CHRISTMAS

Dear Baldwin,
Merry Christmas and a happy new year. I like you, and l miss your criticism. Please don't let me wait long for it.

Nah.  You keep telling me that my criticism's worthless and not worth listening to.  And you keep dodging the questions I ask you and you ignore my requests to back up your claims with evidence.  What's the point of communicating with you?

Dear Baldwin,
Friendship. Isn't it enough to like each other as good friends? Then we can help each other a lot.

I have no reason to like you.  Friends do not dodge a person's questions or their calls to back up claims.  If you want to show that you are friends with me, you;ll have to stop doing this.

Dear Baldwin,
You are speaking with a child, aren't you?

If the shoe fits!  After all, your tendency to mount attacks against my character when what is called for is a demonstration of your claims that what I say about your pieces is wrong and that the pieces I send to you lack "rhythm" is childish.

Happy Christmas and New Year. This poem encapsulates in these three verses the point of Jesus' birth.

Dear Solomon,
Merry Christmas and a happy new year. It's very kind of you to write me this salutation, and these excellent words of comment. Thank you very much.

Enjoyed your little poem, Baldwin. Completely agree with that first stanza! I hope you have a wonderful Christmas day :)

The "poem" is not mine.  I would be ashamed to write something so tautologous and as dealing in abstractions  and absurdities as the first stanza of this piece does.  The holy child came to make "knowledge" known?? And what "intent" is it that men are searching for?  How would a child do what he is here claimed as "coming" to do?

Dear NB,
I am not Baldwin, l am Joseph Zenieh. Thank you very much for liking my poem.

I am very surprised at you, Baldwin. I know your writings. I don't answer your questions because l don't want to lie, and the truth will disappoint you. I am very glad that a lot of people like my poetry and read it, in this group and everywhere.

Another excuse.  Another dodge.  Go ahead.  Tell me the truth --  particularly with regard to how and where my pieces lack rhythm.  And remember that assertion is not demonstration.

Furthermore, I'm curious about two things you say here.  Where is the "everywhere" you say you've posted your writings?  Exactly what sites have you (and do you) send your writings to? I've seen no more than four,  and the responses that you receive there are not very articulate let alone not always positive.  And what evidence do you have that  the people you say like your work know anything about the requisite elements of poetry and what constitutes good poetry?  Why should anyone take whatever it is they say about your pieces -- assuming that it's more than something resembling "I like this" and is actually about how your style of writing shows craft rather than your "message" -- seriously and as exhibiting critical acumen?

I've got a lot of likes in deepundergroundpoetry and l have my followers here. That's enough to tell you.

Another dodge.  DU poetry is only one place.  You claimed to have posted in lots of places and to have received likes in all of those places.  

And are you really saying that those who have given you likes here possess  are knowledgeable about poetic craft.  It doesn't seem so to me.  Moreover, few, if any, have they commented on your skill as a writer What's liked (mostly by those who think something's good if it mentions Jesus) is your "message" since it agrees with their gnostic tinged and poorly grounded theology.  

And isn't it true that many of the pieces you have posted here have had no likes whatsoever?

In any case,  you are **still** not demonstrating your claims that the pieces I've sent to you are deficient in the ways you say they are.  Given your perpetual failure to do this when I ask you to put your money where your mouth is,  it's clear not only that you don't know how  do so (e.g., you can't scan), but that  you have no real evidence that shows that what you've said about my writings is true.  

I'm wondering, too, if you know how to use the each function of this site.

You can scan. It's very clear if you can't write a few meaningful lines of poetry in trochaic hexameter, while l write in all rhythms.

Yet another dodge.

And the issue is whether **you** can scan,  especially  when you claim -- but **still** have failed to demonstrate -- that my pieces lack "rhythm" (by which I take it you mean consistent meter).

And as to whether it's clear that I can't write some lines in trochaic hexameter (which, BTW,  you haven't), you seem to have missed this:

Can I not produce some fulsome lines that measure
up to six foot falls felicitous in rhythm
and in rhyme that uses sharp, concrete appeals to
striking imagery and does not make a reader
angered at my inability to write like
one who knows his stuff regarding what it is that
causes one to see some wondrous things with closed eyes?

I want to write a plaintive hymn  
that captures all my sense    
of how much Jesus Jesus Jesus  
should be loved, and fervently,  
by sinners much like me,  
that flows ecstatically with an unbridled  
full devotion  
like a torrid stream  
that’s aimed and surging toward    
the ocean,  
that raptures well above  
the weighted bonds of earth  
those seeking their salvation  
through a watered second birth.  
  
But then I must confess  
that when I say my prayers at night  
Lord Jesus comes to tell me that  
he’d really really wish I’d cease  
attempting what I’m trying to do.  
For after all, he solemnly declares,  
“You cannot write.  And everything  
you pen’s a mess”.  
  
“It’s always full of grammar gaffes  
inversions, awkward speech,  
and gross syntactic infelicities  
that if I were to hear it sung  
would hurt my ears;  
and bring me then    
to abject tears;  
and your so pious claims made there  
about how one  
should understand the words  
set out within God’s Holy book  
distress me, too.  
For all they do  
is show  
that you don’t know what scripture says  
much from your ass”.  
  
“I do not wish to ever be  
worshiped in this way;  
that is to say,  
I cannot stand receiving poesied praise  
whose phrasing’s hardly literate,    
that's poorly rhymed,  
and is linguistically all unrefined  
and smelling like bad gas  
as is (and does) the crap    
you try to pass to me    
that you presumably believe    
is something that is equal in its strains,  
its musicality,  
to the coursing beauty of  
a Mozart or a Bach writ piece,  
or even to the simplest Gregorian,  
liturgical refrain.”  
  
“So stop for heaven’s sake  
until you learn to see  
that your quite evident assumption that  
you are incapable of writing anything  
that’s not in form and in perception  
all poetical perfection  
never less than gifted  
golden composition  
so literarily astute with words  
welled up in sumptuous verbal grace  
that render other would-be hymnists  
envious and  mute    
is woefully, demonstrably untrue.  
I’m begging you!”  
  
  
But do I heed all that He says?  
Well, have a look at what I write  
to see  
and tell me what you think.  
If Jesus is correct,  
and you are in the know  
about good verse  
and how it is set out,  
you’ll be obliged to say,  
perhaps to shout,  
the answer’s “no,  
your writing stinks!”.

This great poem of yours is supposed to be iambic, but it is a very poor kind of  iambic as it is full of mistakes in rhythm. Sorry to say so.

There you go again making a claim without in any way demonstrating its truth.   Why should I believe you unless you  do what  you keep avoiding doing after you make this claim, namely,    **showing** me not only where these mistakes occur, but if there actually are any, how they violate the rules of standard iambic substitutions?  On this, see  
 
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substitution_(poetry)  
 
and for further examples, Timothy Steele's  _All the Fun's in How You Say a Thing: An Explanation of Meter and Versification_  (Ohio University Press/Swallow Press, 1999)  
 
 
And what remains of your claim that I cannot produce lines in trochaic tetrameter?

Did you write any lines in trochaic tetrameter or hexameter? All your poem is supposed to be iambic.

Do you not read my posts?  Look above  in a previous message:

Can I not produce some fulsome lines that measure
up to six foot falls felicitous in rhythm
and in rhyme that uses sharp, concrete appeals to
striking imagery and does not make a reader
angered at my inability to write like
one who knows his stuff regarding what it is that
causes one to see some wondrous things with closed eyes?

And once again you dodge my request to show me where my longer piece is faulty metrically.  I wonder if you know what the verb "scan" means with respect to verse.

Believe me, l have no time to waste on a poem so poorly written like your last one. Your poem is a very poor kind of iambic. You go through it, and you discover that by yourself.

So you are afraid to reveal your inability to scan writings for their meter or to demonstrate that a piece is poorly written.

All talk.

Got it.

And what on earth is a poor kind of iambic?

