THE WRONG POEM
This is not your poem, Eliot, Pound, Shapiro.
This is not your poem, Teasdale, Frost, Ferlinghetti.
This is no poem of yours, dear Walt, dear Emily, dear Maya.
Mostly,
this is not a Kerouac poem
with its eye on the horizon, stumbling drunk
from a ditched Cadillac somewhere just west of convention.
This is not a Ginsberg poem
flush with outrage and happy to shock the mundanes
with news of the most sensible things in the world.
This is not a Snyder poem, clinging to a mountain
wearing a tiny hat. Not a Corso poem, grand thug holler,
a diPrima poem slipping past the boys into the front row,
and it could never be a Kaufman poem, because nothing can be that isn’t already.
This poem smells like a scorecard in a gutter.
This poem slides a video under the teller’s window and withdraws the meager change.
This is not a recording, a television show, a commercial for its own last rites.
This poem eats scraps and makes sense.
This poem doubles back upon itself and tries to become a world
where a drunken mountain can fall on a car
and a cranium licked with fire shines cat’s eyes from within.
This poem wants to be
the psalm that rises when something that has not mattered becomes holy.
I will never be a writer until this poem is done.
I will never be a poet until I do not make another poem
about another poem
for as long as I live.
Dark Matter 
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 4:55 am
Re: I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
(NOTE) I had posted a comment earlier, but I realizd it came off as kinda nasty, and it was meant to be funny, so I removed it and came back to this one for some added work.
See, I thought of this poem as being a way of saying everything you just said.
The speaker’s braggadocio here is totally farcial. The poem is indeed pointless in any real sense.
It should be read with a hearty dose of snickering.
The poem was designed to do two things: make a point about the folly of trying NOT to be influenced by other poets, and to make fun of those who try to proclaim their originality when there’s nothing original about their work.
Doing it as a poem is just more fun.
What, exactly, does anybody mean when they say “this poem?” in the way it’s said here?
If any poem I write is only an extension of the last one I wrote, and that one is only an extension of all the poems I’ve ever written and heard and read, it’s a little hard to narrow down the poem in front of you as a discrete entity.
As to meta poems — poems about poetry? I have a long standing feud with Sou about this one; she feels more like you feel about them, and I’m of the opposite mind: I think they are necessary and important.
Why would any human endeavor be off limits to a poet? Poetry is something we do; why not write about it? We write about blow jobs, birth, death, salt, and soap; washing and filth and red ripe tomatoes; fucking and fighting and chicken soup.
It’s all a part of who we are.
Now, I dislike poems about poetry that SUCK; and I indeed probably hate them more than others; but I’ve also heard some stellar pieces about the process of art.
It’s easier to write bad poems about poetry than it is to paint bad pictures about painting, I guess…Then again, isn’t Jackson Pollock’s work sort of painting about painting?
At any rate — I find the writing of a good poem about poetry to be far harder than any other type, and I relish the challenge, even when the result turns into broad farce, as it did here.
PS: I haven’t written a funny poem in ages, either. I needed to.
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”
January 20th, 2005 at 3:19 am
I don’t know if you’re looking for critique, but…
As far as meta-poems go, Tony, I gotta say, you write the best.
But that’s kind of a cold compliment coming from me, because I hate meta-poems. Not even in satire. It’s like a Saturday Night Live comedian portraying some despicable celebrity like Hilary Duff or Paris Hilton; mimicking the chronically annoying is still annoying. This is probably a personal bias.
In the case of this poem, there’s little point in bragging defiantly to the (mostly) dead. Nor in telling the reader what can only be proven by not talking about it.
But the images are awesome. All of ’em. Seriously.
There’s an episode of The Simpsons in which Ned Flanders runs into an ex-girfriend of his, who is the lead singer of a Christian Rock band. Her old Christian band broke up to go mainstream, and when Ned asks if that was hard, she said, “Nah. They just changed the word ‘Jesus’ to ‘Baby.'” So, what exactly do you mean when you say, “This poem?”