What is a man?

[Red Fish 0]

What is a man?

A miserable little pile of secrets.

What is a man?

The same could be said of all religions.

What is a man?

It is not by my hand that I am once again given flesh.

What is a man?

Have at you.

[Viaene 0]

it sounds nice ,but I don't get the last verse (my knowledge of poetic english is quasi nihil :s )

[Red Fish 0]

i probably made it too deep i'll work on it

[Viaene 0]

That's not what I'm saying, I'm quite good at understanding deep poetry when it's written in my native language. Now I'm trying to do the same in English now, but I need some help.

[blind-fitter 0]

it sounds nice ,but I don't get the last verse (my knowledge of poetic english is quasi nihil :s )

"Have at you" is an American expression; means nothing in English. Don't worry about not understanding it, 'cos I didn't either.

[Tony Baloni 0]

Wow. This poem is so deep, it really speaks to me. Especially that last line.

[Red Fish 0]

american expression my backside it was my expression and it was completely original if you do nothing but rely on standardized ideas and concepts to try to understand my poetry you'll never even come close

[Tony Baloni 0]

Well then I guess I had this totally wrong. I was trying to use the English language and grammar system to decipher the poem.

[Lucky 5]

Nammy, I'm not being critical here, so don't take it that way at all, K? I sort of liked it, but I just don't get the last line either, and here is why:

To my knowledge "have at you" is not an American expression either. To "have at it" means to "go for it" , and that might make some sense. I understand having an individual style, but it seems to me that if you have to explain your words then something about the poem doesn't work. Unless you are the only person you are writing for.

[Tony Baloni 0]

It's what you say before you swordfight somebody. Common knowledge.

http://www.bartleby.com/81/8035.html

[Steel2Velvet 0]

I'm a bit surprised B-F didn't get the Shakespeare reference. I've always felt he is pretty adept at English Lit.

I see the poem as just that - a swordfight (or just any type fight) a person has with themself. The battle within that is caused by conflicting feelings.

[Foolonthehill 0]

Yeah, that's exactly what I thought S2V.

I've been having conversations like this with myself recently.

[Red Fish 0]

its about a vampire swordfight

[Levis 5]

I think it's based on Freudian concepts.

(:beady:)

[TheLizard 1]

I think people are attempting to find meanings where there might not be any to be found.

Or, as the author says, it's about a vampire swordfight. Badass?

[Levis 5]

Wait, no... it's Jungian. Okay... that's fine by me

[blind-fitter 0]

To my knowledge "have at you" is not an American expression either. To "have at it" means to "go for it" , and that might make some sense.

Well, y'know, I was just trying to make our Belgian friend feel a little better about not understanding the final bit? Of my 43 years on planet Earth, I've spent upwards of 42 in England, speaking English. Granted, for a couple of those years I had minimal language and comprehension skills (insert your own joke here). In all that time, I had never encountered the phrase "have at it", until I saw it used here on SF by American English-speaking persons. I could work out what it meant, without too much trouble, what with being an English-speaker. It may be that the phrase has its origins in English, but the same could be said for most American-English phrases, could it not?

Wherever its origins , it seems to be in more commonplace usage over there than it is over here.

I'm a bit surprised B-F didn't get the Shakespeare reference. I've always felt he is pretty adept at English Lit.

Ouch! That smarts.

Adept at the language, perhaps; not so much the Literature. I got a grade C at O-level: indicative of the failings of the English comprehensive school system and the poverty of my work ethic.

Never read Shakespeare: didn't realise it made me a lesser person, though.

"Have at you": doesn't sound very Shakespearean, to these ears... Are you sure it's one of his? If so, it's hardly one of his best.

Strangely enough, much as it might be perceived as one of our "quaint English traditions", I never did get into sword-fighting, either. Thus, I remain blissfully unaware of the sport's arcane terminology.

[TheLizard 1]

Them's duelin' words.

[Red Fish 0]

I think it's based on Freudian concepts.

(:beady:)

look don't try to do all that stupid psychoanalytical garbage on my poetry i already told you what it means you don't need to start with your oxford styled fancy education smarts on it i don't even know what frueding means

[MuzikTyme 0]

it's Jungian.

Comforting that someone other than me even knows that word/person, much less the philosophy behind it/him.

Wasn't his first name Carl, too? See what/whom designed this great site?

Wow!!! I just became aware!!!

[Levis 5]

What roobish... almost everyone knows Jung. Maybe not his 'theory' but they know OF him anyway. He was Freud's (ugh) crony after all ... till he came to his senses. Phew.

[MuzikTyme 0]

Wow! Thanks for biting. Though, your bite's not very hard at all!

Grow some teeth as well as theory.

Thanks for your contributions!

[Levis 5]

I think my more than slight disdain for Freud and his so-called 'theories' is fairly well-known in these parts. I mean, Jung at least admitted he had no proof for what he said, but what right did Freud ever have to claim his methods were 'scientific'? Twit. :beady:

[MuzikTyme 0]

None.

I haven't disagreed with you...yet.

[Kevin 3]

Levis' dislike of Freud borders more on the pathological rather than the logical ...