# language deconstructed:



## dannyboy (Nov 3, 2017)

Who taught him words — need,
that terrible master, chalk-dusted hands 
permanently ready to strike the cheek?

Perhaps he has no words, words 
being creatures of the shared, crablike 
critters that scuttle across space,

that slide down the conch ear, 
like children enjoying the water slide, 
until dunked in a gasp of thought.

Eyes, body, skin and smell, hold the links 
forged with the spoken word 
into a chain that binds each to the other.

He, alone, needs no such linkage, 
is mute 
as he endures the pause between visits.

Has he thoughts 
then — or do they, too, 
need words? 

Perhaps time is perpetually about —
a pattern that ensnares him, 
constricts him as ideas circle like sharks.

Or time is a flick of the switch,
He is off, he is on, 
waiting, rage, back to waiting, so on.

He may howl, as if he could see the moon, 
scream pain out into the darkness,
sound to create a chance of light?

Perhaps he throws stones into the dark, 
the clink of them hitting 
seconds to hours to years passing.

Or he uses stones to sharpen his horns 
so despite the boredom of time 
they remain as sharp as his unspoken rage.

If he had words 
could he have unraveled his rage — 
or is that the tale’s sadness, 

inherent in his plight 
the dark as a constant companion
he must always succumb?

If he thought, his thoughts might, 
for a time, confine the rage 
so that it simmers like an unused cock.

In the end, though, 
his thoughts fail him, as thoughts must — 
when left alone they create madness.

No matter how many time the rage,
no matter the times just after the blood — 
the regret, the promises, new beginnings 

he sits amongst ruined bodies,
innocent lunges squeezing out final words 
he cannot understand, 

the smell of decay pressing against him, 
like fingers poking, asking the question 
he cannot answer 

all that persists with the beast 
left in the ruin of bones is the wish 
he had the words to find solace.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 4, 2017)

But where are the Minotaurs?

Kidding. This is great. I’ll write some real feedback later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 5, 2017)

Danny, yet another chance to examine the academic inherent in your work. I spent some time reading up on Deconstructionism (_you choose a whopper_!) in hope to address your poem with the best I’ve of what I’ve gleaned. Here, I savored your metaphorical twist and turns. Richer, than ever. 

Who taught him words — need, _are essential?  _
That terrible master, chalk-dusted hands 
permanently ready to strike the cheek? _Unlike the Formalist who places importance on structure and literary devices, that terrible master, teacher of Deconstructionism purports that words are insignificant._

[Perhaps he has no words, words 
being creatures of the shared, crablike 
critters that scuttle across space,] _The breaking down of language_

[that slide down the conch ear, _great imagery!_
like children enjoying the water slide,] _In contrast to the whole, actually haunting _
[until dunked in a gasp of thought.] _Deconstructionism causes us to question and revise everything we were told about the world._

Eyes, body, skin and smell, hold the “links” 
forged with the spoken word 
into a chain that binds each to the other”._ It __asserts that words only refer to other words*_

He, alone, needs no such linkage, 
is mute *
“as he endures the pause between visits”. _Beautiful wording but unclear as to meaning_

Has he thoughts 
then — or do they, too, 
need words? _“Words are not fully present to us”

_Perhaps time is perpetually about —
a pattern that ensnares him, 
constricts him as ideas circle like sharks. _What an absolutely brilliant twist!!!_

Or time is a flick of the switch, 
He is off, he is on, 
waiting, rage, back to waiting, so on.

He may howl as if he could see the moon, _at a moon, unseen (slant -_
scream pain out into the darkness,
sound to create a chance of light?

Perhaps he throws stones into the dark, 
the clink of them hitting_ maybe another word?_
seconds to hours to years passing.

Or he uses stones to sharpen his horns  _Maybe "tongue" _but to no avail. Make this the focus of verse? Love the "stone sharpening"
so despite the boredom of time 
they remain as sharp as his unspoken rage.

If he had words _He cannot. __Language is unstable or impossible in the Deconstructionist world_
could he have unraveled his rage — 
or is that the tale’s sadness, 

inherent in his plight 
the dark as a constant companion
he must (must he) always succumb?

