Studio8 - Uniting the Arts

Azure the eyes of slavic saints:
they will not suffice. Gargoyles
of titanium take to wing,
vortice scheherazade-like;
sky-timpani cracks the crystal.
Hansels, gretels beatific
inevitably topple:
something repulsive this way turns.

((do i dare say it...))
strong piece you've created here.

Danke. Poet I am not but jass around a bit. War serves as an inspiration; words are merely flies next to MIGs.....

Writers, amateur or pro should always be on guard against comedy, even well-executed comedy. Corso called it the "divine butcher." A standup comic at Cafe-mafia (or carnys with kazoos maybe....), and the poesy's flushed (along with any serious muzak)

However.

You could reach a point where comedy is the only thing left.
I'm not afraid of a MIG. I could lay down and go to sleep right beside it.

what do you think the poets are writing about?

yinny yangy nonsense of course.

perhaps but zaniness, yuks, jests get old as well, do they not. I'd rather watch MacBeth (or even Hamlet schtick) than the endless puns and wit of Shakespearean comedy. Most fools are bo-reeeng. Kubrick outdoes Woody Allen.

I didn't understand it.

Just being honest.

But hey, I don't even understand the poetry posted by all the people you say can't write.

LOL!

As Emily D once yawped, "success in circuit lies." (That's the starting point for nearly any creative writing).

Ah'll give you a hint though: sorta like air strike

Yeah, the West won the Cold War (Thanks Ronnie!)
But they still got to keep their MIGS..
Bummer.

btw.. 'gargoyles of titanium take to wing'.
loved that.

Nah. Sorry. I don't want to work that hard.

If I don't understand it first read, I go on to another one or write one myself that I don't understand.



No offense intended or anything. I'm sure you are not offended. You wouldn't expect me to understand your super intelligent, highly skilled, expertly crafted piece, after all.

I didn't understand it on the first read either.
I find that happens to me a lot.

Not making excuses for the West, or conservatives (though Reagan, however f-ed up, killed fewer people than Bill Clinton, or Bush did) . The Russians now have at least much firepower, militarily speaking, as the USA, excepting maybe navy. Their airforce indeed more modern than US or China or EU, and they outrank all countries in terms of military satellites in orbit.

For a real account of the brutal force of the Russian military read some objective accounts of Major Zhukov's march to Berlin circa 1945 or so. When Solzhenitsyn, an officer riding with Zhukov, wrote about it, they put him in a gulag.

Anyway, poesy, whatever it be, should not be mistaken for statements of fact, or arguments, or even expressions of emotion, especially after Stevens, Williams, Pound etc. (not to say Rimbaud and pals) Alas the Confessional sorts of scribblers did a lot of damage and created a sort of "Dear Diary" school of writing (some beats also helped with dat).

well, I understand all the words in this piece
and it has a certain rhythmic power
I like random colliding images

but here's my objection: It doesn't say anything to me
it doesn't give me an idea that I can hold on to.

Obviously it touched mnaz with some sort of meaning
and I guess that's the beauty of poetry
you don't know what it will mean to the reader

or as I like to say, "you got to bring something with you if you wanna take something home."

Yes. I would never make excuses for the East either. Fuck Sputnik and those genocidal automotons. The last century in particular was suicidal. Fuck the MIGs. But at some point we at least try to move on, no? If we're still touting WW2 as some sort of genesis of wisdom, recounting or pimping its horrors on a literal balance sheet instead a spiritual one, what does that say about us?

Juxtaposition is not randomness. That some X doesn't swooon to some writing has little or no bearing on what it means, evokes, connotes, etc. Whatever. Agency is usually an issue. Obvious moral messages ended with like Wordsworth (well until the Dear Diary school brought em back....).

Re WWII. The liberals have managed to create this image of a well-meaning victimized USSR (even a kinder gentler Stalin) and that is not at all the case. While I do not think the stalinists quite equal the Nazi beasts, they are just a few steps behind; but their crimes have been sort of kept under covers (due I believe to marxist influence in the academies, mostly).

The soviet power-grab at the end of WWII involved some very nasty business all across eastern europe. But none of that's too PC, and when one brings it up, everyone yawns, refers to McCarthyism etc. McCarthy was indeed whacked: that didnt stop Bobby Kennedy from working for him.

Totenkopf wrote: Re WWII. The liberals have managed to create this image of a well-meaning victimized USSR (even a kinder gentler Stalin) and that is not at all the case. While I do not think the stalinists quite equal the Nazi beasts, they are just a few steps behind; but their crimes have been sort of kept under covers (due I believe to marxist influence in the academies, mostly).

I'm confused as to who exactly "the liberals" are these days.
A kinder, gentler Stalin? Give me a break!

The soviet power-grab at the end of WWII involved some very nasty business all across eastern europe. But none of that's too PC, and when one brings it up, everyone yawns, refers to McCarthyism etc.

I don't. You're right.