# We Grease The Machine



## Nee (Jan 24, 2013)

*.
*
You think that everyone's a victim
But I know, no one’s hands are clean
No one will step-up to take the blame.

Most don’t even know they are lying…they
Stumble like cell-phone zombies roaming the 
Earth’s new wild spaces—darkened city streets.

Nothing will save us from our unending selfishness 
It seems we’ve just about poisoned everything. 

No empathy: just this dangerous unbalancing
We look away from our slow decomposition
Mesmerized by our coming remuneration. 

Without gratitude…just who will save us 
From the manic rush of our machinery.



.


----------



## Vitaly Ana (Jan 24, 2013)

Powerful thoughts and frightening sentiment. Well done!


----------



## gokedik (Jan 24, 2013)

Dig it. Most people are completely unaware, lost in their own little worlds. Machines caught in a loop. Now is the tine that all that dies off, the change has taken place. Humans of substance will rise to the top like so much cream.


----------



## Chesters Daughter (Jan 25, 2013)

Ay dear Nee, do you dislike me? Your choice of font is a killer. I love this piece and fully agree with its message, as V said, powerful and frightening to the umpteenth degree. Makes a body pause and think, and worry if they're wise. That reaction always spells tremendous success. A few tiny nits, you've caps where they aren't warranted and it's messing with your flow. In S2, L2, I would break on roaming and move the "the" down to the next line. I think it would make for a smoother read, but that's just my opinion. Not sure if the cap in Earth is there for emphasis or because it is beginning a line, either way, I paused a bit too long to contemplate it, unwelcome speed bump, but again, just my opinion. I really enjoyed this and please feel free to ignore my nits, I'm hopelessly anal.

Best,
Lisa


----------



## enchantedsecret24 (Jan 25, 2013)

I really love this Nee! Very powerful message, you are very talented.


----------



## Nee (Jan 26, 2013)

Thank you everybody. 

why Lisa   I don't know you well enough to dislike you.
And the font I feel is easier to read than the default font. 

In fact, I have been having some difficulty reading peoples posts--especially, when people post large blocks of text with no paragraph breaks. I would probably have posted more comments if I had less difficulty reading here.


----------



## dolphinlee (Jan 26, 2013)

Nee said:


> And the font I feel is easier to read than the default font.
> 
> In fact, I have been having some difficulty reading peoples posts--especially, when people post large blocks of text with no paragraph breaks. I would probably have posted more comments if I had less difficulty reading here.



The second part of this says that you might have commented if you had had less difficulty reading reading peoples' posts.  I do so agree. 

However as Chester's Daughter said the choice of font is killer.  The only reason I bothered to read this (by taking the time to increase the % view) is that you spend time helping other people with their work.  I think by the number of views versus the number of posts you may have lost some helpful comments from others who feel like you do that if it is diffiuclt to read. 

Have pity on those of us whose eyes are constantly reminding us that we are getting old.

You think that everyone's a victim
But I know, no one’s hands are clean (is the comma needed?)
No one will step-up to take the blame.

Most don’t even know they are lying…they
Stumble like cell-phone zombies roaming the  (This gives me too many different images) 
Earth’s new wild spaces—darkened city streets.

Nothing will save us from our unending selfishness  * 1
It seems we’ve just about poisoned everything. 

No empathy: just this dangerous unbalancing (I would prefer a full stop to a full colon)
We look away from our slow decomposition
Mesmerized by our coming remuneration.  

Without gratitude…just who will save us 
From the manic rush of our machinery. 

*1 I understand why you have used the word 'our' in this line. I wonder if it would be easier for people to read if it was left out. We all like to avoid taking the blame. I think the point would still be made.

I think the last two lines are perfect.


----------



## Angel101 (Jan 26, 2013)

It's not the font, it's the size. Edit and increase to size 3. I prefer this font and always use it for my own poems, but always at size 3 so people can read it, as I myself have very bad eyesight. Anyway, I'll be back with my critique!


----------



## Nee (Jan 26, 2013)

Angel101 said:


> It's not the font, it's the size. Edit and increase to size 3. I prefer this font and always use it for my own poems, but always at size 3 so people can read it, as I myself have very bad eyesight. Anyway, I'll be back with my critique!



Thank you...you are an Angel. 

