/lit/ - Literature

>ou're too concerned with metapoetry--or what the poet is trying to convey and the personality of the poet, rather than the poem. I know this is true because the poem you refer to really does not use much dense vocabulary and you seem to attack the poet as much as the poem
I don't even know the poet, so the need to "attack" him rather than his poetry (which is pretentious and pseudo-intellectual, like I said) is something you and you alone devised. I don't use an extensive vocabulary to communicate because I am not trying to impress anyone. If I am going to write something, then I might and only when necessary.

>You are most likely more pretentious than anyone else here by thinking your critique is worthy of being noticed, but it isn't, because your arguments are fucking pathetic and you make it so obvious you're a fucking failure of a writer that the fact that you even continue responding with these "critiques" is laughable.
Yes, your opinion on the matter certainly matters more than mine, oh veteran writer. Is your critique of me being noticed, yet mine of his writing not?
>Arguments are fucking pathetic
You're attacking me now, not my arguments.
>Failure as a writer
And I supposed you have published books?
>Laughable
At least we agree on something, you are a pool of mind-numbing gag.
Also, put your trip back on Benny.