If he thought, his thoughts might, [_like you driving this home]_
for a time, confine the rage 
so that it simmers like an unused cock. [_Great slant rhymes and striking imagery not easy to forget]_

In the end, though, 
his thoughts fail him, as thoughts must — 
when left alone they create madness._ [__Thoughts, left too long alone, are like a feral animal. Perfectly, put!]_

No matter how many time the rage,
no matter the times just after the blood — _like the repeating _
the regret, the promises, new beginnings 

he sits amongst ruined bodies, _now soulless bodies_
innocence  lunges, squeezing out final words 
he cannot understand, _for language can never be mastered, comprehended _

the smell of decay pressing against him, 
like fingers poking, asking the question 
he cannot answer _Can a smell ask a question?_

all that persists within the beast_ sans organic language, we lose our humanity, soul. Does this not render us a beast?_
left in the ruin of bones is the wish 
he had the words to find solace  _How can solace be found where words are nothing but an analytic examination in order to reveal their inadequacy. __This is a heartbreaking ending._

Thank you, Danny who always manages to marry the intellect and visceral with such skill. Laurie


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 5, 2017)

Hi Jen,

thanks for the feedback - this poem attempts to work through Deconstructionism and uses the Minotaur as the central figure - that may help with that "he alone..." - then again it might just be that those three lines don't work. Part of this is trying to work through how things like Deconstructionism etc are attempts to replace the more "mythic"  or "alchemic" thoughts of past generations (and so in truth this poem connects to the poem Literalism not just through the Minotaur, but also through this idea of past world-views being replaced by the new ones).

I must admit being a bit concerned in referencing Deconstrucionalism - it has been many many years since I actually looked at it - (late 70's I was a language & literature student before theatre took control of my bodily functions).


Again thank you

Danny


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 5, 2017)

Hi, Danny....that would be "Laurie"  - (but Jen is a lovely name. Hi, Jen!) I suppose I took your title to an entirely different level but did learn much about Deconstructionism as it pertains to Literature. Nearly impossible to define so exploring the theoretical was interesting. 

Seriously, I will have to re-read because I did not get reference to the Minotaur. I had thought your reference to "He" was akin to the "Royal We"

Now, if you had titled your poem "The Minotaur" I would have looked this up immediately only to discover you were referring to my ex-husband - the bullheaded beast....




> I must admit being a bit concerned in referencing Deconstrucionalism


 No worry. Now, just a ghost of a thought :ghost:

I'm all linked out by now but will become properly acquainted with this Greek shortly.

Thanks for explaining. Laurie


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 5, 2017)

Hi Laurie,

sorry Jen's my wife - oops.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 5, 2017)

Sorry, that was a long 'later', but I'd like to go through this comprehensively and make some comments (in red)



dannyboy said:


> Who taught him words — need,
> that terrible master, chalk-dusted hands
> permanently ready to strike the cheek?
> 
> ...


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 5, 2017)

Hi VB - thanks so very much,

I'll work on this over the day and respond later. Plenty to think about!


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 6, 2017)

language deconstructed: (edit 1)

Who taught him words — need,
that pitiless master, chalk-dusted hands 
permanently ready to strike the cheek?

Perhaps he has no words? Words 
being creatures of the shared, crablike 
critters that scuttle across space,

slide down the conch ear, 
children relishing the water slide, 
until dunked in a gasp of cold thought.

Eyes, body, skin and smell, hold the links 
forged with the spoken word 
into a chain that binds each to the other.

He, alone, needs no such linkage, 
is mute 
as he endures the hiatus between visits.

Has he thoughts 
then — or do they, too, 
need words? 

Perhaps time is perpetually about —
a pattern that ensnares him, 
constricts him as ideas circle like sharks.

Or time is a flick of the switch,
He is off, he is on, 
waiting, rage, back to waiting, so on.

He may howl, as if he could see the moon, 
scream pain out into the darkness,
sound to create a chance of light.

Perhaps he throws stones into the dark, 
the clink of them hitting 
seconds to hours to years passing.

Or he uses stones to sharpen his horns 
so despite the boredom of time 
they remain as sharp as his unspoken rage.