On my screen #3 is so large that I was afraid people would give me crap for using it.
In fact, it wasn't 'til dolphinlee copied and pasted the font into her post that I could see that the default font was actually larger. 

It would be a good thing if we were to say straight out what we mean: in this case, "Your font is too small."

By the way, in California "Dude your font is killer." is a good thing. 


*sorry to hear we are all slowly going blind.


----------



## Cheid (Jan 26, 2013)

I love this poem.  It speaks to the excess and corruption in our society.  Your word choices help to drive home the point you are making and call up a stark apocalyptic world image.  

The only part that was hard for me to read was s2 l1 & l2.  the last words "they" and "the" are unnecessary modifiers that break the flow and slow the pace.  However, I noticed that the line length creates an arrow pointing to the right which seems a little too perfect and precise to be coincidental  and if the shape of the poem was indeed your intention I feel that the words don't take away enough to justify changing the form. 
I would recommend swapping the direction of the arrow to point to the left, or backwards, as the point your poem is making is that we are all looking the wrong direction.

Thanks for sharing.  I look forward to reading more of your poems.

 -Cheid

*edited font size for ease of reading


----------



## Blade (Jan 27, 2013)

​


dolphinlee said:


> *1 I understand why you have used the word 'our' in this line. I wonder if it would be easier for people to read if it was left out. We all like to avoid taking the blame. I think the point would still be made.
> 
> I think the last two lines are perfect.



I would agree that "our" could well be left out here both on the basis of being unnecessary but it also implies inclusion (entirely) in the machinery.(possessive)

On that basis "our" could be removed from the last line as well.

OK then. My read of the piece is that the world is a huge machine inhabited mainly by zombies and that salvation lies in individual gratitude and consciousness. By that measure "our" does not belong.

Thanks for the thought workout.


----------



## Nee (Jan 27, 2013)

So, I should cut the word that really nails down the entire concept of this piece: that being, *our* collective responsibility for the mess *our *world has become then...?


----------



## Blade (Jan 27, 2013)

Hmmm. This is getting interesting.

OK. The machine. I am sitting at a computer which I assume is powered by a nuclear plant because there is a complex about 75 miles NW with little population in between. It is cold outside and the building which is heated by natural gas that comes via pipeline from several hundred miles away.

So the machine sustains me but I have no say in the construction, maintenance or operation of the utilities involved here.

Where is the *"our" *here?

I think I am reading my own philosophy into this. I think the individual should "wake up" and be aware of what is going around them and do what they can to build a better world but grabbing the big picture with *"our" *​is unfeasible. Democracies in general make it impossible for anybody in particular to get control of much of anything.

Gratitude works for me pretty well as we live longer, safer and more interesting lives than people even a half century ago.

For what it is worth I figure the machine sustains us and forces us into individualism but *"our" *is lost in the process.


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 27, 2013)

The word 'just' usually offends me, sometimes it is an unnecessary extra, a qualifier which merely detracts from the strength of the statement, or it has so varied meanings as to be meaningless, a jackal of a word, consider this,

It seems we’ve just about poisoned everything.

Nothing will save us from our unending selfishness
It seems we’ve just about poisoned everything. . 

No empathy: just this dangerous unbalancing
We look away from our slow decomposition
Mesmerized by our coming remuneration.

Without gratitude…just who will save us
From the manic rush of our machinery.

becomes,

It seems we have poisoned everything.

No empathy: only this dangerous unbalancing
We look away from our slow decomposition
Mesmerized by our coming remuneration.

Without gratitude … who will save us
From the manic rush of our machinery.

See what I mean about meanings? An 'only', 'almost' and 'exactly'.


----------



## Nee (Jan 27, 2013)

Blade said:


> Hmmm. This is getting interesting.
> 
> OK. The machine. I am sitting at a computer which I assume is powered by a nuclear plant because there is a complex about 75 miles NW with little population in between. It is cold outside and the building which is heated by natural gas that comes via pipeline from several hundred miles away.
> 
> ...




But, if *we* don't fix it, then *our* world wont be *our *world for much longer.


----------



## Nee (Jan 27, 2013)

I am truly sorry you feel offended Olly.

However, "It seems we have poisoned everything." is not the feeling I want: it implies it's over...nothing to do. Oh, hang it all and pour me another.

Whereas, if it is almost/nearly/ just about over, then there may be time to act. 

