At the Gates of Dawn / George J. Dance

[George J. Dance]

At the Gates of Dawn

Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
& from the icy waters underground

a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
on all. Floating down, the light resounds
blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –

& all the land is lime and limpid green.
Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.

Change, return, success, going & coming,
nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
lazily winding, finding its way to sea.

~~
George J. Dance, 2009
from Doggerel, and other doggerel, 2011

https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html

[Karen Tellefsen]

I like this one.

[Michael Pendragon]

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:04:59 PM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> > At the Gates of Dawn
> >
> > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,

Like the fog, night comes on little cat feet.

Not bad... but irrelevant to the remainder of the poem.

> > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

Cute and fanciful -- but out of place with the rest of the poem's tone.

> > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
> > & from the icy waters underground
> >
> > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
> > on all.

Now you've lost me.

If darkness is increased 1 to 7 times, there needn't be a comma. If the line has some other meaning, I've no idea what it might be.

A scarlet (red) eagle doesn't seem like it should shine gold, but crimson.

>> Floating down, the light resounds
> > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –

Was there some sort of explosion? Nuclear?

> > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
> > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
> > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.

Mankind is extinct and Earth has reverted back to its natural state?

The final line (above) is nice... but... if it's foggy, the buttercups would have a hard time catching any rays of sunlight.

> > Change, return, success, going & coming,
> > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
> > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
> > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.

Why end the poem with Tarzan-speak? I realize that it could be thought to reflect Earth's return to her natural order... but Tarzan-speak isn't so much natural, as the invention of Hollywood writers.

[Will Dockery]

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>

I remember this one from days of yore, a favorite.

[Dennis Teal]

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:

> At the Gates of Dawn
>
> Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
> the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

That's all the nonsense of yours anyone needs to read. It's no wonder you wasted
your money and time playing "editor" to the word soup slop writer Will Dockery.
Go back to being a stock boy if your old back can take it.

[Will Dockery]

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>

Speaking of Syd Barrett.

:)

[Will Dockery]

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:04:59 PM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:

Seconded, a favorite of mine from way back.

[Zod]

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:

Quite excellent....

[W.Dockery]

Dennis Teal wrote:

> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> At the Gates of Dawn
>>
>> Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
>> the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
>

> That's all the xxxxxxxxxxx

Fuck off, troll.

:)

[Family Guy]

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 9:33:18 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:

>
> Fuck off

Wish you would.

[Family Guy]

Dance and Dockery write like they're recovering from head trauma.

[Will Dockery]

While I don't care about hat you do, either way.

:)

[W-Dockery]

***

AAPC Readers' Choices (of favorite poems of AAPC poets):

-------------------------------------------------------

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/search?q=%22AAPC%20Reader%27s%20Choice%22

The "AAPC Readers' Choices (of favorite poems of AAPC poets):" is a good feature.

***

[George J. Dance]

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 1:08:33 AM UTC-4, Dennis Teal wrote:

> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> > At the Gates of Dawn
> >
> > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
> > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
> That's all the nonsense of yours anyone needs to read.

Oh, dear: now even the non-readers are stopping at the second line.

Well, no reason for me to read all of their swill, then.

<snip>

[Will Dockery]

True, Peter J. Ross he is not.

:)

[W-Dockery]

Family Guy wrote:

> On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 1:08:33 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> > At the Gates of Dawn
>> >
>> > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
>> > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
>>

> Dance and Dockery write like they're recovering from head trauma.

Meanwhile you continue to whine like a little twit, Alex.

:)

[George J. Dance]

I never know how to respond to posts like this. On the one hand, here's someone who doesn't 'get' the poem, and doesn't care for the bits he did get; but he doesn't want to provoke a confrontation by panning it to my face. So if I jump in to explain it, it could sound like being confrontational, or overly defensive; and it could spoil the poem for those who like to decode poetry. And there is an old code here that an author should not talk about their work, as his opinion doesn't count; it's the reader's first impressions that matter.Those are all reasons for my not saying anything....

On the other hand, I like talking about my poems; I'm always hopeful that someone who knows what I was doing ends up being more sympathetic to the poor poem, perhaps even friendly; while if I don't say anything, it may sound as if I agree with, or at least can't answer, any of the criticisms. Those are reasons for writing a prose explanation ...