If he had words 
could he have unravelled his rage — 
or is that the tale’s sadness, 

inherent in his plight 
the dark as a constant companion
he must always succumb?

If he thought, his thoughts might, 
for a time, confine the rage 
so that it simmers like an unused cock.

In the end, though, 
his thoughts fail him, as thoughts must — 
when left alone they create madness.

No matter how many times the rage,
no matter the times just after the blood — 
the regret, the promises, new beginnings. 

He sits amongst ruined bodies,
innocent lungs squeeze out final words 
he cannot understand, 

the smell of decay presses against him, 
like fingers that poke and require 
an explanation he cannot provide.

Left in the ruin of bones 
the beast yearns for words 
to construct an exit.


----------



## VonBradstein (Nov 6, 2017)

I can't believe I didn't mention it the first time around but...

...'unused _cock_'?


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 6, 2017)

the bull in the paddock...basically leave a bull alone and with all that testosterone, it gets really, really mad...the  proverbial itch and all that...


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 6, 2017)

> Originally Posted by *dannyboy* this poem attempts to work through Deconstructionism and uses the Minotaur as the central figure - that may help with that "he alone..." - then again it might just be that those three lines don't work. Part of this is trying to work through how things like Deconstructionism etc are attempts to replace the more "mythic" or "alchemic" thoughts of past generations (and so in truth this poem connects to the poem Literalism not just through the Minotaur, but also through this idea of past world-views being replaced by the new ones).


A bit stumped (seems contrary?)This, registers. Not a world-view but a sociological example of views being replaced by new ones. e.g. Emily Post’s Books on Etiquette from decades past, now addresses “Virtual Etiquette”.

I read up on the mythology this morning. Fascinating! What follows is what I’ve gathered, reading your poem in new light. However, reviewing your first write as being purely about Deconstructionism was easier. The sharp edging of it worked with the concept. Here in mythological context, I think maybe a smother, clearer approach might serve your subject better.  OK. To what I gleaned. Not much. But gave it all I got...



> *language deconstructed: (edit 1)*
> 
> Who taught him words — need,
> that pitiless master, chalk-dusted hands _(King Minos, Minotaur’s father? chalk-dusted hand reference escaped me. Perhaps teaching but what?)_
> ...


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 6, 2017)

Hi again Laurie,

and thanks again for the work you've put into this. Yep you've understood the references, and I think this reading and your first are both correct - one works from the title and the other from the recurring myth.

the chalk-dusted hands refers to "need" (the teacher - chalk = words learnt via the blackboard).

Slowly the use of the Minotaur myth is taking shape. It's a look a the loss of goddess, replaced by the male heroic journey and then by - well what exactly - science and rationalism? The poems attempt to look at the constructs of modern thinking, (literalism, science, deconstructionism, art, the abandonment of the heroic "journey" etc). As a whole I hope they will make sense, yet individually they also need to stand on their own two feet. 

But I ramble,

so again, thank you.

Danny


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 6, 2017)

Thank you, Danny. Sooo, it's all about connecting the dots. OK. Just give me a lifetime :02.47-tranquillity: _See? How humble I am?

_Truly, the journey of a goddess. I've learned much in my research. Deconstructionism is certainly PHd material. I con_graduate _myself!

A wonderful challenge. Now, I'm thinking I might just take on "Word Salad" which is by far senseless like many think. Lots of connecting the dots in that bowl!

Laurie


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 6, 2017)

congraduations on your research!

Enjoy the salad mix


Danny


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 6, 2017)

Thx! Laurie


----------



## sas (Nov 7, 2017)

I rarely comment here, anymore, but ...

I've just read The Poetry Home Repair Manual, Ted Kooser (U.S. poet Laureate). Chapter Two: Writing For Others.

You didn't. 

I think you are fine with it.  For me, a waste of talent. 

.


----------



## TL Murphy (Nov 8, 2017)

Fascinating poem.  The last three stanzas give me goosebumps.


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 8, 2017)

Thank you TL

sas not sure what you mean by your response - if you think I do not care about my readers then I'd suggest you should never jump to conclusions - I'm happy to be told this poem doesn't reach the audience - a different comment to saying I do not care - that is just your intellectual crap - how a poet considers the reader's response to their work is an important question - to think a poet doesn't consider the reader is presumptuous bullshit I don't have to accept.  And thank you for taking the time to read and respond..plus I'd be happy to be see if i can get a copy of the book -it may help me. 