And it is action that will save us...not Jesus. 
God helps those who help themselves after all.


----------



## Blade (Jan 27, 2013)

Nee said:


> But, if *we* don't fix it, then *our* world wont be *our *world for much longer.



Agreed. I think you have to notice at step one that in the industrialized democracies power is very seriously fragmented inside societies. You have Presidents, Prime Ministers,Senators. Congressmen, Members of Parliament, CEO's, Unions, Shareholders, Voters and so on.

*"We" *is the resultant of a myriad of interacting forces and decisions *not *a monolithic organization that is actually run by anyone in particular.





Nee said:


> Whereas, if it is almost/nearly/ just about over, then there may be time to act.
> 
> And it is action that will save us...not Jesus.
> God helps those who help themselves after all.



Sure. go for it. I think you have to have a close look at the big picture and be able to apply your own skills and resources to do the best you can do with what you've got rather than be mesmerized by "the machine".


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 27, 2013)

> However, "It seems we have poisoned everything." is not the feeling I want: it implies it's over...nothing to do. Oh, hang it all and pour me another.
> 
> Whereas, if it is almost/nearly/ just about over, then there may be time to act.


I see what you mean, I have a horrid feeling it is too late, but maybe that is because I am old am cynical, it is good to know there are still those trying to do better by the world. But please take on board what I said about 'just', the fact that you had to explain your meaning is a good illustration of what *I* mean, 'poisoned almost everything' is a good phrase, and if you want people to understand 'not much time left to act' say so loud and clear, it is a good message.


----------



## Angel101 (Jan 28, 2013)

This is lucid prose that has a clearly defined voice and the emotion comes across. At times the train of thought wanders, but as prose it's not badly written. As poetry, however, it needs improvement. 

_You think that everyone's a victim_

You're putting the reader into a role that s/he doesn't necessarily want to be in, and then you're not explaining yourself. Since you start off by insulting us, it seems only fair that you would then proceed to clearly elucidate or define this undesirable role you've given us. But instead, you just drop the whole "talking to the reader" thing altogether.

_But I know, no one’s hands are clean_

Oh, so you're better than the rest of us, is that it? And if the poem starts of with "you" and "I," why does it then go on to be about "us?" It seems like you're not actually including the speaker in this grim portrait of humanity.

_Most don’t even know they are lying…they
Stumble like cell-phone zombies roaming the 
_
If you don't know you're lying, is it really lying? Isn't it more like ignorance? Or is it like, "You're lying to yourSELF, MAN!" 

The speaker maintains his repugnant quality, by elevating himself above the masses, who apparently don't know that they're lying about something (which the speaker won't reveal to us). 

Cell-phone zombies sounds very cliched and unoriginal. Also it's unclear in this poem how exactly cell-phones turn people into zombies. Is it because we're spending too much time on our cell-phones, and not enough time looking at the beauty of nature around us? That doesn't seem like some new insight into human nature. We're growing more and more dependent on machines every day. You're using a machine right now. Does that make you a zombie? If it does, then it's your job to explain how to the reader -- because, not everyone will automatically agree with the assessment that you're making of humanity's relationship with its gadgets and devices. You need to form an argument.

Also the enjambment is really obvious and ineffective.

_Earth’s new wild spaces—darkened city streets._

That almost sounds like something good and cool. I'm picturing Blade Runner. But the previous line with the zombies made it sound like we were talking about something bad. If the darkened streets are bad, maybe a more graphic description of how bad they are would help. Or if it's not bad, then perhaps there is some other quality that the imagery (of which there is none) could evoke. Darkened streets as wild spaces seems ambiguous.

_Nothing will save us from our unending selfishness 
It seems we’ve just about poisoned everything. 

_Whiny. Not poetry. It's not even a slap to the face to wake us up. It just sounds like complaining. You say we've poisoned everything, and yet you haven't evoked one specific thing that we've poisoned. You say that nothing will save us from our selfishness, and yet you haven't given one specific instance of someone being selfish in this poem. There's nothing poetic about this. 

_No empathy: just this dangerous unbalancing
We look away from our slow decomposition
Mesmerized by our coming remuneration. 

