I am your master and your master's master,
I am the dragon's teeth which you have sown
In the field of dead men's and of live men's bones.
I am the moving belt you cannot turn from:
The threat behind the smiling of the clock:
The paper on which your days are signed and witnessed
Which only the mouse and the moth and the flame dare devour.
I am the rustle of banknotes in your graves,
The crackle of lawyers' seals beneath your tombstones,
Borne to the leaning ears of legatees.
I am the cunning one whose final cunning
Was to buy grace, to corner loveliness,
To make a bid for beauty and to win it
And lock it away.
Mastro de vi mi estas kaj de l' mastro;
Mi estas drakodentoj, kiujn vi semis
En ostokamp' de l' mortaj kaj de l' vivaj.
Mi estas ŝarĝrimen' neeskapebla:
Minaco post rideto de l' horloĝo:
Paper', kiu registras viajn tagojn,
Kiun nur mus', tineo, flam' manĝemas.
Mi estas monbilet-susur' en tomboj,
Krak' de sigel' jurista sub tombŝtonoj,
Fluge al orelklin' de heredontoj.
Ruzul' mi estas, kies ruzo fina:
Aĉeti gracon, ĉarmon monopoli,
Aŭkcikonkuri belon kaj ĝin gajni
Kaj ĝin forŝlosi.
Here is a poem by A.S.J. Tessimond, translated into Esperanto. What do people think?
Poezio? Ne, pantolono!
It's fun, Jim, but not as we know it.
sounds more swedish than latin,
which surprises me ...
I always though it would sound more spanish than anything else
( the things I don't know !!! )
I have always been a language nut. I picked up an Esperanto dictionary back in '71, '72. I thought it was a cool concept whose time had come. I still have the book, but now instead of a cool concept, I look at it as an ill-advised attempt at the inevitable homogenization of many beautiful languages into an Americanized hash.
Not that IT is Americanized, but it seems to be going that way now. Big, fat, cheeseburger-gulpin', Levi's-wearin', Coca-cola soaked, Murkin 'English'.
Sorry for the rant.
I used to laugh at my Gaelic-cussin' Gran. I'd love to take lessons from her now.
(Oh! The pome!)
Loved the original.
The 'translation' blows.
Esperanto is a 'language' that never got to take a breath. Probably best.
According to the crossword puzzle in last Sunday's New York TIMES magazine, Stalin called Esperanto "the language of spies."
Jack? : As a self-described "language nut," you should get into Tolkien (if you haven't already). He invented the languages of Middle Earth first, then developed the history, and finally wrote the stories.
The poem is ok. I don't know esperanto-looks like greek (and spanish),
to me. Think it will catch on-Esperanto-in the poetry of the world.
Perhaps we are to Philistine to try a language without a large reader
Yeah, JRR liked to do a LOT of groundwork before diving into a story.
All that is gold does not glitter
Not all who wander are lost
The old that is strong does not wither
Deep roots are not touched by the frost...
It's the only Tolkien I can recall.
There is SO much more.
I think that the real problem with Esperanto is that it's totally invented- nothing just grew, so it won't have the same illogical flavor.
On that note, there was a discussion on NPR the other day about the '@' symbol used in email, and what it's called in different countries/languages. Here in the US, we call it 'the at sign.' Boring but true. My favorite was Yiddish, which uses the term 'strudel.'
Around here they use both, in such phrases as:
'Where is that strudel at?'
Of course when I put 'at' at the end of a sentence, I always put a loooonng pause just before it, so people understand that it's only there for effect.
What- it's not 'Where is that there strudel at?
Where is that there, you know, strudel at?
Re: ending a sentence with "at"
Legend has it that a black student arriving at Yale asked a professor, "Can you tell me where is the dining hall at?"
The professor replied, "Young man, I do know know where you are FROM, but I can tell you where you are NOW. You are at YALE, and at YALE one does not end a sentence with a preposition."
So the student re-spoke: "Can you tell me where is the dining hall at, *******?"
