- From: Sherrie Lee <sherriel383@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 19 Oct 2007 03:54:25 -0700
On Oct 19, 12:19 am, "Dennis M. Hammes" <scrawlm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sherrie Lee wrote:
On Oct 18, 8:29 am, George Dance <georgedanc...@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 14, 11:47 pm, Sherrie Lee <sherriel...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Oct 14, 12:35 pm, "Dennis M. Hammes" <scrawlm...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Sherrie Lee wrote:
They spread the paper on the floor. Their feet, four knives to print
(the crumbs that stick like sand between their toes),
smear the page -- a trap for today's trimmings.
Whose hair this is, I think I know.
The knives stick out to cut me, though.
<-- I wouldn't pay attention to that last bit; she wasn't actually
reading the pome, just pawsing on her way to the window.
Your mews organically paws her serendipitous work.
She's a copy cat. My (wife's) Pixel wrote "gtfffffr" the other day. I
was so proud.
Did you see the butter correction? Even worse, eh?
It is ugly ironically set preventatively.
I still don't understand your poem enough to comment meaningfully in
general, but here I can make a decent comment. Yes, changing 'four' to
'butter' made it worse. Four one thing, you've lost all indication
that there are two people here - a couple, I originally thought.
I'd suggest saying 'four palette knives' - since that's an artist's
tool, you can then drop 'to print' if you want.
They'll shed question marks shaped like two tears
(let go from a place that fills later
with a word in the form of nothing
like the same space before the paper is gathered
so as to prevent spilling its contents and so as to compact it
as flat as flat can get when caring to make more room ends).
An excellent image awkwardly put.
Thank you; it results in cancelling out itself. It's paradoxical, but
it can be restated.
Do you need "so as" here (twice!)?
After the cutting they'll focus on new growth, another time,
the itch of brush-less days.
Yesterday was garbage day, which doesn't matter.
The community pays for the giant dumpster
into which a couple bags have already been tossed.
Pausing to wear a pair of shoes for the walk down the street
Here I'd go for the common vernacular plus the alliteration:
"Pausing to pull on a pair of shoes ..."
he picks the grit stuck between his teeth.
They'll survive a few more years.
This last stanza is best overall, but the segue from hair to shoes is
Thanks again. It seems to beg for a narrative. Something to explain
it. There is no hair, but it's there. More, but in a different way,
less. Something unequivocal. A less abrupt transition.
As I said, I'm lost; I have no idea what's going on here. They spread
down some paper, walk on it, and then throw it away. Why? I dunno.
That could be just me, of course; but it would be addressed by adding
more narrative to the piece.
Did 'they' throw it away? And the questions were 'why'. The poem does
do a bad job in that it assumes both tears ask (although, it's its
Yes, the line needs both "so as to"s because they're filler that
stretch the line, like answering 'why' twice without meaning a thing.
It has the feeling of having no idea of what's going on up to a point.
The word 'bin' is too un-American. 'Trash container' might be ok. I'm
sorry that I was used to the word 'dumpster' in terms of assuming its
meaning was something that belonged to everyone, but it appears to
belong to only those who pay for it (which couldn't work in the same
sense due to the purpose of the 'bin' is to keep the community orderly
and clean; whereas, the purpose of the trademarked word is different
The original Dempster Dumpster was still a patent and trademark in 1964.
Like "Aspirin," in 1880 a Bayer, A.G., trademark, "dumpster" has
become generic in both production and useage, and is preferred (as
above) for that it identifies a type, purpose, and milieu of, even
attitude toward, a container in a single word. It has even generated
common language, cf. "dumpster-diving," "dumpster dinner," "dumpster
decor," "dumpster detective."
If you mean "dumpster" (lower case), put "dumpster."
The truth is Cat put me in shock. I learned something (shocking, I
I'm reeling in fun (or wallowing) over the idea of invented words and
phrases that can be profitable and can restrict expression at the same
time. Although, I'm not quite sure how fun it is when it pushes me
further into where it's headed, possibly, only because it radiates in
many directions. Who knows?
The simple answer is It's all about (what you say is tits and the only
tits I care about are my own and friends and family and the human race
whose health and happiness "make the world go 'round") what boils down
to a tolerable existence and avoiding being a pawn in the existences
of those whose tastes are more gluttonous etc... than well, safe.
When did we start trademarking words? Hey, I get it. Maybe it dates
back to the many unmentionable names of god. Or maybe it dates back to
the many beautiful names of Allah. A starting point for research is
the question or trying to answer it with, The Industrial Age?
Now we want to be in the Information Age where the genetic code is
being busted and agriculture (on which grand improvements during the
Industrial Age moved up to 90% of the population to the cities and
made possible the Moore-like population explosion) is making another
transformation. We're feeding Africans and issuing birth control and
new diseases are (challenging) scientists.
What in the world are we going to do with all these hands and brains!?
Ok, ok, some don't require brains of their tits, but have you seen the
dirty old man and his big fish? I digress. That wasn't a poem. I feel
one coming on. Fricken dirty old man!
Dumpster Decor, tsk. You ought to see my place!
(P.s. My youngest cat steps over the keyboard, not on it.)
- Re: Run-on
- From: Dennis M. Hammes
- Re: Run-on