Our Women

I wrote this little poem in honor for all our precious women.
Don't you agree with this statement?

in 2008 this approach seems a little paternalistic and patronising, but it is the accepted romantic idyll i suppose. i think women in western countries may have some issues with this 'music box dancer' view of women, especially on womens day , which i understand is a celebration of the achievements of women.but , hey, they can defend themselves.

Women love romance...! I suppose men love it too.

romance ,as you say ,is wonderful , its the objectification [a vessel of love], and anachronistic view of women as 'ours'[your woman], that would raise the hackles of most equalists. i stand by the words patronising and paternalistic.i believe poetry does not have to be so..19th century, to wit; bukowsky ,burroughs.kerouac.

Chopper!!!

The sensitive side is starting to show... beware the sensitive side, sensitivity leads to empathy, empathy leads to equality, and equality leads to the dark side... Use force young skytalker...

Just kidding, couldn't resit it really. [btw. for some romantic claptrap that managed to dribble out of a pen I once owned, do a search on my name at www.poetry.com]

regards,
T. Tempest. DCA

____________________

"I'd love a thousand words in a foreign language." Tang Yuchuan

Tsc Tempest Photography at http://www.kong-xi.com/doc.html

doc! could it be? are you ..... my.... father? ha ha ,your right doc. im sorry but i think poets should sweat beads of blood for their words so they take a rarified form like fine liquor .jeez im getting bloody poetic .ok im channelling the dark side now and.... oh my god!!! hey sweetheart grab me a beer will ya,daddies typin.

Hi Kong Ye De,

first let me say that I am happy that a few people are writing poetry and sharing it with the rest of us not so lyrical. Good on you! Please keep it coming.

Next, when poetry is published in a public forum it will attract attention, sometime what you might expect, and sometimes otherwise, please don't let the ebb and flow of such commentary discourage you.

Thirdly, sometimes by posting in a public forum this carries with it an implicit invitation for others to offer critique, hopefully it'd be constructive, sometimes it's not. How you respond to such critique is a measure of your own confidence as a writer, and the robustness of your sense of literary self.

Now,

Kong Yi De wrote:
>... in honor for all our precious women.
>Don't you agree with this statement?

Let me first deal with the question. Hmmmm......, No.

With such a question is also the implicit obligation for me to provide a justifiable reason as to why I feel one way or the other.

Let's try the right foot first. I have no problem with your sentiment, to honor the precious women in our lives - paraphrasing what I hope you mean, rather than quoting what you wrote.

So let's look at the poem.

1 A woman
2 A crown of glory
3 A woman
4 A love of a man
5 A woman
6 A vessel of love
7
8 Treat her with tenderness
9 Cover her with love
10 She needs you
11
12 Your woman"

The first six lines of this poem are observed commentary. Is it romantic? Well, perhaps one person's romance is another person's expression of soppy sentimentality. Is this sentimental? I think it is.

Personally, I think lines 4 and 6 would better serve this poem if they were swapped. Secondly, I change the "A" in "A love of man," to "The" as this develops the poem towards something more concrete and definite, and perhaps gives it a greater sense of emphatic importance as an observation. Thus like a haiku it leads to a culminating statement.

Now, lines 8-12, wow... this certainly gives me pause for thought. It's this part that causes me some discord and disagreement.

Line 8 is tells me to do something and gives no 'pure' reason for me to do so, this feels almost like some moralistic commandment - and woe betide me if I don't comply (an implicit threat). That kinda jacks me off, and makes me feel patronized.

Line 9 to cover something is to hide it smother it, yes perhaps protect it, but not an obvious meaning especially in this sense. To cover, is to put out of sight, keep hidden, and, in my view, is somewhat paternalistic.

Line 10, does she? To me this smacks of co-dependency - an unhealthy relationship by-product born of two people who do not know how to live inter-dependent lives.

Finally, line 12: there are so many uses of "your" but in this context it runs so close to possession as to really make me chafe. There are two things I don't like, jealousness and possessiveness.

I have no intention, desire or wish to ever possess a woman, own her, make her mine. Many of the Australian women I met, would take strong issue with such a statement, especially if it implyed that they might belong to me (or anyone else but themselves, for that matter). Thus the last line causes some consternation resulting in my overall and final, "No, I don't quite agree with what you are saying here."

Don't be disheartened by this critique. Please take it in the spirit it is offered. I hope that it gives you cause to reconsider your intent and how your words may better convey that intent.

Best of luck, best wishes and keep up the good fight,

regards,
T. Tempest. DCA

____________________

"I'd love a thousand words in a foreign language." Tang Yuchuan

Tsc Tempest Photography at http://www.kong-xi.com/doc.html

Thanks for your constructive comments Doc. By the way, how did you get this name Doc, if I may ask? Is it short for doctor or does it have some other meaning?

yes. "Tsc Tempest. DCA" DCA = Doctor of Church Administration.

regards,
T. Tempest. DCA

____________________

"I'd love a thousand words in a foreign language." Tang Yuchuan

Tsc Tempest Photography at http://www.kong-xi.com/doc.html