_At this point, I really feel like you're just going off on some sort of rant, and you're not taking the reader with you. What dangerous unbalancing are you talking about? Is it something to do with the cell-phone zombies? What's so dangerous here? Are we going to get brain tumors from our cell-phones? There's too much raging criticism of the perceived zeitgeist without anything specific or tangible to anchor all of that criticism to. No empathy. We're soooo bad. The human race might as well go suck on an egg. It's bad. It's all bad. We're rotting, but we don't want to look at it. 

Remuneration? How does that word possibly fit here? Who is remunerating who for what? Do the zombies work for the cell phone company, and so they keep rotting because they want their paycheques? It doesn't make any sense at all. At. All.

_Without gratitude…just who will save us 
From the manic rush of our machinery.
_
JOHN CONNOR!






(Come on. You know you laughed.)

Good luck. Hope that helps.

Bay


----------



## Olly Buckle (Jan 28, 2013)

> You say we've poisoned everything, and yet you haven't evoked one specific thing that we've poisoned.


You see whay I mean? 'Just is such a mongrel word that 'Just about' doesn't register with Angel, it is perceived as a 'filler', in the same sort of way as people who pepper their conversation with 'You know', the listener never really thinks they are being asked if they understand.


----------



## Angel101 (Jan 28, 2013)

Yeah, if "just about" is supposed to be the only indication of hope in this poem, it doesn't work because it's filler. Also the negativity in the tone makes it impossible for me to find hope in this poem, especially if that hope is supposed to come from something so insignificant.


----------



## Nee (Jan 28, 2013)

Blade said:


> Agreed. I think you have to notice at step one that in the industrialized democracies power is very seriously fragmented inside societies. You have Presidents, Prime Ministers,Senators. Congressmen, Members of Parliament, CEO's, Unions, Shareholders, Voters and so on.
> 
> *"We" *is the resultant of a myriad of interacting forces and decisions *not *a monolithic organization that is actually run by anyone in particular.



Agreed also. Yet, although the actual power and sociological structures were different in the times of Buddha, Jesus, and Mohamed, they were just as entrenched as they are today, and still these people affected great change upon the world. And a little closer to our time, Gandhi and Martin Luther King achieved awesome results in the same way: that being, going over the heads of the power elite and changing the way people (regular people) think of humanity, not as a bunch of separate competing groups, agencies, governments and religions, but as *WE* humanity.


----------



## Nee (Jan 28, 2013)

Angel101 said:


> This is lucid prose that has a clearly defined voice and the emotion comes across. At times the train of thought wanders, but as prose it's not badly written. As poetry, however, it needs improvement.



Thanks Angel. 

How often when you read or hear an opening line like:

“You’ve got a lot of nerve to say you are my friend…”

Do you believe that the writer of that line is actually talking about you?

I can ask you the same thing when it comes to writings in the first person…do you believe them all to be autobiographical…?

Yes I know you didn’t actually say that you thought so, but you did speak for all humanity by suggesting that I put people in a position they would not wish to be in; when I was believing that people (especially in here) would understand the use of this literary device as an artistic choice.

People are generally smarter than we writers sometimes give them credit for, so I would like to invite you to cut them a little slack. 

You had so much to say on this poem—a poem I felt wasn't all that big of a deal…I mean it took maybe an entire 40 mins to write—that I can’t help wondering what you would say about this one:

http://www.writingforums.com/poetry/136001-lying-within-hole-we-dug-bad-word-warning.html

Again, thanks a lot for your time and the considerable thought you put into your response.  

.


----------



## Angel101 (Jan 28, 2013)

Addressing your reader directly is something that poets do, and it's the only way that "you" makes sense in this context, as "you" does not reappear in the poem and take on a character of its own. Even if it did, "you" is the reader (in whatever role you choose for him -- your girlfriend, humanity, etc. -- and "I" is the speaker. How you develop those roles is up to you. Anyway, that's why I said that. If you don't want it to come off badly, I would strongly encourage you to either take it out or take it further.


----------



## Nee (Jan 28, 2013)

Angel101 said:


> Addressing your reader directly is something that poets do, and it's the only way that "you" makes sense in this context, as "you" does not reappear in the poem and take on a character of its own. Even if it did, "you" is the reader (in whatever role you choose for him -- your girlfriend, humanity, etc. -- and "I" is the speaker. How you develop those roles is up to you. Anyway, that's why I said that. If you don't want it to come off badly, I would strongly encourage you to either take it out or take it further.



I can't see why a silly little poem has gotten you so upset.