This is Tolkien:
"All that is gold does not glitter
Not all who wander are lost
The old that is strong does not wither
Deep roots are not touched by the frost..."
Does anyone know what THIS is?
"Not all explorers leave home."
or yonderChesil wrote:
Where is that there, you know, strudel at?
Or, as G.M. Hopkins put it:
Where kept? Do but tell us where kept, where.—
Yonder.—What high as that! We follow, now we follow.—Yonder, yes yonder, yonder,
(after all, why use one 'yonder' if you can get away with five?)
RE: (after all, why use one 'yonder' if you can get away with five?)
"Now die! die! die! die! die!"
"Justice! Justice! Justice! Justice! Justice!"
(both lines from Shakespeare)
Your talents are overwhelming, but how about a poem written in Eperanto...
And Jack, some research turned this up:
Ver'es that strudel at?
It just has to be glatt
The M'giach who made to cugel
Has it righ in the noodle.
Haldorn Flamergushen (1818)
No hablo esperanto.
I just noticed that my 8-20-03 posting got censored.
I am not officially complaining, but I want y'all to know that I did not and would not intentionally write "*******."
What I wrote was a seven-letter word meaning anus.
I had thought that it was the twelve letter one, meaning 'person who follows in the footsteps of Oedipus Rex.'
Methinks The Moderator has once again exceeded His authority. I may have to go back and search the original posts where His duties were outlined. I recall taking offence when the same thing happened to me, although in 'correcting' one of my ditties, it was more of a copyright violation than mere sanctimony.
Ah, here is one of the relevant topics. Re-reading, I seem to have been wrong in thinking the Moderator promised to use a gentle touch. Still, His is a thankless job at best, and not one I would desire.
There, I've said it.
Because, I want to discuss the use of the word, and I can't really do that without typing it out, and not hiding behind asterisks thus **.
I do not like it. It offends me. As soon as I see it, I stop reading. I think it is only done to shock. Only once have I seen it used on this forum in an appropriate manner, and that was by JP when she was reporting what one of her patients said and yes, it was done to shock and yes, it worked and was appropriate.
The best poet on this site is Jay M. He uses the word all the time. He is an adult, and his theme is often the sex act. For which he will use the word. I suppose that, at a stretch, I will have to accept that but it saddens me that he will not use his excellent imagination to lead us down his path rather than bludgeon us.
I am fully aware that Philip Larkin used the word, especially in This Be The Verse. That saddens me too.
Recently, we have had a spate of people using the word in their poems. One in particular is Percival, who used to post as Jaguar. He has been here before, and last time he caused such offence with his postings that many good people left. His actions, and those of other like-minded people, led to my appointment.
So what am I to do? It is all very well to say that the word has been used before, so why worry now? I wasn't moderator then. I am now. If I had been able to act then, maybe emule wouldn't have lost so many friends. I am, quite simply, not going to let it happen again. So what are my options?
1. Do nothing. Accept that the word is part of poetry. But people will leave; children will think it's acceptable; newbies will cut and run.
2. Use the delete button on anything containing the word. But that is extreme, and would mean the loss of poems such as the one by JP, and much of Jay M's work.
3. Use the edit button, and remove the word or replace it with asterisks. Less extreme, but it's still censorship.
I have a proposal.
I will not accept poems with the word in the title. If the word is in the body of the poem, the title should be followed by "contains obscenity". People can choose whether to open it.
I will still edit/delete where a poet has gone too far. Percival's latest thread is an example: it is simply too strong to be left as it is. If that means that somebody leaves, being unable to accept my censorship, so be it.
But I don't think that the word referred to was the one Marian-NYC quoted.
I don't recall there being too many problems in this forum when there wasn't a moderator. Occasional differences of opinion, some strongly rooted too. But we survived pretty much intact.
Personally, I don't find the word used by Marian to be offensive in the context in which she was using it. Had she been aiming it at a forum participant it would have been inappropriate, but Marian would not do that. This was a joke that extremely few people would take offence about.
