Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Red Fish

What is a man?

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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. :P

"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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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!!!

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...