volatile

[weedguru_animal]

i thought coming back here would be for the best,
i thought that i was making the right choice,
but that isn't what i see when i look in the mirror,
or when my ears register the disgraceful volume, and content, of my angry voice...

i wanna enjoy mc hammer,
but i am more suited to radiohead's Creep,
and the viciousness and aggression,
of those wild lads from Mobb Deep...

i court catastrophe after catastrophe,
blunder after blunder,
I am so desperate for some sunshine and peace,
but all I offer the world is more thunder.

I am a bad kind of wild,
and i honestly can't recall the last time i sincerely smiled,
where are my internal controls??,
i wanna set them back to 'mild'

but i havent got that option,
i gone too far down this road,
so much for being a cat or even a fox,
in this reality i have carved out, i am a venomous toad...

i miss my lady's warmth,
not just her gorgeous ass,
like everyone she has her faults,
but unlike me, she has some class...

i'm lost in a sea of hate,
with my back to the land,
if i wasn't the admin of this damn website,
many years ago I would have been rightfully banned....

i gotta sort myself out,
fuck this self pity,
cos i know full well that there are people struggling to eat,
with no time to write useless rhymes like this, about feeling shitty...

don't approach me with love,
cos i will cut out your eyes then sadistically smile,
i used to be calm and benign,
but now on every conceivable level,
I am inordinately volatile................

[alexthechamp]

Yeah, you can rhyme but you don't need too. I find lots of the poetry on these boards is similar-either about drugs and how high people get, or cynical rants about society and depression/personal pain. Sure both topics are good; but do you have to write about it every time? These are all fairly superficial-explore the metaphysical realm.

[weedguru_animal]

Metaphysical talk is enjoyable for some, but I find it on the whole to be quite useless. Personally, these days, I would rather concentrate on what is really happening, on areas of Existence that can be felt and touched, than to ponder questions which have no definite answer. To explain my stance more accurately I give you a few lines composed by one of my heroes, HL Mencken:

'A Metaphysician is one who, when you remark that twice two makes four, demands to know what you mean by twice, what by two, and what by four. For asking suxh questions metaphysicians are supported in oriental luxury in the universities, and respected as educated and intelligent men'

So, with that quote in mind, I will criminally generalize metaphysics as superficial in response to your comments. And with that I offer some hope that you may enlighten this very forum with your own metaphysical insights into subjects which affect more than just your own cerebral patterns.

[alexthechamp]

I'm not here to enlighten, nor did I claim I had any such ability. I was merely making an observation; much of the writing is quite alike. I am not talking about your work, and yours alone but commenting on the bulk of that which makes up this poetry forum. If you would like to read my writing and act the critic, I would be honoured. You also chose to ignore my statement concerning rhyme. I believe that non-linear poetry, also that which is more focused on rhythm is much more effective in the act of engaging the reader. Not too sure if you know about the 'emo' craze, but your poetry reminds me of the same idea: self-deprecating, dark, depressing and of little actual revelation. Revelating- something that your idol, Hunter S. Thompson consistantly suceeded in doing...pulling revelance from the insignificant, unshrouding human epiphany through our own ignorance.

[weedguru_animal]

The rhymes, my rhymes, were once flowing from me like thepent up angry water from a burst dam but since I decided to embark on writing more digestable, more useful and perhaps even more revelatory text, the poetic verse has dwindled to a putrid and I agree often repetitive trickle.

The main reason for me switching my literal focus to other areas is that my own poems have been on the whole more therapy than in any way useful to others, though there is of course occasionaly a sentiment or three expressed to which readers can relate, which at least gives me a sense of solidarity. But solidarity and self-help is no longer why I write.