----------



## Angel101 (Jan 28, 2013)

Lol. I'm not upset. I was just explaining why I said that, since you asked and since you seemed to disagree.


----------



## Nee (Jan 28, 2013)

Angel101 said:


> Lol. I'm not upset. I was just explaining why I said that, since you asked and since you seemed to disagree.



Well then...perhaps it was the passive aggressive dismissal of me not being a poet because I disagree with the rules as you see them, that had me thinking you were a bit upset—seeing how that sort of thing is often an indicator when someone is feeling hurt, or threatened. But hey…if I was wrong then, my bad.

Peace.


----------



## GonneLights (Jan 28, 2013)

*Ouch.
*
I don't like the poem, though. As you say, it didn't take you very long. And the only flaw, really, as I don't see too many stylistic problems - just does not offend me, usually - is the suddenness of it all. As Angel said, it isn't anchor. We all know sort-of what you're talking about, because we've all heard similar things said about a type of issue, especially from that fin de siecle mass return to Nature Religion, and Anti-Modernist reactionaryism and so on. But, even if you do choose to keep it a spectre, and don't outright mention it, you're tagging onto strange and vague images. Cell-phone zombies who are in cities are the only enemy made, here. Using cell-phones isn't a prejudice most people hold, you know? But, I know exactly what you mean when you say all of it. But that's the weakness. It relies on an already existing spectre to make it's point. It is standing behind Anti-Modernism and peering over it's shoulder and saying 'Yeah!'. 

The Machine is all very vague terminology, also. You need to set up the metaphors. I adore the notion of a Machine, I've written many adorations to the 'Great Machine', which is the Tree of Life and also the Aristotlean Prime Mover. But the Machine was my mentors metaphor for the confinement of society, which Aleister Crowley expressed as 'The Herd'. If a student of my mentor was to read this, he may interprret it as a socio-psychological treatise, and if someone had just finished reading my poems, it'd be a work of severe matter-hatred. I'm assuming it's either the literal machine, or Capitalism, or corporatism. But it's so ambiguous and strange.

As I said, I think these problems come from nowhere but absent-mindedness. You write a poem quickly about a spectre and it's a spectral sort of poem, I guess. A ghost of a poem. Before you set to work, make sure you have the roots of the poem firmly in the soil. As Angel said, mount an argument. You don't have to make it argumentative, though. Just deal with the issues. There's no cause _or _effect here, just spectres. But other than that, yes, I think you are a good poet. I'll have to read your other more serious works to comment further on them. When I first wrote a review of a poem of Angel's, in fact, I was exceptionally harsh, and I read another poem and it was a perfect work of art and I was blown over and she's a brilliant poet. So, I will learn from that, ahaha...


----------



## Nee (Jan 29, 2013)

Nah...that's not harsh Jack. 
And yes I have read a few fairly decent ones from Angel. 

But this one: "It is standing behind Anti-Modernism and peering over it's shoulder and saying 'Yeah!'." 

...Ouch. Good one.


----------



## Blade (Jan 29, 2013)

Nee:  I appreciate the weight of the issues you are taking on here though I cannot help but project my own perspective into your poetry. Following is a brief explanation.

It looks to me that you have a conflict or meshing of themes going on here. On one side is the despair of the religous and on the other the despair of being entrapped and swallowed by the machine.

Granted the God/Devil/Second coming/salvation route seems a little romote and threadworn at tis point. Belief that Jesus will suddenly appear in the clouds and fix everything up is highly unreasonable and unlikely. Even worse having to go to church and paying to hear about it.

Science (or more accuraely applied science) strives to dislpace the Bible boys and establish a new world order more suited to the needs and desires of human kind. It has succeeded in many ways and has certainly changed the world but has also confronted us with a lot of problems which *we *must deal with on *our *own as a species.

My bottom line on this is that as a citizen of the 21st century you have to jettison the cult of *we *and adopt a *me *perspective and take it from there. A sort of "belief in a personal God" in old fashioned terms.

PS. It is kind of fun posting in a threat that features two and three letter words in *bold.*:cheers:


----------



## genevieve (Jan 29, 2013)

~


----------



## Nee (Jan 31, 2013)

Hi genevieve

Two problems with your version: First, it would change the meaning of the poem. And second, it'd remove any pretense of presenting a non-denominational view. 

Though I appreciate your interest.


----------