Danny


----------



## sas (Nov 8, 2017)

Your revision was much improved. However...

from comments, it must be clear that your work, although most creative, was not clear. Your poem was left to google; or, search for your long explanation of it, so one could read again to understand. A poem, written, not for oneself, but for a reader (as it should be) shouldn't require that. Only in poetry do some find that acceptable. If it were a prose story, you would be "pulled up", in a workshop. Maybe poets have bought into "obscure must mean good." 

As I haven't creds, you might find something to consider, on this topic, in Ted Kooser's book. He writes extensively, and with chastisement, on it. Besides being U.S. Poet Laureate, his poetry book won the Pulitizer Prize. Not a bad guy to listen to. 

I am glad you are in this forum and participate strongly. I find your work exceptional, and your workshop comments spot on. But, I'd prefer not to picture you writing while in a poetry costume...a beret with long scarf. Be sure your reader never wants to leave your page. Gift them clarity. 

My best. Sas 
.


----------



## Nellie (Nov 8, 2017)

dannyboy said:


> - I'm happy to be told this poem doesn't reach the audience - a different comment to saying I do not care - that is just your intellectual crap - how a poet considers the reader's response to their work is an important question - to think a poet doesn't consider the reader is presumptuous bullshit I don't have to accept.  And thank you for taking the time to read and respond..plus I'd be happy to be see if i can get a copy of the book -it may help me.



After reading this, I do feel the need to respond. I do admit, you're words and poems are usually way over my head, but after seeing others asking questions and you taking your valuable time to answer those valid questions, I am enlightened. I believe you consider the reader's response... it's just that sometimes deep thinkers are way down there thinking and other's senses escape (does that make any sense to you?)

Much of Ted Kooser's work focuses on the Great Plains in America. He grew up and lives in Lincoln, Nebraska, which is a state west, north-west of Colorado, my state.

Thanks for responding. I do enjoy reading your work.


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 8, 2017)

edit N/A


----------



## TL Murphy (Nov 8, 2017)

Deconstructivism is a difficult concept to grasp. The idea that language is metaphysical  makes language probably the most difficult way to approach the subject. The poem here titled "Language Deconstucted" does not deconstruct language. The poem is not deconstructive. It's narrative/ metaphorical and in that dense it is about deconstruction which is a kind of oxymoron because one of the tenants of deconstrutivism is that you can't really talk about it. Am I getting warm?
The introduction of the Minotaur is a great approach- the dumb but sentient man-beast, grounded in stones, bones and inexpressible rage.  I don’t think I would have picked up on the Minotaur if I hadn't read your comment - well maybe after several readings. But it might help to put it in the title. "The Minotaur Deconstructs Language"

 language is probably  the most difficult way


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 8, 2017)

Hi, TL. Yes. A very complex concept, words cannot begin to describe.....  And do agree with your suggestion.



> it might help to put it in the title. "The Minotaur Deconstructs Language"


----------



## RHPeat (Nov 8, 2017)

SilverMoon said:


> Curiosity is the hallmark of intelligence. A reader has seveal choices after reading a piece of work they do not understand:
> 
> One can placidly pass it by because it rouses no interest.
> One can blame the writer because they do not understand it.
> ...



Laurie

A writer should not write "for" the reader, but "to" the reader. That you are writing for anyone that wishes to read the poem. That the reader is part of the process, but that you are asking them to come to the bar before they leap into the poem. Which means they must drop their baggage to engage the poem. We all want readers and sometimes a little mystery can go a long ways in a strong poem. There's noting wrong with that at all. 

I do agree with TL that the "Minotaur" should be in the title. It would open up the abstractness of the poem a bit more. A workshop is a good place to find out such things from those who are willing to take on what is written on the page, and to get entangled in the poems given information without tying it onto there own personal baggage. Instead allowing the poem to lead them as the reader into its own dark cave at times. And any good poem should be read more than once for its depth. Keeping in mind that too much information might be as dangerous as not giving enough information. Either one can make a poem difficult when it's figurative. 

