|
|
 |
|
Getting Through : Creative Writing
Call it something nice | from thatata - Saturday, July 28, 2007
accessed 1045 times something from either the fifty percent who are crazy,or the fifty percent who are nuts. A Particularly Vile Piece of Imagination.
God is impotent in the face of man;though you suck his dick,all you produce is a vicious circle of saliva.
Of course some people have a taste for this kind of romance.They are welcome to it.Yes.Suck suck that rancid air.
Imagine that pink,purple,and proud scepter.And stick your brain on it. Squish.
Now we are in the prezence of God Almighty.
Meeting the Patriarch
He "smitted" me with his hands,real biblically.Not strike,smote.His very skin was the skin of a Patriarch;there was the bad air of the prophet about him.The kind of man who begat chirldren and was begotten.
The kind of guy,who lives with history in his literal veins.The type of guy,who stops time in the most unpleasant way for a child.Yup,face to face with a "patriarch".But,the earth didnt swallow me up at all,it was rather bathetic. |
|
|
|
|
Reader's comments on this article Add a new comment on this article |  from live_fast-die_young
Saturday, August 11, 2007 - 22:54
(Agree/Disagree?)
I like this! Like it enough to get angry at the atrocious punctuation and the very distracting nu-spell/misspelling of words such as prezence. It's butchery of the written word! Spacebarrr!
(reply to this comment)
|  From thatata
Sunday, August 12, 2007, 01:03
(Agree/Disagree?)
Thanks.I have this mixture of stupidity,ignorance,and laziness,that makes me write badly formed sentences.That word "prezence" was written out of laziness,it wasn't really in my mind to write a nu-spelling,its a stoopid misspelling.
By the way,that story"Meeting the Patriarch",it was suppose to convey ludicrous bathos,but it doesnt really work out does it?I know I can learn more hmmm...?(reply to this comment) |
| | From live_fast-die_young
Monday, August 13, 2007, 03:25
(Agree/Disagree?)
Stupidity, no. Laziness, perhaps. You don't need me to tell you how the quality of writing can (in the worse cases) literally rip the carpet out from under the content. If you don't respect your work, why should anyone else?
If you're looking for constructive criticism you might try posting your work on another website such as one of these forums: allpoetrydotcom, everypoetdotorg, thepoetsanctuarydotnet, etc.
Here's my opinion: I think you have the idea of bathos there alright. Religious material is great for that because the hyperbole and antiquated words are already contextual. I'd suggest leading into the piece more gradually, with more description, that way you won't have to define the whole piece at the end by saying "bathetic" which, in my opinion undermines your purpose. For example:
"He smote me with his hands, real biblically. The pose he struck just before the landing of his righteous anger said more than the actual blow. You have been smitten. His very skin was the skin of a Patriarch...."
or some such other extention of the first idea.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From thatata
Wednesday, August 15, 2007, 02:44
(Agree/Disagree?)
You're right. I tend to be like,"I don't care", Ill just stick this out. Obviously though If no one gets it, then things ain't working. It comes from my love of things that are twisted and not straight, clumsiness, or like Punk Rock, blunt yet incisive. Ironic or "supernatural"(unnatural).
Anyways, I got your point. I think I'll check out those sites too.
Im reading Salvador Dali at the moment- "If you refuse to study anatomy, the arts of drawing and perspective, the mathematics of aesthetics, and the science of colour, let me tell you that this more a sign of laziness then genius."(reply to this comment) |
| | from AndyH
Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - 20:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm realizing that my attack at you was misdirected, I was more frustrated at people like scorpion, prince c, and Samuel. I especially began to reconsider, when I saw Samuel jumping on my bandwagon. Please Samuel, stop agreeing with me.
I also stopped and remembered that I've said far more vulgar things than you on many an occasion on this very site. So for being a hypocrite I apologize. You seem like a bright enough fellow, horrific punctuation aside.
I stand by my point however, about the decline of content and such.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | from rainy
Wednesday, August 01, 2007 - 01:05
(Agree/Disagree?)
