The Pheasant, Wizard Award Winner Options

[Guest_Nina_*]

James

You are most welcome

Nina

[Guest_Jox_*]

Hi Ron,

Thank you very much for your interest and comments.

I do (try to) write humour poems - e.g. "Donkeys Cheat At Cards," which I see as humour with no deeper meaning. Then again...

I am certainly not saying that others find my efforts funny but - in general - I think humour can be achieved in any form of writing - even academic papers (sometimes).

My overall target is not really any one group - it is power-bases of mankind - where that power is abused. Now, I judge what abuse is because this is my mind's output. But I'm always happy to argue my corner. In this poem I suppose I am "targeting" sports shooters. However, it may be in every other respect they are decent people and much better than I. So it is really we humans who need to be held to account - and that does include me (at least the last time I looked in the mirror!) (That was an attempt at self-deprecating humour :) )

>>"To you, I believe such a topic coming from deep conviction requires
either additional poetic expression to assure that the reader interprets it properly or suitable footnotes."

This troubles me a bit and for two reasons.

Yes, I do use footnotes - sometimes very extensive. But usually to explain references which would take ages to look-up. I try not to use footnotes to explain the meaning of a poem. I will always explain to critics what I meant if they ask, though. However, I rather think the poem is failing if I need to explain the meaning per se.

Secondly, I do expect the reader to bring something to a poem - their own mind. Therefore, I am not comfortable with "a proper interpretation." If an interpretation is required that is up to the interpreter (i.e. the reader) - what you suggest is not the flexibility of interpretation, it is a rigid prescription, is it not? Once I have created the poem with a certain meaning in mind, it is interesting to see the various interpretations which people make. If you took it to be humorous (albeit a failed attempt at) that is interesting, too. Cathy did suggest it was a little too over that side for my meaning and I think you make a similar point. I may adjust it, then.. but to be honest I never find anything with guns in to be funny. I utterly hate them. So I do have a philosophical problem there. For me, guns always mean serious. I shall have to think on that.

On this point, if you return, might you please tell me what additional poetic expression you had in mind? (I’m stumped on that one). Thanks in advance.

>>On second thought, if we all stay friends, my typing finger has been unnecessarily stressed.

emm you’ve lost me here, sorry Ron. Your typing was not wasted; I appreciated your comments but that is not mutually exclusive with us remaining friends, is it? I would have thought that if you were willing to take the trouble to comment as you have, that was a very friendly and helpful act - and I’m grateful. Thank you.

All the best, James.