A poet friend
RH Peat


----------



## Robbie (Nov 8, 2017)

The language you use is transcendent and perhaps the “reality” of your poem is metaphysical and a speculative theory, beyond reason. it’s highly intellectual to be sure but I don’t know enough about deconstructionism to make further comments.  Will continue to read. Its going to lead me to more reading on the subject and my curiosity may help me glean something meaningful to say. Hope so. 
[FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]


----------



## SilverMoon (Nov 8, 2017)

RH, Loving your metaphorical take, analogy. The idea of speaking "to" the reader as opposed to "for' the reader speaks to reason. Given this, the very important goal can be obtained  - to speak "with" the reader, i.e. any form of dialogue which enriches, enlightens both parties. And I would never drop my baggage. It's "Louis Vuitton."

What qualifies a poem to presented for Workshop is still a question I have. But perhaps this can brought to Poetry Discussion.

Thanks for your input RH, invaluable. Laurie


----------



## TL Murphy (Nov 8, 2017)

The Minotaur is to language as man is to the metaphysical. Stuck in the concrete world, the Minotaur understands what language does but cannot grasp language itself.


----------



## RHPeat (Nov 8, 2017)

SilverMoon said:


> RH, Loving your metaphorical take, analogy. The idea of speaking "to" the reader as opposed to "for' the reader speaks to reason. Given this, the very important goal can be obtained  - to speak "with" the reader, i.e. any form of dialogue which enriches, enlightens both parties. And I would never drop my baggage. It's "Louis Vuitton."
> 
> What qualifies a poem to presented for Workshop is still a question I have. But perhaps this can brought to Poetry Discussion.
> 
> Thanks for your input RH, invaluable. Laurie



To the real artists.

Right, that the impetus of the poem comes from the writer's artistic senses, but all arts are there to communicate through those senses. The arts are meant to invoke and evoke feelings in another.  As the writer we are not there to tell the reader what they are to be sensing we are offering it to them; we are there *TO* offer them experiences for them to have on their own. So it is not even about our emotions; it's about what evokes our emotion in another which is something very different and unique. Supposedly writers/artists have the ability to create feelings in others, and that is what the writing should be doing. Whether they have the experience or not depends on what we have done as the writer to create those experiences as an impetus within the reader, as well as what they can comprehend. Every poem isn't for everyone. Some readers may not be able to enter into the epiphany of the poem at all. 

But the writer that is in full control of his craft knows what to do to make the reader feel something. They know enough not tell them what their thinking, but instead to make them feel due to our use of words and images. That we as writers make them feel they are actually inside the art we've created as the writer. Weather it is a painting, a poem, a song, a symphony, a sculpture. It doesn't matter, for we are giving it to them to have an experience. We want that other unknown person to feel part of that thing; in poetry we literally want the other to wear the poem. To live it in their own way internally. Yeah, we all thought it was going to be easy. What a silly notion that was; it has got to be the toughest experiment I ever tried. I'm still working on it after 55 years. Maybe I'll get it right before I die. 

:rofl:


a poet friend
RH Peat


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 8, 2017)

Wow,

well its great when a series of responses create a discussion - so firstly, thank you to one and all - the only way I can get better at this is to have responses otherwise it is guess work - again, I am very appreciative of the effort - responses etc, so thank you.

Now to this poem and probably to what I am trying to do.

I am trying to connect to readers in all sorts of ways - to their intelligences, their morals, their understandings, I want to affect, effect, re-imagine etc.

I want to do this in my poems in four distinct ways.

1) The poem itself - their emotional response, their world and the poem colliding as it were.

2) The intellectual response - their intellectual curiosity - the 'what the hell is this poet on about?'