Strangely enough, I don't have a problem with this. It is merely mirroring back the disgusting God-pornography we had forced on us in the cult, and as such I think it is acceptable here in the creative writing section. Better out than in, I say.
(reply to this comment)
| | | | | | | From rainy
Thursday, August 02, 2007, 12:19
(Agree/Disagree?)
Bit harsh on yourself, Andy, Babe. I wasn't criticising anyone, but I was indeed pointing out what you stated above. This bit of writing immediately struck me as some grotesque funfair-mirror parody of the LJ series, and, well, art has the right to be ugly IMO. Wasn't personal, Andy. I was fully expecting to be slammed with the 'thumbs-down'. :)(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | From thatata
Thursday, August 02, 2007, 12:38
(Agree/Disagree?)
Really?Is that so?
How I wrote it,was not to be meant to be a parody of the Family.At least thats not the spirit I wrote it in,I wrote it in the spirit ,of how I explained it.At least thats what I think is true.
When you gave me your critiq of what I what I wrote I thought you may be going deeper into Family tradition,not the L J series but mabye more like "Old Church,New Church",isnt there a letter like that?
I thought mabye,you were going to talk about the sort of pornogaraphic symbolism they use.And then I thought,yes even the Bible uses this kind of language.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | From thatata
Sunday, August 05, 2007, 07:39
(Agree/Disagree?)
Ezekiel-now heres a guy ,with the real mouth shits.He was famous of course for literally eating the stuff.
In Ezekiel chapter 23,he writes about Judah and Israel as being two dick-hungry sluts and their just and due punishments are:
33Thou shalt be filled with drunkeness and sorrow,with the cup of astonishment and desolation,with the cup of thy sister Samaria.34.Thou shalt even drink it and suck it out,and thou shalt break the sherds thereof,and pluck off thine own breasts:for I have spoken it,saith the Lord God.
And heres some more:
43.Then said I unto her that was old in adulteries,Will they now commit whoredoms with her,and she with them?44.Yet they went in unto her,as they go in unto a women that playeth the harlot:so went they in unto Aholah and unto Aholibah,the lewd women.45.And the righteous men,they shall judge them after the manner of adultresses,and after the manner of women that shed blood;because they are adultresses,and blood is in their hands.46.For thus sayeth the Lord God;I will bring up a company upon them,and will give them to be removed and spoiled.47.And the company shall stone them with stones,and dispatch them with their swords;they shall slay their sons and their daughters,and burn up their houses with fire.48.Thus will I cause lewdness to cease out of the land,that all women may be taught not to do after your lewdness.
I hate to admit it, but the Bible can write things with a lot of horror...(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From thatata
Sunday, August 05, 2007, 23:08
(Agree/Disagree?)
Actually Ive read quite a bit of Oscar Wilde,I especially like what he wrote in prision De Profundis.His interpretation of jesus though perhaps not true is the most interesting Ive ever read.Not all that moralistic or logical crap that usually fills other peoples writings,because they feel they got to prove something.Which perhaps no one really does.
I like his plays and essays too,He had a tendency to use the same witty lines in a number of places.Certain phrases youll find in more then one book.Another reason why I like him might be that he called himself an anarchist on one occasion ,and he wroteThe Soul of Man Under Socialism thats a work of literary anarchy.Plus Johnny Rotten liked him.
Youre attempt at semi-insulting me ,amused me.But mabye you were just filled with good intentions and were just trying to educate me.Which ever way thanks for being so brilliant.
Im open to any more education ,feel free.Ill look forward to it.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | from cheeks
Sunday, July 29, 2007 - 20:34
(Agree/Disagree?)
I would have to say as far as poetry goes this too is crap. As a Christian I simply am not going to respond to the rest. Pearls and swine and all that. We did use to vote to the trailer park comments and articles that had a lot of foul language. I don't know why we don't still do that. I would say if this was a genuine article keep it, but to me the kid has the mouth shits so why bother keeping it around?
