deepundergroundpoetry.com
Why Joseph Doesn't Write Arthurania
Where are your lilting words
set out within compelling verse
so literate and grammar graced
they’d teach me through example how
to bring alive before a reader’s eyes
the gloried acts of chivalry,
that were the essence of
the “one brief shining moment”
forged by the bearer of Excalibur
until the savaged darkness fell
because of Medraut’s treachery
and Guinevere's adultery
upon the time in Albion
that’s known to all as Arthur’s age
They are not anywhere
upon a page
or on a screen
no doubt because
despite your bragging how
you’re so adept
at writing captivating poetry
you know
that if you tried to do this thing
you’d show
you haven’t any of the art or the ability
required to meet, fulfill, the task
I’ve charged you with, i.e.,
to make the British hero come alive
so pulsingly
he thrives within a reader’s thoughts
or memory
You are aware
that anything you’d deign
to write about
the denizens of Camelot
would be in form and style
and language, too,
abysmal in its quality
in phrasing deictic, grammar gaffed
and incoherent, ragged, and
in thought so incomplete,
and therefore’d be a testament
to just how much
you lack poetic mastery.
And so it’s no surprise that you
again prescind
from taking up this enterprise.
For you don’t want to face
the recompence
in stark critiques
you’d rightly be subjected to
because in writing Arthurania,
the way you write about
your other themes
you’d then so undeniably provide
compelling evidence
of your poetical incompetence.
***
Cue the ad hominemed and red herringed respons.
set out within compelling verse
so literate and grammar graced
they’d teach me through example how
to bring alive before a reader’s eyes
the gloried acts of chivalry,
that were the essence of
the “one brief shining moment”
forged by the bearer of Excalibur
until the savaged darkness fell
because of Medraut’s treachery
and Guinevere's adultery
upon the time in Albion
that’s known to all as Arthur’s age
They are not anywhere
upon a page
or on a screen
no doubt because
despite your bragging how
you’re so adept
at writing captivating poetry
you know
that if you tried to do this thing
you’d show
you haven’t any of the art or the ability
required to meet, fulfill, the task
I’ve charged you with, i.e.,
to make the British hero come alive
so pulsingly
he thrives within a reader’s thoughts
or memory
You are aware
that anything you’d deign
to write about
the denizens of Camelot
would be in form and style
and language, too,
abysmal in its quality
in phrasing deictic, grammar gaffed
and incoherent, ragged, and
in thought so incomplete,
and therefore’d be a testament
to just how much
you lack poetic mastery.
And so it’s no surprise that you
again prescind
from taking up this enterprise.
For you don’t want to face
the recompence
in stark critiques
you’d rightly be subjected to
because in writing Arthurania,
the way you write about
your other themes
you’d then so undeniably provide
compelling evidence
of your poetical incompetence.
***
Cue the ad hominemed and red herringed respons.
Published 25th Jun 2022
All writing remains the property of the author. Don't use it for any purpose without their permission.
likes 0
reading list entries 0
comments 6
reads 198
Commenting Preference:
The author encourages honest critique.
25th Jun 2022 8:28pm
Who told you, my dear friend,
that l'm interested in
writing about king Arthur and his deeds,
or if he was a man of perfect life or mean.
All what l said about that famous king
was that the poetry which was
written about this man
could stay for such a time
that was so long,
and then l compared what
was written about him
with what you write and l see here
in this outstanding group.
Then l asked where you are
from what was written in the past
about that king, and how long what you write will stay.
As a poet, l'm not interested in
writing about such verse
concerning previous time.
You know so well
what subjects l'm so much
interested in, and hope
that you like them.
that l'm interested in
writing about king Arthur and his deeds,
or if he was a man of perfect life or mean.
All what l said about that famous king
was that the poetry which was
written about this man
could stay for such a time
that was so long,
and then l compared what
was written about him
with what you write and l see here
in this outstanding group.
Then l asked where you are
from what was written in the past
about that king, and how long what you write will stay.
As a poet, l'm not interested in
writing about such verse
concerning previous time.
You know so well
what subjects l'm so much
interested in, and hope
that you like them.
25th Jun 2022 9:12pm
As predicted, you've just replied to me with a poorly written excuse for not doing what I asked you to do. The issue isn't whether you are interested or not in writing about King Arthur, but whether, given your actual and implicit claims to be a master of poetic art, you would show that you have the ability to write something about him or other denizens of Camelot that would be enthralling, let alone that would be -- in terms of style -- without any of your tell not show tendencies as well as the grammar gaffes, solecisms, forced rhymes, inversions, turgid, deictic, puzzling phrases, and question-begging claims that populate your submissions.
So here's more evidence that you lack that ability.
So here's more evidence that you lack that ability.
26th Jun 2022 5:30pm
Let's get to the heart of the matter. Leaving aside the fact that, unlike your idolTennyson and older poets like Malory or Swinburne or Morris or Arnold, you are not interested in the Arthurian legends, let alone writing about them, do you believe that you are nevertheless **capable of writing** an enthralling, engaging poem about Arthur or the denizens of Camelot that would not contain faulty meter, grammar gaffes, solecisms, forced rhymes, inversions, deictic lines, incoherencies, and puzzling phrases? This is a "yes" or "no" question.
Cue either no repose to this question or one that is a red herring and that avoids saying either "yes" or "no".
Cue either no repose to this question or one that is a red herring and that avoids saying either "yes" or "no".
