
the reader" in poetry in general? Hell, I can justify any crap I write with that
reasoning! Your response deflects serious examination. You're more worthy than
that.
- Frank
*******************
Frank Parker
[log in to unmask]
http://now.at/frankshome
"if cattle had gods, they'd look like cattle"
Xenophanes (570-475 BCE)
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Poetryetc provides a venue for a dialogue relating to poetry and
>poetics [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of david.bircumshaw
>Sent: Friday, June 07, 2002 7:03 PM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: Running sex
>
>
>>David B, by the way, in that poem you posted a couple days ago,
>the phrase "your running sex": I ask this seriously, more or less,
>and I do so in full awareness that the question may betray a pitiful
>paucity of poetic perspicaciousness on my part, but by this
>"running" conceit, am I, as reader, meant to imagine a penis or
>vagina with tiny legs, say, running away rapidly from you and your
>lover?<
>
>It's meant to be left open to the reader, Kent, and the fields of
>imagination. But what's a vagina with tiny legs, that's really got me
>puzzled. Do you have those in America, courtesy of Dreamworks and their
>Special Effects?
>
>Best
>
>Dave
>
>
>
>David Bircumshaw
>
>Leicester, England
>
>Home Page
>
>A Chide's Alphabet
>
>Painting Without Numbers
>
>http://homepage.ntlworld.com/david.bircumshaw/index.htm
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "KENT JOHNSON" <[log in to unmask]>
>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>Sent: Saturday, June 08, 2002 2:54 AM
>Subject: Running sex
>
>
>That article by Eagleton that Alison mentioned is in The Guardian.
>Very interesting.
>
>In another recent issue of same, John Tranter's Jacket is termed
>"the Prince of on-line literary journals." There is no indication that
>the writer feels there is a Queen.
>
>David B, by the way, in that poem you posted a couple days ago,
>the phrase "your running sex": I ask this seriously, more or less,
>and I do so in full awareness that the question may betray a pitiful
>paucity of poetic perspicaciousness on my part, but by this
>"running" conceit, am I, as reader, meant to imagine a penis or
>vagina with tiny legs, say, running away rapidly from you and your
>lover?
>
>Kent
>
|