(reply to this comment)
| | | | From cheeks
Monday, July 30, 2007, 05:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh Honey, there is no apology for being a Christian. I am very secure in what I do and do not believe in. I just see little reason to debate my beliefs against yours. Like I have said before I don't believe in aliens and spend little time pondering the issue. I also don't go and mock people who do believe in aliens, everyone has their quirks. Like Republicans who think we went to war because Sadam has W.M.D's. To each their own. I do happen to think your article was uncalled for and was written for no other purpose than to shock people and piss them off. I see little reason to support an article like that on this site. I think freedom of speech can only go so far. Had you written an article that was offensive to gay or black people you would have never gotten your article on the main site but because this is a decidedly non-Christian site they allowed it. (reply to this comment) |
| | From thatata
Monday, July 30, 2007, 05:26
(Agree/Disagree?)
Well,if they take this off, this site,maybe I wouldnt mind that much.But believe it or not,I didnt put this on this site to shock people.I wrote it as a joke, not on specific christian people ,or even really on christianity specifically as a major thing to attack,but like I said an absurd joke or mabye more like a joke on an absurd situation.
By the way I also wrote another article but it doesnt seem to have been posted.I wonder if theres someting, or some reason for it?I promise the next post isnt obsene ,it may be a little dumb but its also more then that,or is it less then that?
Actually thinking about it,jokes are suppose to shock or at least surprise.
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From thatata
Tuesday, July 31, 2007, 00:41
(Agree/Disagree?)
Its a confused piece of writing I admit,originally it was meant to be posted under creative writing.But it got moved to dealing,mabye thats better ,Im not sure?By putting it in dealing it gives it a different feeling and nuance.
Though there may be a fair bit of stupidity in it,theres also some meaning.
The question: is truth logic or feeling?I admit can be seen as a futile question.But it is a question that involves us.
If you want you can read the article.Its been posted.I would welcome both constructive or destructive criticism.(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | from AndyH
Saturday, July 28, 2007 - 23:01
(Agree/Disagree?)
I'm going to vote this article for the trailer part, not because I disagree, or because of some kind of popularity contest, but because it is VULGAR, and clearly says in the FAQ, that obscene shit like this belongs in the trailer park.
Anyone who's been here long enough knows that this forum has degraded considerably. We need to raise the bar once again, and we need to do it by not tolerating crap like this.
Or don't, whatever. That's just my two cents.
(reply to this comment)
| From thatata
Saturday, July 28, 2007, 23:45
(Agree/Disagree?)
Sure its kind of vulgar and perhaps obscene,but can it also be funny?And even meaningful?
And i dont know even why you mention something like"popularity contest"thats inappropriate,even though you find it appropriate enough to mention it. Its not on my mind.
And what does "raise the bar " mean,anyway?To whos bar?
To paraphrase oscar wilde,"Brute force i can understand,but brute reason I cant.Theres something unfair about its use,its like hitting below the intellect."
Theres no such thing as superiority of reason.
Oh well.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Samuel
Sunday, July 29, 2007, 05:55
(Agree/Disagree?)
It's vulgar. It's not going to do anyone any good. It's not going to stimulate anyone's mind, or cause them to see new things or the old in a different light. It's not going to imspire anyone to improve themselves, or lend their help to a fellow man. If anything, it will promote closed minded viewpoints and intolerance against people who are different from you. We are all dumber now for having read this. Maybe the Rational Response Squad board will be more appreciative of this utter lunacy that you have managed to pass as an article, but as for me, I have nominated it for the Trailer Park.(reply to this comment) |
| | From afflick
Sunday, July 29, 2007, 12:43
(Agree/Disagree?)
Samuel, do you ever think how often on this site you endorse censorship? It seems to me you are nearly always the first to: nominate for the trailer park; announce what will and will not stimulate minds; call for removal and/or condemnation of material. Who are you to say what is "imspire"-ing to others? You can only speak for youself, you know? So lay off the trigger finger.(reply to this comment) |
| | From thatata
Sunday, July 29, 2007, 08:55
(Agree/Disagree?)
What I wrote even though it can be taken as blasphemy and vulgarity,was written more in the spirit of humor.It was meant to be an absurd joke, or maybe more a joke on an absurd situation.
It was something I wrote on the ineffectualness of the belief in God.There may be vulgarity in the symbolization,yet theres an idea behind it,a type of philosophy.