So, as always, I'm torn. I see downsides in either alternative.

[NancyGene]

> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:31:27 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> >
> >> > > At the Gates of Dawn
> >> > >
> >> > > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
> >> Like the fog, night comes on little cat feet.

We agree. The image is also of a cat in a litter box.

> >>
> >> Not bad... but irrelevant to the remainder of the poem.
> >> > > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
> >> Cute and fanciful -- but out of place with the rest of the poem's tone.

What other kinds of homes would they be sleeping in? We see that gnomes rhyme with homes, and the reader would have to agree that there actually are gnomes out there ("the gnomes). Or, what gnomes?

> >> > > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
> >> > > & from the icy waters underground
> >> > >
> >> > > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
> >> > > on all.
> >> Now you've lost me.
> >>
> >> If darkness is increased 1 to 7 times, there needn't be a comma. If the line has some other meaning, I've no idea what it might be.

We thought maybe it was the days of the week, as we can't think of any other pattern that uses 7. Maybe increasing by one is Daylight Saving Time? We thought that maybe the scarlet eagle was the sun, with its rays being the feathers? "Red sky in morning, sailor’s warning."
> >>
> >> A scarlet (red) eagle doesn't seem like it should shine gold, but crimson..

> >> >> Floating down, the light resounds
> >> > > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –
> >> Was there some sort of explosion? Nuclear?

We think that this is as in comic books, where there are bam/pow symbols. We assume that George is using onomatopoeia, but it is an odd mixture from line to line.

> >> > > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
> >> > > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
> >> > > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.
> >> Mankind is extinct and Earth has reverted back to its natural state?

We rather like the "buttercups cup" phrase.

> >> The final line (above) is nice... but... if it's foggy, the buttercups would have a hard time catching any rays of sunlight.

They must be already there, along with the dandelions, which both bloom in spring.

> >
> >> > > Change, return, success, going & coming,
> >> > > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:

Rearranged perhaps, but not created or destroyed.

> >> > > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
> >> > > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
> >
> >> Why end the poem with Tarzan-speak? I realize that it could be thought to reflect Earth's return to her natural order... but Tarzan-speak isn't so much natural, as the invention of Hollywood writers.

We stopped at that too. A "the" or "its" sea would have been much better.

> >
> > I never know how to respond to posts like this. On the one hand, here's someone who doesn't 'get' the poem, and doesn't care for the bits he did get; but he doesn't want to provoke a confrontation by panning it to my face.

No, we don't think that is Michael's motivation. Michael tries to be fair to a poem but does not back away from a confrontation. Also, what confrontation would that be? Are you so married to this poem that suggestions would insult you?

> So if I jump in to explain it, it could sound like being confrontational, or overly defensive; and it could spoil the poem for those who like to decode poetry.

However, if an experienced and educated poet and poetry reader such as Michael does not get it, that should tell you something. How would you know if other readers actually understood it?

> And there is an old code here that an author should not talk about their work, as his opinion doesn't count; it's the reader's first impressions that matter.Those are all reasons for my not saying anything....

We don't know that rule, but if people do not get the meaning in any of our poems, we are happy to explain what we intended. That makes the poem much more textured for the reader. Otherwise, we might as well just eat a book of Shakespeare's sonnets and think that is just as good as reading and understanding them. Or, eating the heart of a brave warrior.

> >
> > On the other hand, I like talking about my poems; I'm always hopeful that someone who knows what I was doing ends up being more sympathetic to the poor poem, perhaps even friendly; while if I don't say anything, it may sound as if I agree with, or at least can't answer, any of the criticisms. Those are reasons for writing a prose explanation ...

Please crack the code for us.

> >
> > So, as always, I'm torn. I see downsides in either alternative.

If you provide an explanation of your intentions, that may start an actual discussion, which is good.

[Michael Pendragon]

I'm not trying to pan your poem, George -- I'm asking questions to 1) point out the parts that could use some clarification, and 2) to learn what you were trying to express (in which case I could possibly offers suggestions to make it more clear).