3) The connection of this poem in a series of poems - in this case a series based around the Minotaur myth - this demands several things both of myself and the reader. It demands my poems both stand alone and someone create a world-view that is consistent within the context of the series. It does not need to be as consistent as say a novel - my characters are not as defined, nor should they be, they can morph a bit, the poem format gives me flexibility to explore the themes inherent in the series. It asks the readers to consider the myth from the standpoint of the collection of poems (so far I have 15 poems in the Minotaur collection) - for this to work the reader must be interested in either the myth or why I am choosing the myth (and preferably both) - if they do not know, nor care I expect this collection will not gel with the reader - I accept that though I hope some of the poems individually may still work for the reader. It also demands that I explore and create a diverse range of poems so many of these poems are deliberately different, trying to shape a world view through the crafting of different poems, in style, in these, in imagery - while at the same time finding consistent motifs/metaphors/experiences that echo/vibrate throughout the collection.

4) the collection as a whole makes sense and is entertaining/satisfying for the reader - this means I will sometimes be forced to construct a poem to suit the needs of the collection not just of the poem itself. 

As I have stated elsewhere my intention is to work much like a painter creating a new series works - exploring a theme/s over and over searching/pushing/untangling etc until (hopefully) so works are created that both stand alone and create a collection.


truthfully I do not know if any of this works - so far I have no readership/publisher interested in this way of working (my two publisher have crashed and so I work in the empty-space) but I am absolutely interested in seeing how far I can push myself into this direction. if my poems bore I am truly sorry it is not my intention, it just shows how far I have to travel, and I do intend to travel.


danny


----------



## TL Murphy (Nov 9, 2017)

Dannyboy, if you offer up a series of poems into a public arena as individual poems, each poem should hold its own, regardless of the intended series.  If the series is more important than the individual poem then this is perhaps not the best venue to present it, because context is everything.  I think this Minotaur idea is brilliant, but there needs to be a connective tissue, and it could be as simple as the title. If you are working in a larger context than one poem then it's best to present that as a manuscript because it's really one long poem.  So we are getting fragments here and readers can get frustrated for lack of context which you have apparently developed outside of one individual poem. Personally, I enjoy the individual poems and I am not adverse to working backwards into the archives to pick up the thread in a reverse order.  But that is not necessarily the best way to get constructive critique, if that's what you're after.


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 9, 2017)

I'm fine with the critiques as they come - I want them to stand alone but I also understand sometimes i am working towards a bigger picture - I take what i can knowing that is/could be an issue. I also understand that is a limitation of this  site 9and sites like it) we have to be careful not to demand the same thing of every poem - it is important to search for the method behind the poet's madness. I rarely get bothered with what people say about the poems and usually they trigger responses in my writing that helps develop my work - I just thought given the context of the discussions here people might be interested in how I work and why not every title will have minotaur in it. At no point have I backed aay from the critiques nor have I worried about people's responses to the poems - but sometimes it helps to try and show their is also a bigger picture the poet has in mind.

I have posted for many years on this forum, those that know me know I work in clumps of poems those that don't I just thought an explanation might help.

Again I thank everyone fore their responses, their insights etc, it is why I always return to this site and why i am trying to connect through critiques to old compadres and to meet and exchange thoughts/ideas with new ones.

Danny


----------



## TL Murphy (Nov 9, 2017)

Dannyboy, I’m afraid I start to lecture sometimes before I have all the facts.  I don’t know why I do that but thank you for your patience and thank you for the explanation (which you don’t have to do).  I think the stuff you are putting up here is pretty amazing.  It’s very different  than what I do, highly intellectual, which I think for me as reader,  becomes a little intimidating.  But the subject matter is profound and the metaphorical platform you use here is very effective.  On a more practical side, I really do believe that the best poetry is concrete and image based and when it strays into the abstract and rhetorical, the poetics break down. I’ve engaged in a lot of discussion about that and we don’t need to get into it here but I understand that some good poets and smart people are able to demonstrate that there is a place for abstraction in poetry. I can accept that and I think, of all your most recent poems that I have read, this one is the most concrete and there is a successful balancing of the abstract with the concrete in the treatment of time and thought - two abstract concepts which you’ve made concrete by objectifying them rather than using abstraction to create some kind of amorphous atmosphere. The images are powerful and grounded in the solid context of the poem.  It’s quite remarkable.  I like the revised ending, too.


----------



## dannyboy (Nov 9, 2017)

Thank you TL  I enjoy all input - one the input often teaches me and/or they force me to respond and the response often educates me. I actually try to work in concrete images but sometimes I gloriously (hopelessly) fail!


----------