Though I dont mind moralistic or logical criticism.In a piece written under creative writing, an aesthetic criticism is what I hope for more.
And another thing,I dont believe the major purpose of art is utilitarian.In my sensibilities,that is wrong.(reply to this comment) |
| | From Samuel
Sunday, July 29, 2007, 11:22
 (Agree/Disagree?)
Okay, sorry. There is a difference between writing something in the spirit of humor and meaning what you say.
I also don't think that the major purpose of much art today is utilitarian, but I think that it should be. We stopped at a restaurant after church today for lunch. One of the decorations at the restaurant is a poem written in 1986 about a man describing his first trip to the Statue of Liberty as a boy. The paper it is printed on has a picture of the Statue of Liberty on it. It inspires men and women from across the world to achieve their dreams, and reminds us that the only thing that limits us is our fear and old mindsets.
That is what art should be like. I guess we disagree on that, and that's okay.(reply to this comment) |
| | From thatata
Sunday, July 29, 2007, 12:16
 (Agree/Disagree?)
I didnt think you would comment like that"that art should be utilitarian" its a bit of a suprise.Personally in my own way of thinking to make art to only serve the utilitarian,is to degrade art and personality. Isnt the western personality famed for its rebellion ,its striving to understand ,and mabye in its later parts to give irratinality its due,after all perhaps all ideals may be to a certain degree irrational.
Personally I like democracy a lot,an artist should perhaps realize that in all forms of government,democracy has given him the most freedom.Thats why I think artists who are communist were kind of fucked,like picasso an idiot ,was a communist.But alot of artists forsook communism when they realized ,that communism as practiced in the Soviet Union , and in all country that were ruled by communist parties,is totalitarian.
Since we have such a grand democracy,I think the artist should use it to express himself as an individual,not as some kind of partisan.Not as a propagandist,but as a person,a person with individual tastes and perhaps even vulgarities...(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From thatata
Sunday, July 29, 2007, 14:00
(Agree/Disagree?)
Tolerance,I have tolerance for your beliefs,mabye especially because I know youre beliefs can have no power over me.If you were a nazi ,I would have no tolerance for your beliefs ,because I imagine in this world you would wipe me out in a second.You Being christian in a democratic world,I can have tolerance,mabye even a respect for your beliefs.
This respect does not come from belief in what you say,but mabye more in extremisim and sincirity.At least thats the kind of respect I had before.But mabye now I can say this respect,is the respect I would give to anybody that has really looked on life.
The christian,in my way of thinking has looked on life.And in my opinion,has fallen into an abstraction.
Can anyone find the concrete through abstractin?
Me even though I have a feeling toward extremism,cannot in my state get with it.I think a person should be lucid,if he isnt he cuts off one of the legs ,he cuts off one of the legs, of what it is to be a man.
I think the state of man is an artistic state.The supernatural and the logical should never be agreed upon,in a certain sense.And do you think they can be agreed upon in a human sense?How so?For you I guess it would mean that we must be born again.
But mabye christians,dont understand what it is to be born again?The baby lives in the concrete the nonabstract.Its just growth, nonthinking and yet it thrives.
(dammit I better cut this off Im sounding idiotically serious)and by the way im drunk.damn.
(reply to this comment) |
| | From Samuel
Sunday, July 29, 2007, 19:11
(Agree/Disagree?)
Oh, so you're drunk, that explains all the typing errors ;)
Yes, my beliefs have no power over you, but at the same time, your beliefs have no power over me. I agree with your saying that you could not tolerate the beliefs of a Nazi, but I disagree with your logic behind it. One should be against Nazis not because of fear that in this world they could wipe you out in a second, but because of their belief that any group, creed, or nationality is deserving of being unilatarally wiped out. That is where evil begins.
