Love is Not a Document

“Love is Not a Document”

The world’s people need to see from sight,
And not from past or a world’s divide.
Some must learn that things are reachable heights,
And not deny which they have learned to lie.
For in my heart I know it is a wrong,
And implore a world to stop being blind.
Do we condemn a bird to sing its song?
Of course not! So why for man and mankind?
I hold this to be an absolute truth:
I know my love; and I know their love too.
Being political – they have no couth,
But love’s not a law; what does paper do?
The time has come when I can take no more,
For this fight is an un-fightable war.

This is awful. Its entire purpose as a poem is to preach and rant. It has neither introduction or conclusion. Worst yet, it flip-flops and uses imprecise language to persuade... a disastrous combination, if I ever saw one.

1. Don't just randomly use phrases that you think seem intelligent and stick it in poem form. It's awful.

2. Next time you want to want to rant, make it MATTER. Don't go on the abstract about mankind sucking. Why does it suck? Because things are reachable heights? Because they have learned to lie? Because the world is blind? I'm sorry... do you want me to continue on the tired, vague, listless images that you continued to use? And yes, I know, poetic license and all that crap. But still. Your imprecision has rendered this poem dead on arrival. It never even had the chance. If you want to rant about humanity, you might as well discuss what's so bad about it, and if you can't name a specific, best not write at all.

Thanks.

I wrote it for class. (I didn't want to put the words "Gay-Discrimination" in it, as it was read out loud.)

But, I see what you mean. I thought I made it clear about its purpose and what it was about, but I guess I didn't.

I'll try to go back and edit it some.

I was actually not even thinking about gay rights when I read it- simply discrimination and humanity's faults in general. I think- by mentioning or alluding somewhere the specific topic of discussion, it'd be easier to understand as the meaning is emphasized.

I can't say I agree 100% with Snoink, but I do agree that it was a bit on the ranting-side. I think the part that really does it though is the

Do we condemn a bird to sing its song?
Of course not! So why for man and mankind?

The tone just sorta switched at that point and it was a bit jarring.

The rest of it was written rather skillfully and I actually thought the piece did well to portray a side of one of today's biggest controversies. It didn't have much poetic elements, but it made me reflect and it was well written. Though if you're going for poetic, it might need a bit more focus.

Great job all the same

~ Audy

Thanks.

It was supposed to be "Ranty".

My teacher said, "This is supposed to be a sonnet complaining about something in life."

So yeah...it was rant-ish. (But that's what I was aiming for. )

Thanks again!

Jon wrote:Thanks.

I wrote it for class. (I didn't want to put the words "Gay-Discrimination" in it, as it was read out loud.)

That makes it even more worse! How can art ever be used to portray injustice if you are too afraid to name, specifically, what the injustice is? And then the vagueness... ugh! I'm just glad that there is no possible way that this poem can be published (it's rather awful!) because it is vague poems like these that hinder the homosexual movement even more than the people against homosexuality do in the first place. Since there is so much wiggle room in the poem, it can be interpreted to mean a great many of things, and it can be easily used to imprison homosexuals even further. Awful stuff.

Also, it isn't necessary to name the words, "Gay-Discrimination" in it, necessarily. That's not subtle, and it would make your poem ridiculous. This is one of those things that you should "show and not tell." You need to learn how to do that if you ever want to write poetry competently.

And there is a difference between being ranty and complaining about something legitimate. Ranty is awful because it's all the complaints without any basis or merit. There is no soul in a rant, and that generally makes awful poetry.

I don't know. Get rid of this and make something better. The more I learn about the nature of this assignment, the more hideous this poem becomes. You're better off just starting over entirely.

I just want to say that this poem was extremely powerful to me. I loved how you didnt come right out and say what was on your mind, you used analogies and discriptive writing to convince the reader in a poetic way.

Being political – they have no couth,
But love’s not a law; what does paper do?
The time has come when I can take no more,
For this fight is an un-fightable war.

That to me was the strongest part.


Oh and one more thing.
That "Snoink" guy needs to shudup.

I wasn't thinking of gay rights when i was reading this either.
But i loved the poem,maybe not reason behind it but i still liked it!
Keep going!

Thats nice of you Snoink. Very tactful.

Anyways, Gay Rights did occur to me, but it was pretty well done. It was obvious enough that it was your subject, but it wasnt blatantly and stupidly obvious. I disagree with Snoink, you dont have to come right out and name your target. In my opinion, its good to suggest and lead your reader to it and have different people interpret it different ways.

I think your piece needs some revision, you need to go through and make sure everything runs smoothly. Things like "Do we condemn a bird to sing its song?" That doesnt make complete sense. Maybe something like "Do we condemn a bird [when it/for] sings/singing its song?"

I think this has a lot of potential, and its really not too bad as it is.

Keep writing.

Not that I completely agree with Snoink, but I do believe it is very preachy. Too preachy, even. It does has potential, but you don't have to be so flowery with your language. Simple words are fine. Preach doesn't usually bother me, but your whole poem centered around that. I think you should rewrite this, because its interesting and it has a cool start.