Perhaps Censor would be the more appropriate term to use? The OED does not mention censorship at all in relation to moderator.
Well ! I can't ***** believe this whole thing. I'm *****shocked I tell you! What the ? ******and then ******the *******************. And furthermore, ****************!
Glenda, you got more stars than my entire 9th grade class last year!
Les, we are talking a huge difference of scale here. Stephen has, in my view, taken a strange view of Marian's post. If we are reduced to a line of asterisks for the word used in the context used, then we may as well be back in grade school.
If anybody ever looks for a quote from large chunks of John Wilmot's poetry, they are going to be faced with large elements of censorship. Are those poems unfit to be read?
What always troubles me about any form of censorship is that it is never defined and always seems to grow well beyond expectations. Here is Stephen's first post as Moderator:
"I have agreed to share Moderator responsibilities with Aaron. That is why my name appears in bold.
I can edit and delete posts. This is useful when there are accidental double posts.
As you know, there are from time to time attacks on the site, or on individuals. I will keep an eye on those, but I will exercise my responsibilities with a light touch.
Deleting a word in a light hearted anecdote does not appear to be a light touch to me.
Do we have problems here with words carrying different connotations on opposite side of the ocean and down under. Randy might be an acceptable name for your child in the US but a British child would have difficulty living it down. Equally fagging might be common in public schools in Britain, but I believe it means something else in the US.
Chesil, your point is well-taken. I think probably the stategy to use a blanket move of placing an asterisk over any possibly objectionable words may not be appropriate on this forum. Yet, I understand that the moderator cannot be on the site reading every post on every forum, every minute of the day.
In a perfect world we might have a separate set of rules for the discussion forum and the User Submitted Poetry forum. As to your examples of John Wilmot, the classics I think can merely be labeled. "Caution, Adult Content"
I don't think the decision is made one case at a time, such as Marian's post, it is a program that kicks in whenever someone muffs the duck.
BISHOP, MORRIS, 1893-1973
The Naughty Preposition
(published in a 1947 issue of The New Yorker):
I lately lost a preposition;
It hid, I thought, beneath my chair;
And angrily I cried, "Perdition!
Up from out of in under there!"
Correctness is my vade mecum
And straggling phrases I abhor,
And yet I wonder, what should he come
Up from out of in under for?
Excellent, Ilza, excellent!
For what it's worth, as Les said: I don't think Stephen PERSONALLY censored my post. More likely, there's a program in place that automatically replaces certain words, with asterisks for each letter.
And I really truly didn't mind. My follow-up post was purely for clarification.
And yes, Stephen has a thankless, please-all-and-you-please-none job to perform.
I think we all know the difference between calling someone on the forum a "one-trunk-inheriting slave" vs quoting a speech form Shakepeare in which one guy calls another one a "one-trunk-inheriting slave."
(As my friend Pam would say: "I resemble that remark!")
And if we had to choose between a person censoring aggression and a machine automatically replacing #@$%&! with ******, well I started this sentence hoping I'd know how to finish it, but I don't.
For what it's worth, as Les said: I don't think Stephen PERSONALLY >censored my post. More likely, there's a program in place that >automatically replaces certain words, with asterisks for each letter.
Nope, can't be that:
Now isn't that strange!
It would certainly pain me deeply to have to apologise so early in the year already.
The Los Angeles Times columnist, Jack Smith, would claim that he was allowed two mistakes per year. If this is your first for 2003, you're in pretty good shape.
Yes, it was the profanity filter which zapped marian NYC, not me. If she should care to use the British spelling, it will survive both the automatic and human censoring devices.
Stephen, thanks for moving Brittany's poetry over to the USP.
At your service, me old mate.
Oh, it's a FILTER. Somehow, I had this mental image of you personally erasing each and every profanity. (Search ALL FORUMS, ALL DATES, for ***** [asterisks mine])
The filter doesn't zap everything. I look at as much as I can, and let most of it go especially on this forum. The USP can get a litle hairy and I police it more. Mostly it's stuff that's extra porno that I delete. Maybe I will delete where others wouldn't, but I have to work to my own standards.
