[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 114 KB, 561x697, satan-fall-from-heaven.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
686392 No.686392 [Reply] [Original]

I will say this for the use of form in verse, without it the struggle of creation is neutralized. The poet loses the essential nature of struggle, which grants the artist its autonomy. When form is dispensed with, the poem ceases to be. What is left is dire, prosaic, bloodless and most certainly not art.

>> No.686411

Oh.

>> No.686435

Yeah, well, that's just, like, your opinion, man.

>> No.686436

noone disagrees? satan is very pleased.

>> No.686464
File: 3 KB, 85x127, auster.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
686464

Way to post in your thread, OP.

>> No.686472

Not sure what you mean, "use of form." What's that? Can you give an example - or two?

>> No.686479

>>686472
I meant the use of any poetic form, as opposed to poems which use no form at all. Most of what is posted on /lit/ is an example of formless poetry.

>> No.686499

Way to be vague as fuck OP. If you wanted to lead a discussion you failed miserably because no one can understand you when you say shit like "the essential nature of struggle" without explaining what you mean.

>> No.686522

>>686499
I didn't want to write a goddamn book, anon. I guess I did fail to spark discussion but I thought I was being pretty clear.

>> No.686523

op, i'm with ya

>> No.686527

>>686499
i didn't word that part correctly, i admit. i meant to say that the essential nature of art is struggle.

>> No.686529

the constraints of language are struggles enough

>> No.686540

To put it more directly than OP:

Working within specific constraints can, counter-intuitively, help drive the creative process.

>> No.686545

>>686529
No these constraints must be perennially envisioned, reworked and rejuvinated by critics who would feign at creation. They are spectral, boorish games to play for people that have forsaken the loving dungeon of metered verse.

>> No.686546

>>686540
Actually, more like working without specific constraints will, counter-intuitively, inhibit creativity.

>> No.686553

>implying the absence of form and structure is not a form and structure

>> No.686558

>>686553
>implying that it is
are you a moron?

>> No.686563

>>686558
My IQ dropped five points reading that. You sir are either intentionally ignorant and pretentious or partially retarded.

>> No.686565

If it's still verse, though without form, then it can not be prosaic.

>> No.686567

>>686563
examples of where the absence of something is actually the presence of same thing?

>> No.686569

>>686565
you don't know the definition of prosaic. go look it up, dear reader.

>> No.686572

>>686558
>>686567
this anon is retarded.

this >>686553 guy is right

>> No.686573

>>686569

I deliberately ignored the connotations.

>> No.686576

>>686572
hurr durr. are you always such a mindless sycophant? lrn2write verse you plebes. The absence of form and structure is not an example of form and structure. Nowhere has this been true.

>> No.686578

>>686567
You know exactly what I'm talking about. Intentionally removing structure from your written verse structures your verses by being without classically structured. I'm not saying free verse is always amazing poetry, I'm saying that free verse is as much poetry as a sonnet.

>> No.686581

>>686578
>classical
fixx'd

>> No.686582

For I will consider my Cat Jeoffry.
For he is the servant of the Living God duly and daily serving him.
For at the first glance of the glory of God in the East he worships in his way.
For this is done by wreathing his body seven times round with elegant quickness.
For then he leaps up to catch the musk, which is the blessing of God upon his prayer.
For he rolls upon prank to work it in.
For having done duty and received blessing he begins to consider himself.
For this he performs in ten degrees.
For first he looks upon his forepaws to see if they are clean.
For secondly he kicks up behind to clear away there.
For thirdly he works it upon stretch with the forepaws extended.
For fourthly he sharpens his paws by wood.
For fifthly he washes himself.
For sixthly he rolls upon wash.
For seventhly he fleas himself, that he may not be interrupted upon the beat.
For eighthly he rubs himself against a post.
For ninthly he looks up for his instructions.
For tenthly he goes in quest of food.
cont

>> No.686584

>>686582
For having consider'd God and himself he will consider his neighbour.
For if he meets another cat he will kiss her in kindness.
For when he takes his prey he plays with it to give it a chance.
For one mouse in seven escapes by his dallying.
For when his day's work is done his business more properly begins.
For he keeps the Lord's watch in the night against the adversary.
For he counteracts the powers of darkness by his electrical skin and glaring eyes.
For he counteracts the Devil, who is death, by brisking about the life.
For in his morning orisons he loves the sun and the sun loves him.
For he is of the tribe of Tiger.
For the Cherub Cat is a term of the Angel Tiger.
For he has the subtlety and hissing of a serpent, which in goodness he suppresses.
For he will not do destruction, if he is well-fed, neither will he spit without provocation.
For he purrs in thankfulness, when God tells him he's a good Cat.
For he is an instrument for the children to learn benevolence upon.
For every house is incomplete without him and a blessing is lacking in the spirit.
For the Lord commanded Moses concerning the cats at the departure of the Children of Israel from Egypt.
cont

>> No.686585

>>686576

He's probably trying to say that deliberately using no form, for whatever reason, is a form unto itself by virtue of the fact that its chosen.

>> No.686586

>>686581
you forgot
>structure

>> No.686588

>>686584
For every family had one cat at least in the bag.
For the English Cats are the best in Europe.
For he is the cleanest in the use of his forepaws of any quadruped.
For the dexterity of his defence is an instance of the love of God to him exceedingly.
For he is the quickest to his mark of any creature.
For he is tenacious of his point.
For he is a mixture of gravity and waggery.
For he knows that God is his Saviour.
For there is nothing sweeter than his peace when at rest.
For there is nothing brisker than his life when in motion.
For he is of the Lord's poor and so indeed is he called by benevolence perpetually--Poor Jeoffry! poor Jeoffry! the rat has bit thy throat.
For I bless the name of the Lord Jesus that Jeoffry is better.
For the divine spirit comes about his body to sustain it in complete cat.
For his tongue is exceeding pure so that it has in purity what it wants in music.
For he is docile and can learn certain things.
For he can set up with gravity which is patience upon approbation.
For he can fetch and carry, which is patience in employment.
For he can jump over a stick which is patience upon proof positive.
cont

>> No.686590

>>686585
Thank you kind sir, assorted external distractions caused my writing to become incoherent.

>> No.686591

>>686578
I'm saying it's not. Free verse does not replace the structure of poetic forms with anything. It is essentially a way to arbitrarily form prose. It isn't poetry. I'll conceed that it gives a (very rudimentary and mostly pointless) structure to prose, but that does not make it poetic.

>> No.686594

>>686588
For he can spraggle upon waggle at the word of command.
For he can jump from an eminence into his master's bosom.
For he can catch the cork and toss it again.
For he is hated by the hypocrite and miser.
For the former is afraid of detection.
For the latter refuses the charge.
For he camels his back to bear the first notion of business.
For he is good to think on, if a man would express himself neatly.
For he made a great figure in Egypt for his signal services.
For he killed the Ichneumon-rat very pernicious by land.
For his ears are so acute that they sting again.
For from this proceeds the passing quickness of his attention.
For by stroking of him I have found out electricity.
For I perceived God's light about him both wax and fire.
For the Electrical fire is the spiritual substance, which God sends from heaven to sustain the bodies both of man and beast.
For God has blessed him in the variety of his movements.
For, tho he cannot fly, he is an excellent clamberer.
For his motions upon the face of the earth are more than any other quadruped.
For he can tread to all the measures upon the music.
For he can swim for life.
For he can creep.


So perhaps no "form" does not necessarily result in no poem.

>> No.686599

>>686585
Free verse is not a choice, it is a fall back plan for people who fail at poetry.

>> No.686604

>>686594
This seems like it is a modified folk-song structure of some kind. I don't know the form itself so I can't specifically prove you wrong, but all the repetition counts for something.

>> No.686605

>>686591
I think you missed the point of poetry.
Poetry is your rhythmic breathing.
As you inhale, you take in the world around you
and when you exhale, you breath life onto your page.
Structure and form may be impressive,
but the subtle simplicity of a thought sung true
rings just as true as a song brooded over with pretension.

>> No.686610

>>686605
a formless song is just talking.

>> No.686619

>>686604
It's Kit Smart.

>> No.686622

>>686610
No, all talking is song.
The song may be discordant and unpleasant,
but song is simply a rhythmic vocal vibration,
much like talking.
Quality of the song sung may vary,
but everything said is sung.

>> No.686628

>>686622
Okay, well some songs are better, usually the ones which respect form. Your appeal to mediocrity is rubbish in my estimation.

>> No.686633

>>686605
Actually, poetry isn't just rhythmic breathing. Those are two different things. I think you are deluding yourself into thinking you are okay at writing when you actually suck.

>> No.686638

>e. e. cummings sucks
Oh to hell with this.

>> No.686644

>>686628
Are you aware how stupid and pretentious you just made yourself sound?

>> No.686651

>>686644
I was stating my opinion.

>> No.686658

>>686576
you guys are talking past each other. is white a color? depends on what you mean by color. just sayin.

>> No.686672

>>686658
UGH fuck this vain age and its endless relativism resulting in universal mediocrity. nothing but kitsch.

>> No.686683

>>686651
I never said you weren't. Modesty is a lost art and sometimes when accepting failure you need to listen to what you're saying. You sir, are pretentious. You sir, are also an idiot. It's ironic how those two things go hand in hand. No one will ever know how stupid you are if you never open your mouth.

>> No.686698

>>686683
You are blasting a lot of unsupported slander because U MAD

>> No.686743

>>686594
Unless I miss my guess wildly, that is the work of Christopher Smart.

I'd have to say you miss the mark there; beginning every line of a poem with the same word is at LEAST as constrictive a form than as rhyming or obeying a syllabic scheme.

>> No.686769

>>686672
get over your inability to read and pay attention. you are pretty bad at this theory thing

>> No.686774

>>686622
Song is composed (designed you might say) to BE sung; even extemporaneous songs are limited by the musical intentionality of the improvisor.

Pretending that "all things are song" only makes you sound like a pop-mystical boob who's spent too many nights drenched in THC chasing your tail to pin down what meaning means, and on reaching no conclusion deciding there is no conclusion to reach.

>> No.686778

>>686769
What are you even talking about? The inability to read and pay attention? You weren't suggesting essentially that ''it's all relative, man''?

>> No.686797

>>686638
e.e. cummings wrote in form, you faggot.

>> No.686800

>>686658
Is atheism a religion? See how false analogies work? Poetry without form is prose.

>> No.686810

>>686769
>bad at theory
Not the anon you were replying to, but when has theory been mentioned in this thread? It's mainly been semantics.

Also, you're an idiot. The best free verse writers all began, and continue to us, elements of form.

>> No.686812

>>686800
atheism is a metaphysics, silly.

anyway, seriously if you are not able to understand the point, here it is.

form and structure have a distinct, modal effect. it is an element of a work, a modality. so yes, so called "no form" etc is a form in the sense of being an answer to the form question.

>> No.686816

The entire tradition of ''free verse poets'' has left the state of poetry in a slump. It was innovative, i suppose, at first, but since it was easily discovered that anyone could string along self-examinating prose into an arbitrary shape, poetry lost its luminosity.

>> No.686820

>>686810
i dont care about verse and stuff. simply pointing out that your little argument is silly because you guys are working on different ways of understanding form and structure.

it's merely for my own amusement

>> No.686821

>>686800
Yep, he did it. He opened up that can of fucking worms. He inserted it directly on his penis, and fucked it silly. Dirt and worms all crawlin on his balls.
If I put line breaks on that it'd be a poem. Admit it.

>> No.686823

>>686812
I agree with free verse being poetry, but atheism is not "a metaphysics". Atheism is an ideology.

>> No.686829

>>686812
There is no "form question". You either use form or you do not. If you do not, you are not using form. Is trying to drive a nail with a baby's face an answer to the hammer question?

>> No.686834

>>686829
If it puts the nail in the wood, well, yes.

>> No.686841

>>686812
>atheism is a metaphysics, silly.
Jesus fucking Christ, I facepalmed hard. I can't tell if this is a troll or an absolute illiterate retard. The denotation of atheism isn't a lack of metaphysics, it is "the doctrine or belief that there is no God," so the analogy does not apply. Atheism is not a religion, and the lack of form is not a form.

>> No.686844

>>686829
It depends, is the hammer defined by it's purpose or is a hammer defined by it's shape?

>> No.686845

>>686834
it would put the nail in the baby's face. just like ''free verse'' does not sufficiently produce poetry.

>> No.686846

>>686823
atheism is a metaphysical doctrine. atheism in culture is an ideology.

but then again, if we are talking about an idea's cultural footprint, then yes, atheism is a kind of "religion" if you stretch religion

>> No.686851

>>686846
nice save, but I know it's bullshit.

>> No.686852

>>686846
please stop discussing religion in our poetry thread.

>> No.686855

>>686820
>herp derp, I'm just pretending to be a retard to troll anons, just kidding
You're an idiot. With no understanding of religion, metaphysics, or poetry.

>> No.686863
File: 28 KB, 345x314, 1273778293127.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
686863

>>686844
>it's TWICE
but anyways, of course the hammer is defined by it's purpose, the shape is incidental.

>> No.686867

>>686846
It's also a philosophical doctrine. So fucking what? This does not change the fact that you defined atheism as a lack of metaphysics, which is completely fucking retarded. Atheism is the absence of religion; metaphysics is not directly related to it.

>> No.686868

>>686829
see, the form question is a rather peculiar piece of philosophical shoptalk. to translate it into plain speak, the form question is "the value that the element "form" takes on within a particular piece of literary presentation." it takes a distinct way of analyzing literature, a theory that has a concept called "form", to facilitate this. so by saying the form question, i am acknowledging the contingency of this particular way of analyzing literature while still using its framework.

to give an example of how it works, "good" "bad" are answers to the moral question. but if i say "good" "bad" are concepts in the moral plane, i am saying the same thing but making more theoretical commitments. by asking the moral question, i am creating a theory that has "moral plane" in it.

ja?

>> No.686876 [DELETED] 

>>686844
>>686863
You could use anything as a hammer. A fork, a spoon, a ruler. Most likely not an effect hammer, but regardless, purpose does not change the technical definition. For example, you could use a book as a plate, but it still wouldn't change the fact that it's not a book.

>> No.686877

>>686868
Look, you are just mistaking relativism for actual theory. You can either choose to use form, or choose not to. By choosing not to, you are also choosing not to write verse.

>> No.686878

>>686868
Please stop talking. You're just making the free verse supporters look bad.

>> No.686881

>>686876
a hammer must drive nails to be a hammer.

>> No.686882

>>686876
So you're saying that a hammer is only a hammer when it's initial purpose is to be a hammer, right?

>> No.686886

>>686867
are you retarded? i said atheism is A metaphysics, ie a metaphysical position, ie an ontology of metaphysical objects located in this world.

>> No.686890

>>686881
A large rock could be used to drive nails. Does it still make it a hammer?

A book could be used as a plate. It could also be used as a hat. But this purpose does not change the fact that it is a book.

>> No.686899

>>686886
atheism does not profess any ontology. it is not negative, it is a neutral position, i am not discussing this theoretically or empirically, but semantically, which is the most /lit/ related. this is not fucking /rel/ it is /lit/ so gtfo

>> No.686901

>>686890
Deletefag detected. Presumably OP as well.

>> No.686906

>>686890
no, i didn't say if something drives nails, then it is a hammer. i just said a hammer must drive nails.

>> No.686909

>>686901
no I am OP, and i don't know what he's getting at.

>> No.686910

>>686878
>implying i take a position on your quarrel

all i am doing is giving you a functionalist angle on the form thing

>> No.686913

Long ago, if my memory serves, life was a feast where every heart was open, where every wine flowed.

One night, I sat Beauty on my knee. -- And I found her bitter. -- And I hurt her.

I took arms against justice.

I fled, entrusting my treasure to you, o witches, o misery, o hate.

I snuffed any hint of human hope from my consciousness. I made the muffled leap of a wild beast onto any joy, to strangle it.

Dying, I called my executioners over so I could bite the butts of their rifles. I called plagues to suffocate me with sand, blood. Misfortune was my god. I lay in the mud. I withered in criminal air. And I even tricked madness more than once.

And spring left me with an idiot's unbearable laughter.

Just now, having reached death's door, I thought about seeking the key to the old feast, through which, perhaps, I might regain my appetite.

Charity is the key. -- Such an inspiration proves I was dreaming!

"A hyena you'll remain, etc...." cries the demon that crowns me with merry poppies. "Make for death with every appetite intact, with your egotism, and every capital sin."

Ah. It seems I have too many already: -- But, dear Satan, I beg you not to look at me that way, and while you await a few belated cowardices -- you who so delight in a writer's inability to describe or inform -- watch me tear a few terrible leaves from my book of the damned.

>> No.686916
File: 87 KB, 755x1255, LOL-I-TROLL-YOU.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
686916

>>686820
>it's merely for my own amusement

Just highlighted for people who (understandably) weren't reading closely: the stupid part of this thread essentially ended here.

>> No.686918

>>686913
This is a translation.

>> No.686921

>>686886
He was responding to your original post, not the post afterwards when you began to backtrack like a fucking pussy.
>atheism is a metaphysics, silly.
In response to:
>atheism, the lack of a religion, is not a religion
Which is either a) a logical fallacy, a hilariously retarded non-sequitur on something that has nothing directly to do with anything that has been discussed or b) an implication that atheism is a lack of metaphysics.

Either way, you spouted out a retarded post (>implying any of your posts weren't), and now you're trying to fucking backtrack.

>> No.686923

>>686899
durr i think this guy is silly so i must comment on everything he says even if i know jack shit about the topic.
also,
>taking "ontology of" as Ontology

>> No.686925

>>686890
So if a piece of writing was written with the purpose of being poetry, containing elements that make up poetry, then it is poetry, regardless of structure. That's like saying a claw hammer isn't a hammer because it's not a ball peen hammer. christ, ball peen hammer is pretty gay

>> No.686933

>>686921
actually, the retarded part is how the guy takes atheism as "the lack of a religion" rather than "the metaphysical position that god does not exist.

so i am right and you are wrong.

>> No.686936
File: 5 KB, 126x126, 1272534786310s.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
686936

>> No.686938

>>686925
>purpose of being poetry
It could be, but if the only thing that distinguishes it from prose is purpose, then it is not poetry.
>containing elements that make up poetry
Well then, that's a completely different issue.

>> No.686942

>>686923
which learning disability do you have?

>> No.686944

>>686933
At the start of the thread I thought you cool.
After reading your posts you are a fool.
Please shut up.

>> No.686948

>>686925
What if i fucked your mom with the intention of it being poetry?

>> No.686952

>>686948
op here, this thread is off the rails.

>> No.686956

>>686948
My mom's dead, so I guess it could be. Please call it "Poetry from the squirming maggot dick".

>> No.686958

>>686952
No, it's poetry.

>> No.686959

>>686948
Only if you write it down.

Otherwise it's just oral folk tradition.

>> No.686960

>>686933
>"Religion is the belief in and worship of a god or gods"
>retarded part is how the guy takes atheism as "the lack of a religion"
>position that god does not exist

Jesus.
Fucking.
Christ.

Facepalm.jpg

>> No.686961

>>686958
FFFFFFFFFFU---i lol'd

>> No.686963

You have to be always drunk. That's all there is to it—it's the only way. So as not to feel the horrible burden of time that breaks your back and bends you to the earth, you have to be continually drunk.

But on what? Wine, poetry or virtue, as you wish. But be drunk.

And if sometimes, on the steps of a palace or the green grass of a ditch, in the mournful solitude of your room, you wake again, drunkenness already diminishing or gone, ask the wind, the wave, the star, the bird, the clock, everything that is flying, everything that is groaning, everything that is rolling, everything that is singing, everything that is speaking. . .ask what time it is and wind, wave, star, bird, clock will answer you: "It is time to be drunk! So as not to be the martyred slaves of time, be drunk, be continually drunk! On wine, on poetry or on virtue as you wish."

>> No.686969

>>686963
This is a perfect example of why free verse is a failure.

>> No.686976

>>686963
>>686969
yes, because the poet, once he has ''liberated'' himself from his struggle with form and structure, must struggle with his ''inner demons''. this is why free verse poetry has turned all poetry into a vehicle for manchild angst.

>> No.686977

>>686969

You're obviously not drunk enough.

>> No.686979

>>686976
>implying shakespeare wasn't the angstiest manchild of them all.

>> No.686984

>>686976
The difference between the romantics and the modern ''free-verse'' poets is not that the romantics were free of turmoil and drug use. They showed, whereas free verse tells. It tells and it tells.

>> No.686986

>>686960
saying atheism is a metaphysics is the same shorthand expression as "socialism is a politics."

this is a rather common way of speaking, your evident confusion must mean you don't really understand what metaphysics in philosophy means.

>> No.686992

>>686986
Niggah, shut the fuck up. You gay.

>> No.686994

>>686986
like ''existentialism is a humanism''. right, it isn't how you said it so much as what you said. your arguments turned against themselves. personally, i think atheism is metaphysical, but not by much. it simply refuses one answer. it does not make any answers of its own.

>> No.686999

>>686994
you're just as gay and troll fodder.

>> No.687000

>>686960
actually, your post was so retarded i failed to understand it on the first go.

>> No.687010

riverrun, past Eve and Adam's, from swerve of shore to bend
of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to
Howth Castle and Environs.
Sir Tristram, violer d'amores, fr'over the short sea, had passen-
core rearrived from North Armorica on this side the scraggy
isthmus of Europe Minor to wielderfight his penisolate war: nor
had topsawyer's rocks by the stream Oconee exaggerated themselse
to Laurens County's gorgios while they went doublin their mumper
all the time: nor avoice from afire bellowsed mishe mishe to
tauftauf thuartpeatrick: not yet, though venissoon after, had a
kidscad buttended a bland old isaac: not yet, though all's fair in
vanessy, were sosie sesthers wroth with twone nathandjoe. Rot a
peck of pa's malt had Jhem or Shen brewed by arclight and rory
end to the regginbrow was to be seen ringsome on the aquaface.
The fall (bababadalgharaghtakamminarronnkonnbronntonner-
ronntuonnthunntrovarrhounawnskawntoohoohoordenenthur-
nuk!) of a once wallstrait oldparr is retaled early in bed and later
on life down through all christian minstrelsy. The great fall of the
offwall entailed at such short notice the pftjschute of Finnegan,
erse solid man, that the humptyhillhead of humself prumptly sends
an unquiring one well to the west in quest of his tumptytumtoes:
and their upturnpikepointandplace is at the knock out in the park
where oranges have been laid to rust upon the green since dev-
linsfirst loved livvy.

>> No.687018

>>686994
do you understand what "metaphysical statement" means? it's on the same order as "mathematical statement" or "moral statement."

i don't know, you guys seem like you've never touched anglo philosophy before. get some russell or something.

>> No.687020

>>687000
>>686999
Samefag.

>>687000
Complete idiot. That anon said atheism is a "lack of religion," religion is defined as "a belief in a god," and you provided the hilariously stupid counterpoint that atheism is a "position that god does not exist" which means the exact same fucking thing.

And still, this has nothing directly to do with metaphysics. Stop shitting up OP's thread.

>> No.687022

>>687018
not everyone jives with that bullshit.

>> No.687026

>>687010
what is this? middle-english?

>> No.687031

>>687026

You should've been able to recognise it from the very first word, you doofus.

>> No.687033

>>687026
no, it's just james joyce not writing poetry.

>> No.687037

>>687020
i said "a metaphysical position." meaning, taking atheism as a metaphysical position. yes, that metaphysical there is the entire point.

anyway, is missing the difference between "religion" and "a metaphysical position" is pretty huge. i don't even understand how it could happen.

you literary people who take "religion" "belief in god" and "a metaphysical belief in god" as the same thing should probably not get angry at my posts. go back to whatever you were doing before.

>> No.687040

>>687037
your posts were convoluted at best. but as far as ''taking a metaphysical position'' goes, that is just some fuckery. atheism is not a metaphysical position. it is a negation of one type of metaphysical position. an atheist may take metaphysical positions, but atheism is not in itself a metaphysical position. oh btw fuck you for derailing a thread about poetry on the front page.

>> No.687073

>>687040
yes, my posts were bad and derailing.

anyway, i am just saying atheism is dealing with a metaphysical question. so atheism is indeed at the same level as religion, if we take both to mean their metaphysics. the offending caricature "it's like saying atheism is a religion" then fails. although this does not really make that particular confused anon more likely to understand the original contention.

>> No.687337

BLACK POWER

>> No.687348

HEY GUYS LETS ARGUE ABOUT DEFINITIONS POINTLESSLY BECAUSE THE THING WE ARE DESCRIBING REALLY JUST DESCRIBES A LOT OF KINDA SIMILAR STUFF AND ULTIMATELY THE FINER LANGUAGE OF THE DEFINITION IS ARBITRARY LIKE YOUR FAVORITE FUCKING COLOR

>> No.687353

>>687348
not at all, and i think your caps lock is on. you might wanna check on that.

>> No.687364

>>687353
Define art and poetry for us then.

>> No.687380

>>687040
negating something is still taking a position on it. If I say "Unicorns do not exist" I am rendering the position "Unicorns exist" false.

>> No.687394

>>687380
negating something is not taking a position.