As a reader/writer of poetry, my sensibilities are decidedly middlebrow. If I don't get it, it's a good bet that the lowbrows will have equal (if not more) difficulty in following it. And with its Batman-like sfx ("Blam pow pow"), it doesn't come across as highbrow.

BTW: Middlebrows prefer poetry that's understandable (at least on its most superficial level) on the initial read. When we're in the mood to do a little decoding, we turn to the daily cryptoquote.

[W.Dockery]

George J. Dance wrote:
> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:31:27 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:04:59 PM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>

>> > > At the Gates of Dawn
>> > >
>> > > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,

>> Like the fog, night comes on little cat feet.
>>
>> Not bad... but irrelevant to the remainder of the poem.

>> > > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

>> Cute and fanciful -- but out of place with the rest of the poem's tone.

>> > > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
>> > > & from the icy waters underground
>> > >
>> > > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
>> > > on all.

>> Now you've lost me.
>>
>> If darkness is increased 1 to 7 times, there needn't be a comma. If the line has some other meaning, I've no idea what it might be.
>>

>> A scarlet (red) eagle doesn't seem like it should shine gold, but crimson..

>> >> Floating down, the light resounds
>> > > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –

>> Was there some sort of explosion? Nuclear?

>> > > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
>> > > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
>> > > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.

>> Mankind is extinct and Earth has reverted back to its natural state?
>>
>> The final line (above) is nice... but... if it's foggy, the buttercups would have a hard time catching any rays of sunlight.
>

>> > > Change, return, success, going & coming,
>> > > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
>> > > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
>> > > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
>

>> Why end the poem with Tarzan-speak? I realize that it could be thought to reflect Earth's return to her natural order... but Tarzan-speak isn't so much natural, as the invention of Hollywood writers.
>
> I never know how to respond to posts like this. On the one hand, here's someone who doesn't 'get' the poem, and doesn't care for the bits he did get; but he doesn't want to provoke a confrontation by panning it to my face. So if I jump in to explain it, it could sound like being confrontational, or overly defensive; and it could spoil the poem for those who like to decode poetry. And there is an old code here that an author should not talk about their work, as his opinion doesn't count; it's the reader's first impressions that matter.Those are all reasons for my not saying anything....
>
> On the other hand, I like talking about my poems; I'm always hopeful that someone who knows what I was doing ends up being more sympathetic to the poor poem, perhaps even friendly; while if I don't say anything, it may sound as if I agree with, or at least can't answer, any of the criticisms. Those are reasons for writing a prose explanation ...
>
> So, as always, I'm torn. I see downsides in either alternative.

At least opt for the old "Thank you f;r reading and commenting" bit, as advised by the original AAPC FAQ.

:)

[W-Dockery]

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 10:40:36 PM UTC-4, Family Guy wrote:

> On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 1:08:33 AM UTC-4, Dennis Teal wrote:
> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>

> > > At the Gates of Dawn
> > >
> > > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
> > > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

> > That's all the nonsense of yours anyone needs to read. It's no wonder you wasted
> > your money and time playing "editor" to the word soup slop writer Will Dockery.
> > Go back to being a stock boy if your old back can take it.

> Dance and Dockery write like they're recovering from head trauma.

No, Dance can write circles around you, troll.

:)

[Will Dockery]

The troll seems to be second handing Gary Gamble at his most shallow.

[Karen Tellefsen]

Gary Gamble had talent and skill, even if he was less than pleasant.

[Will Dockery]

I did like a few of GG's poems.

[W.Dockery]

>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance..html
>
> Quite excellent....

"Shine on, you crazy diamond."

:)

[George J. Dance]

On Wednesday, July 14, 2021 at 11:28:05 AM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:

He definitely knew what he was doing and had standards, as a poet - I've read poems of his that impressed me, and one I even liked so much I wrote a review on. (I forget the name, but it was about talking to his son about the moon.) As a critic, he was insulting and intolerant to anyone who didn't share his standards. The big problem, for me, was that by the time I came here he'd stopped interacting as a poet, and only as a critic; and he became even more insulting and intolerant in that role as time went on.