Spreading awareness is one reason, and hitting high notes of language is another. I am not entirely sure about the revelatory aspects of Hunter's work that you mentioned. His observations were subjective and not invariably agreed with by anyone else who experienced the same events or people of which he wrote about. So his 'revelations' are often more entertaining and intelligent than revelatory. Perhaps! But then again I do consider him to be not only the writer most possessed of savagely potent genius but also of wonderfully sincere creativity and maybe above all else, a man of extreme integrity. Often Hunter just wrote in a more upfront honest and colourful manner than his peers, not neccisarily more accurately or with greater insight. But I can disagree no more than that because he is one of the few humans of now or bygone years, who is an idol of mine. In spirit Hunter is still nothing short of spectacular and i am now terribly tempted to crack open The Curse of Lono...But I will refrain as I am saving that first complete reading for a special occassion.

[alexthechamp]

His subjectivity was his revelation; Hunter, as a 'journalist' (in the least conventional way possible) was well aware that there is no such thing as objectivity in reference to coverage of events. Every perspective is skewed, and therefore lacking objectivity. I don't believe relevatory writings are fact. Relevations are very much personal, and that is what makes it so interesting. In reference to you saying that Hunter was no more insightful than his peers, I strongly disagree. His insight was of the most profound; rather than being an outsider looking in, he was part of the action (an example being The Hells Angels). That is a grand part of what makes his style so appealing to myself-his chameleonesque tactic of blending in with his surrounding was brilliant, and often imitated...not quite duplicated.

[weedguru_animal]

I would never use the word 'chameleonesque' to describe Hunter. As it implies that he changed in some way to adapt/survive, which is the opposite of how I feel he was as a living man (and still is in terms of spirit).

He was as conspicuous as a sabe tooth's tiger incisor entrenched in the bottom gum-line of a domesticated hamster. The reason why he was able to so easily immerse himself within the hells angels Way of Life is because there were major parallals between the two groups. Hunter, from a very early age, had always been a certain kind of outlaw, devoid of respect for authority and determined to live Life the way he damn pleased, often with a 'fuck (or at best: avoid) the consequences' mentality. Yes I must concur that the Great Man had an astonishing knack for diving headlong into the stories he was covering for money or pleasure, but from all that I have read of his work, he dived into these situations ALWAYS as the same Hunter. As I obliquely mentioned in my last post, it is his integrity that I respect and idolize as much as his colourful writing style.

To my knowledge and understanding, Hunter was more often than not, never able to effortlessly 'blend in', which is why whenever he wrote about an event he invariably became a major protaganist in the finished story because Hunter as a man was unavoidably himself, in all situations. It was precisely because of his steadfast approach to being Hunter S, that forced others to react, with varying consequences.

many other writers attempt to pass of their work as that of a frictionless channel that divulges nothing but fact, whereas Thompson made it abundantly clear, in everything he literally composed, that the data, had passed through his own mind, his own senses and that the conclusions were his...

If I was able to ask Ken Kesey, Jack Nicholson, Nixon, Cassius Clay, Oscar Acosta, Ralph Steadman, Juan Thompson, or any other of the multitude of people who exchanged some form of energy with Hunter, for a description of the core of who they thought he really was, I am certain that their perceptions of the man would all prove very similar. At worst these perceptions would resemble each other considerably.

Still, I am not his biographer, nor was I his acquaintance. But I do feel, having absorbed the majority of his obtainable work, that I know his spirit.

It was not my intention to argue, Champ, and to be honest I am extremely happy that there is another disciple(or fan) of Gonzo journalism, frequenting these forums.

(As for other insightful writers of a similar ilk, and bear in mind this is meant to spread good work, not condescend or prove my point, anyway here are a few: Norman Mailer, Henry Miller, HL Mencken, Tom Wolfe, Willie Burroughs)

[FIRE!!!]

Another good one Animal, your writing never fails to interest the deepest reaches of my mind..evokes alot of emotion.

[weedguru_animal]

cheers mr white...it is always helpful for my confidence as a poet to hear decent feedback. Even if that feedback is a year old!!! How are you own writing efforts developing, mate???