I don't understand what you mean by your respect coming from my extremism and sincerity instead of what I say. I am a firm believer that extremism is wrong, that if any religious leader is given too much power, it is only a matter of time before they abuse it. Reason must have its place in religion, this is what (should) keep religion on the right path. I think it's a bit sad that there are preachers on TV that go to these extremes, and claim that their theology is absolutely right. Why? Because they're doing it to get followers. Because you cannot have a TV program, a big fancy church, and all the works without a lot of them. Is this where we have come, people who actually seek out these pastors because they are too lazy to think for themselves? I haven't studied much Nazi history, but what do you think the chances that that Christians in Nazi Germany did the exact same thing? I really don't think the chances that bad. And the Crusaders, well, obviously they were good and listened to their leaders because they were all poor and didn't have Bibles. And if they had had them, it wouldn't have done them any good because most of them were illiterate. Okay, so maybe they had an excuse for not thinking for themselves, but what excuse do Christians today have?
As far as man being in an artistic state, I never thought of it that way. I think in a human sense, yes, the supernatural and the logical can be agreed on. But that's just me. When I look at the issues of science, such as life cannot evolve from nonlife, I have a very hard time believing that any Evolutionary process could have created life, even if an Intelligent Designer was behind it. Of course, that doesn't mean it's impossible. Just because I, or you, do not beleive in something does not mean that it does not exist or is impossible. For all we know, there could actually be a man in the moon, UFOs could exist, and my ninth grade science teacher could have been an alien from Mars.
Getting serious again. I don't completely understand your next sentence. I don't know whether you are referring to the Baptist idea of being "Born Again" or if you just said that to suggest that Christians can thrive while (according to you) not thinking or growing mentally. Yes, it's possible, but that would be a real shame. That's one thing I like about the church I go to, they don't force their doctrine on people. I wish more churches were like that, instead of the "There's only room for one doctrine in this town, pardner" approach that I see on TV sometimes.
Okay, I'm done for now. Perhaps we can continue this discussion when you're sober?
(reply to this comment) |
| | From roughneck
Monday, July 30, 2007, 19:48
(Agree/Disagree?)
OK, I think I get what you're trying to say, but your mistake lies in giving more or less equal credence to ancient superstitions pulled out of Moses' ass (or your own, even) as to proper scientific theory derived from hundreds of thousands of hours of investigation, experimentation, research and cross-checking.
So yes, there is a gigantic, titanic even, difference between common wild-ass speculation, (or beliefs, hunches, gut feelings and other such appeals to emotion) and properly derived theory, but perhaps your alien 9th grade science teacher failed to properly note the distinction. Bad Martian, Bad!
I'll copy and paste from wikipedia (yeah I know, shoot me) to explain what I mean and hopefully fill this regrettable gap in your education.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#Science
"In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations which is predictive, logical and testable. In principle, scientific theories are always tentative, and subject to corrections or inclusion in a yet wider theory."
In layman's terms, not all ideas deserve equal airtime if to be taught as fact. And yes, habitually disregarding (particularly without even casual perusal) compelling evidence to the contrary of your "beliefs" is quite accurately called evidence of a stunted mind. If "teaching the controversy" must be done (and it should, in the spirit of accuracy) it should be done in Philosophy or Social Studies, not Biology. It's called Science because it's fucking Science, and also to differentiate between it and mere Creative Writing, mkay?(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | From vix
Tuesday, July 31, 2007, 00:55
(Agree/Disagree?)
It's great to see you back, roughie. I always read your comments with great relish. Must be the delicious combination of keen intellect and skillful argument coupled with that scathing wit and well-honed humour. I feel I must congratulate you here on your gemini credentials, long may they serve you so well.
Any progress on the moving thing??
(reply to this comment) |
| | From thatata
Monday, July 30, 2007, 02:23
(Agree/Disagree?)
You say ,reason should have its place in religion ,and keep it on its right path,but reason keeps on reasoning.The christian insistence on honesty and truth,has the effect of making a person question things.He begins to find christianity questionable.That is if hes honest.
"If you desire peace of soul and happiness,then believe;if you would be a disciple of truth,then inquire..."-Nietzche
Theres that verse"The fear of the Lord is the beginning ofwisdom",how about something like this,"The fear of the Lord is the beginning of self-censorship."
(reply to this comment) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
|
|
|
]
[About the Trailer Park] [Who Links Here]