26th Jun 2022 8:15pm
Very dear Baldwin,
Believe it or not, l consider you as a very dear friend to me. But Baldwin, l am not interested in those very long poems, which narrate imaginary stories. I am interested in deep emotions that can' affect people's lives. You can see that very clearly in my poems. Why should l spend such a long time about something that means nothing to me? Please be reasonable, Baldwin. This is not a red herring, my very dear friend.
Believe it or not, l consider you as a very dear friend to me. But Baldwin, l am not interested in those very long poems, which narrate imaginary stories. I am interested in deep emotions that can' affect people's lives. You can see that very clearly in my poems. Why should l spend such a long time about something that means nothing to me? Please be reasonable, Baldwin. This is not a red herring, my very dear friend.
And just as I predicted, you've written a response that does not answer the question that I asked you to answer --which is a strange and insulting way for someone to act towards his "friend".
Your response deals with a question I did not raise. I did not ask you whether you should write about a subject you are not interested in. I asked you whether you thought you had the capacity and the talent necessary to write an enthralling and engaging poem about Arthur and/or the denizens of Camelot. So your message above IS most certainly a red herring and for you to say that it is not indicates that you don't know what a red herring is.
Moreover, the fact that you changed the subject and spoke to a question I did not ask and avoided giving one or the other of the only two legitimate responses my question could be properly answered with shows that you know that you are **not capable** of writing an enthralling piece about Arthur and/or the denizens of Camelot, let alone one that would not contain faulty meter, grammar gaffes, solecisms, forced rhymes, inversions, deictic lines, incoherencies, and puzzling phrases?
So once again, leaving aside the matter of your lack of interest in the topic of Arthur and Camelot, I ask: Do you think that you have the talent to write something on this topic that an educated and knowledgeable reader of poetry (which, according to you, is every reader of posts appearing on DUP) would find engaging and enthralling, not to mention absent of faulty meter, grammar gaffes, solecisms, forced rhymes, inversions, deictic lines, incoherencies, and puzzling phrases?
The only legitimate, non-red herring answer to this question is either "yes" or "no."
Moreover, who said anything about writing a **long** poem or spending a great deal of time and effort on an Arturian piece?. I didn't. So it seems if you think that that is what I asked if you were capable of doing. then once again you are misreading me as well as engaging in the underhanded tactic of putting words in my mouth -- which are things that, unless one is a snake, one does not do to a friend.
And, after all, given how much you have claimed that you are a master of poetry, I should think that you'd be able to whip up some good Arturania without expending much time or effort to do so.
**** Red Herring
The expression is mainly used to assert that an argument is not relevant to the issue being discussed. For example, "I think we should make the academic requirements stricter for students. I recommend you support this because we are in a budget crisis, and we do not want our salaries affected." The second sentence, though used to support the first sentence, does not address that topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring"
Red herring
From Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English
ˌred ˈherring noun [countable]
a fact or idea that is not important but is introduced to take your attention away from the points that are important
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/red-herring
Your response deals with a question I did not raise. I did not ask you whether you should write about a subject you are not interested in. I asked you whether you thought you had the capacity and the talent necessary to write an enthralling and engaging poem about Arthur and/or the denizens of Camelot. So your message above IS most certainly a red herring and for you to say that it is not indicates that you don't know what a red herring is.
Moreover, the fact that you changed the subject and spoke to a question I did not ask and avoided giving one or the other of the only two legitimate responses my question could be properly answered with shows that you know that you are **not capable** of writing an enthralling piece about Arthur and/or the denizens of Camelot, let alone one that would not contain faulty meter, grammar gaffes, solecisms, forced rhymes, inversions, deictic lines, incoherencies, and puzzling phrases?
So once again, leaving aside the matter of your lack of interest in the topic of Arthur and Camelot, I ask: Do you think that you have the talent to write something on this topic that an educated and knowledgeable reader of poetry (which, according to you, is every reader of posts appearing on DUP) would find engaging and enthralling, not to mention absent of faulty meter, grammar gaffes, solecisms, forced rhymes, inversions, deictic lines, incoherencies, and puzzling phrases?
The only legitimate, non-red herring answer to this question is either "yes" or "no."
Moreover, who said anything about writing a **long** poem or spending a great deal of time and effort on an Arturian piece?. I didn't. So it seems if you think that that is what I asked if you were capable of doing. then once again you are misreading me as well as engaging in the underhanded tactic of putting words in my mouth -- which are things that, unless one is a snake, one does not do to a friend.
And, after all, given how much you have claimed that you are a master of poetry, I should think that you'd be able to whip up some good Arturania without expending much time or effort to do so.
**** Red Herring
The expression is mainly used to assert that an argument is not relevant to the issue being discussed. For example, "I think we should make the academic requirements stricter for students. I recommend you support this because we are in a budget crisis, and we do not want our salaries affected." The second sentence, though used to support the first sentence, does not address that topic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_herring"
Red herring
From Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English
ˌred ˈherring noun [countable]
a fact or idea that is not important but is introduced to take your attention away from the points that are important
https://www.ldoceonline.com/dictionary/red-herring
"I am interested in deep emotions that can' [why the apostrophe?] affect people's lives."
Leaving aside the fact that what you meant to say (but didn't with any degree of clarity) was that you are interested in writing about the deep emotions that, when experienced, have an effect upon people's lives, here's a suggestion: write about the deep people affecting emotions that Arthur displayed.
Leaving aside the fact that what you meant to say (but didn't with any degree of clarity) was that you are interested in writing about the deep emotions that, when experienced, have an effect upon people's lives, here's a suggestion: write about the deep people affecting emotions that Arthur displayed.