Plus I move things between forums; and delete double posts.
You an'me, we sweat an' strain,
Body all achin' an' racket wid pain,
Tote dat barge!
Lif' dat bale!
Git a little drunk
An' you land in jail.
Well, if I may quote the immortal lines of John Cleese, dangling head first from the window in A Fish Called Wanda,
"I offer a complete and utter retraction. The imputation was totally without basis in fact, was in no way fair comment, and was motivated purely by malice, and I deeply regret any distress that my remarks may have caused you, or your family, and I hereby undertake not to repeat such a slander at any time in the future."
OK, Hugh, we'll kiss and make up. Now come away from that ******* window.
I am sorry for accusing you directly Stephen, please accept my apologies.
More widely, I still believe the blanket use of such a filter is not a sensible thing. Much good literature would be caught by this filter:
A lot of John Wilmot, D H Lawrence, James Joyce, W H Auden and even Robert Burns to name but very few.
As for contemporary poetry a search for the f word at The Academy of American Poets reveals:
Howl by Allen Ginsburg
i sing of Olaf glad and big by e e cummings
Minor Miracle by Marilyn Nelson
Ode on Periods by Bernadette Mayer
Such a Good Dancer by Douglas Goetsch
Three Moves by John Logan
Unnatural Selections: A Meditation upon Witnessing a Bullfrog Fucking a Rock by Jim Dodge
What I Am by Terrance Hayes
When a Woman Loves a Man by David Lehman
Not to mention this strange page:
If the Academy can stand the use of such words, it does seem strange that a poem could not be posted here that contains such a word without it being asterisked away.
Personally, I believe that kids find these words appealling simply because they are banned. Overuse does not shock me, other than to lament such poor vocabulary that cannot find better words to use.
The forums there are down but a quote from the guidelines:
'Try to abstain from using gratuitous profanity. Everybody enjoys a four-letter word now and then, but there are some kids in here and we don't want their parents and teachers forbidding them to visit. Expletives may be bleeped out in discussions that the administrator deems are likely to attract youngsters.'
It seems that an individual view was taken as to what was gratuitous and what isn't. It would have been interesting to see it in practice.
I wonder if Esperanto has its own collection of deletable expletives?
I found 'fiki' in this one, but I'm not gonna translate it:
I looked it up, Hugh. Isn't it merely a diminutive form?
When Katie, with brash elocution,
Called my member, at best, lilliputian,
I thought her uncouth
But, to tell you the truth,
I've experienced some diminution.
Said Katie, with nary a hollar
Les, I think your pipe's gotten smaller
I told her the facts
My plumbing it lacks
Nothing, for I'm quite the installer
I just feel sorry for the poor folks who live in Scunthorpe and are unable to share their addresses with friends.
Drop the 'S' from the town name, and you will see why net filters would object.
I'm frankly disappointed that you didn't spot that. I will have to find a new
Stephen's probably not too busy.
That Italian suppository is spelled innuendo.
I will have to post a list of downright dirty words and see which are asterisked out.
It's a hopeless case,
As you may see,
And in your place
Away I'd flee;
But don't blame me--
I'm sorry to be
Of your pleasure a diminutioner.
--Pooh-Bah, The Mikado
I just stumbled upon the fact that there is a MOVIE in Esperanto. Here's what the "TV-now" listing says:
120 minutes- USA, 1966, (CC), BW, Video, In Stereo
Directed by Leslie Stevens and starring
William Shatner, Allyson Ames, Eloise Hardt
Robert Fortier, Ann Atman, Milos Milos
A demonic temptress sends an incubus to terrorize a virtuous man's sister. Filmed entirely in the language of Esperanto.
(That is all I know of it, and all I need to know.)
So THAT'S what is funny about the way Shatner talks!
I always thought it was because he was Canadian.
Probably available in video stores somewhere. Not that I am tempted, you understand.
I'm tempted by the Red Dwarf, though: