deepundergroundpoetry.com
LOVE STARTS WITH UNDERSTANDING.
LOVE STARTS WITH UNDERSTANDING.
You write your words and think we live
inside your mind the sense to reach.
You add to that some obscure words
and lots of your figures of speech.
Your poem gets a horrid piece
that you don't grasp after a day.
How can we know what you would mean?
Only a witch its gist can say.
You know that mumbling to yourself
can't build a thought in people's mind.
If you would like to dwell in hearts
the heart's key is to understand.
____________________________________
You write your words and think we live
inside your mind the sense to reach.
You add to that some obscure words
and lots of your figures of speech.
Your poem gets a horrid piece
that you don't grasp after a day.
How can we know what you would mean?
Only a witch its gist can say.
You know that mumbling to yourself
can't build a thought in people's mind.
If you would like to dwell in hearts
the heart's key is to understand.
____________________________________
Published 16th Sep 2020
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 1
reading list entries 1
comments 5
reads 314
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
16th Sep 2020 10:30pm
17th Sep 2020 10:25pm
Would you please do me the kindness of stating what the points are that you think J-Z made and then go on to tell me whether you think that the way that they were set out displayed the best features of quality composition?
With thanks in advance for your answers.
With thanks in advance for your answers.
17th Sep 2020 9:09am
Thank you very much, Lozzamus, for your like and comment. I see that my ideas coincide with yours.
This latest piece from you is a mess. And whatever "points" you were intent to make with it are unintelligible.
"You write your words and think we live
inside your mind the sense to reach."
Your syntax here, and the fact that “the sense” is an example of deixis”, makes you say that a poet believes that people who wish to “reach sense” of some unspecified thing (the intended sense of the poet's words?) actually live inside his mind!
If you meant to say is that it is incorrect for a poet to believe that what to his mind his words convey is what they actually do convey and that people would have to "live" inside his mind and see what he thought he was saying before his words made sense to them, you haven’t done so.
"You know that mumbling to yourself
can't build a thought in people's mind."
Leaving aside the fact that this presupposes that the poet you are speaking to (and about) actually "mumbles" to himslef when he writes, shouldn’t your second line read “can't build a thought in people's mindS”?
"Your poem gets a horrid piece"
Do poems “get” things, let alone a particular type of “pieces”? Did you mean to say “your poem receives a horrible response”? If so, doesn’t that convey the idea that the response that a poem receives is badly written and way off base?
"that you don't grasp after a day".
But the poet does grasp "a piece" when he first reads it? Did you mean that the poet never understands "the piece" that his poem (which one?) "gets"?
"If you would like to dwell in hearts
the heart's key is to understand."
Presuming that what you are speaking about is what a poet must do if he wants **his words** to “dwell” in the hearts (but not the minds?) of others”, then what you want to say is that the poet must have an understanding **of how** to do this.
But given the syntax of “the heart's key is to understand” and the fact that the line ends in deixis (to understand what?), what you actually speak about is what a key that “the” heart possesses is.
Moreover, why have you titled your piece “Love Starts with Understanding” when there’s nothing in your piece about love or how it starts?
"You write your words and think we live
inside your mind the sense to reach."
Your syntax here, and the fact that “the sense” is an example of deixis”, makes you say that a poet believes that people who wish to “reach sense” of some unspecified thing (the intended sense of the poet's words?) actually live inside his mind!
If you meant to say is that it is incorrect for a poet to believe that what to his mind his words convey is what they actually do convey and that people would have to "live" inside his mind and see what he thought he was saying before his words made sense to them, you haven’t done so.
"You know that mumbling to yourself
can't build a thought in people's mind."
Leaving aside the fact that this presupposes that the poet you are speaking to (and about) actually "mumbles" to himslef when he writes, shouldn’t your second line read “can't build a thought in people's mindS”?
"Your poem gets a horrid piece"
Do poems “get” things, let alone a particular type of “pieces”? Did you mean to say “your poem receives a horrible response”? If so, doesn’t that convey the idea that the response that a poem receives is badly written and way off base?
"that you don't grasp after a day".
But the poet does grasp "a piece" when he first reads it? Did you mean that the poet never understands "the piece" that his poem (which one?) "gets"?
"If you would like to dwell in hearts
the heart's key is to understand."
Presuming that what you are speaking about is what a poet must do if he wants **his words** to “dwell” in the hearts (but not the minds?) of others”, then what you want to say is that the poet must have an understanding **of how** to do this.
But given the syntax of “the heart's key is to understand” and the fact that the line ends in deixis (to understand what?), what you actually speak about is what a key that “the” heart possesses is.
Moreover, why have you titled your piece “Love Starts with Understanding” when there’s nothing in your piece about love or how it starts?