Dear Baldwin,
I'll show you the poor iambic lines you have written in what we suppose to be poetical writing in your last poem.
1- You have a lot of poor stresses and unstresses in your poor piece.
2- The poor iambic lines in your piece are:
a- should be loved and fervently
b- that flows ecstatically with an unbriddled
c- like a torrid stream
d- that's aimed and surging toward
e-the ocean
f- those seeking their salvation
g- through a watered second birth
h-that when l say my prayers at night
i-attempting what l'm trying to do
j- worshiped in this way
k- that's not in form and in perception
l- poetical perfection
Your poem is a terrible disorder in form and meaning. Again, lam so sorry.

Here my piece with it's stresses emphasized:  
 
I WANT to WRITE  a PLAINTive HYMN  
that CAPtures ALL my SENSE of HOW  
much JEsus JEsus JEsus SHOULD be LOVED, and FERventLY, by SINners MUCH like ME, that FLOWS ecSTATicaLY  
with AN unBRIDLed FULL deVOtion LIKE a TORrid STREAM that’s AIMED and SURGing TOW’RD  the OceAN,  
that RAPtures WELL Above the WEIGHTed BONDS of EARTH those SEEKing THEIR salVAtion TROUGH  
a WATer’d SECond BIRTH.    
      
But THEN i MUST conFESS that WHEN i SAY  
 my PRAY’RS at NIGHT Lord JEsus COMES to TELL me THAT  he’d REALly REALly WISH I’d CEASE atTEMPTing WHAT  
I’m TRYIg NOW to DO. For AFter ALL, he SOLemnLY deCLARES “You CANnot WRITE.  
And EV’ryTHING you PEN’S a MESS”.    
      
“It’s ALways FULL of GRAMmar GAFFES,    
inVERsions, AWKward SPEECH, and GROSS  
synTACtic InfeLICiTIES that IF i WERE to HEAR it SUNG    
would HURT my EARS;    
and BRING me THEN to ABject TEARS; and YOUR  
so PIous CLAIMS made THERE    
aBOUT how ONE  should UNDerSTAND the WORDS set OUT withIN God’s HOLy BOOK    
diSTRESS me, TOO. For ALL they DO is SHOW  
that YOU don’t KNOW what SCRIPture SAYS  much FROM your ASS”.    
      
“I DO not WISH to EVer BE one WORshiped IN this WAY; that IS to SAY, i CANnot STAND  
reCEIVing POEsied PRAISE  
whose PHRASing’s HARDly LiTerATE,    
that's POORly RHYMED,   and IS linGUISTic’LY all UNreFINED and SMELLing LIKE bad GAS  
as IS (and DOES) the CRAP you TRY to PASS to ME that YOU preSUMabLY    
beLIEVE is SOMEthing THAT is E qual IN its STRAINS, its MusicALiTY to ALL  
the COURsing BEAUty OF a MOZart OR a BACH writ PIECE,    
or EVen TO the SIMPelIST GreGORiAN, liTURgiCAL reFRAIN.”    
      
“So STOP for HEAVen’s SAKE unTIL you LEARN to SEE    
that YOUR quite EV i DENT asSUMPtion THAT you ARE inCAPaBLE of WRITing ANyTING  that’s NOT in FORM  
and IN perCEPtion ALL poETiCAL perFECtion NEver LESS  
than GIFTed   GOLDen COMpoSI tion LITerAR i LY asTUTE with WORDS welled UP  
in SUMPTuous VERbal GRACE  
that RENder OTHer WOULD-be HYMNists ENviOUS  
and MUTE is WOE ful LY, deMON strab LY unTRUE.    
I’m BEGging YOU!”    
      
      
But DO i HEED all THAT he SAYS?   Well, HAVE a LOOK    
at WHAT i WRITE to SEE  and TELL me WHAT you THINK.    
If JEsus IS corRECT, and YOU are IN the KNOW    
aBOUT good VERSE and HOW it IS set OUT, you’ll BE oBLIGED to SAY,  
perHAPS to SHOUT,    
the ANswer’s “NO, your WRITing STINKS!”.  
   
You have not read the lines accurately  or  in context and taken account of how my enjambment works,  and you have yet to show that any of those lines  that you think are off metrically are not consistent with standard iambic substitutions.  
   
You've also not noted how the piece rhymes and is, according to your criteria of what a writing has to have in order to be poetry, otherwise poetical as well as very incisive.  
   
Now what about you claim that I am incapable of writing lines that are not trochaic?