Not just him ... I've seen people on other (non-poetry) usenet groups go through a similar trajectory, an increasing nastiness the longer they're here - and I even spotted the same thing happening to me, at one point.

But enough about him; I have my own poem to talk about here.

[Will Dockery]

It is a difficult trap to avoid, staring into the abyss, fighting monsters and all that.

:)

[George J. Dance]

I appreciate that. I'll be explaining what I did, in a line-by-line, later today. As a sort of introduction, for now it's important to explain why I can't and won't be rewriting.

This is 'conceptual poetry'. I don't know if you know that term. It's part of the backlash against the free-form, anything-goes poetry of mid-century. One reaction was "neoformalism," which I'm sure you do know all about, trying to restore the formal constraints of verse. "Conceptualism" was another reaction; an attempt to write poetry constrained in other ways. The constraints, and the results, are all over the map.

The constraint I used here is the cento form. I didn't use complete lines; but every image I took was from Syd Barrett's lyrics to the first Pink Floyd album, The Piper at the Gates of Dawn. So the poem does have a dual purpose; it's meant as a pretty poem about a sunrise, and also a look into the mind (a sort of tribute to) Barrett. My hope is that those who do recognize the Barrett connection (I think the title's a dead giveaway) will get more from the poem, but at the same time those who know nothing about it can just read it at as a poem about a sunrise.

> As a reader/writer of poetry, my sensibilities are decidedly middlebrow. If I don't get it, it's a good bet that the lowbrows will have equal (if not more) difficulty in following it.
>And with its Batman-like sfx ("Blam pow pow"), it doesn't come across as highbrow.

True; the imagery is all over the place. But I'll get into that later.

> BTW: Middlebrows prefer poetry that's understandable (at least on its most superficial level) on the initial read. When we're in the mood to do a little decoding, we turn to the daily cryptoquote.

There's a definite split in audiences there; I remember we discussed that a couple of years ago, with Northrop Frye's distinction between "popular poetry" (in which the meaning is plain at a single read) and "serious poetry" (which has a deeper meaning that must be decoded). I do try to make my poems "serious" - I want the reader to get more than the surface meaning - but I also want them to be "popular" - able to be read and appreciated in one pass. It's easy to fall off either side of the fence.

[George J. Dance]

In a sense. Barrett really wasn't the "crazy diamond", much less the character "Pink" in "The Wall." He did go through a wild time, taking psychedelics and being thrown out of the band, followed by years of being unable to duplicate Piper's success as a solo artist. But he seems to have made out OK - he got out of the business, bought a nice home, and lived a nice middle-class life on his PF earnings.

The idea that he went crazy comes from those songs by Roger Waters. I get the impression Waters did not like Barrett; in any case, Waters and his vision of PF were what replaced Barrett's. So I always detect a leaven of malice in those works.

[Will Dockery]

Interesting, and thanks... I'm not as well versed on P.F. history as I should be.

[Zod]

Well put...

[W-Dockery]

Karen Tellefsen wrote:
> On Wednesday, July 14, 2021 at 9:24:14 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 11:51:21 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:

>> > On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 1:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fake Dennis forged:

>> > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> > > > At the Gates of Dawn
>> > > >
>> > > > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
>> > > > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
>> >
>> > > That's all the nonsense of yours anyone needs to read.
>> >
>> > Oh, dear: now even the non-readers are stopping at the second line.
>> >
>> > Well, no reason for me to read all of their swill, then.
>> >
>> > <snip>
>> The troll seems to be second handing Gary Gamble at his most shallow.
>
> Gary Gamble had talent and skill, even if he was less than pleasant.

You were already gone by the time Gary Gamble really started deteriorating, Karen.

[Michael Pendragon]

I'm familiar with "conceptual art" -- and always assumed that "conceptual poetry" was a part of that movement (placing the poem's concept above its style/execution).

> This is 'conceptual poetry'. I don't know if you know that term. It's part of the backlash against the free-form, anything-goes poetry of mid-century. One reaction was "neoformalism," which I'm sure you do know all about, trying to restore the formal constraints of verse. "Conceptualism" was another reaction; an attempt to write poetry constrained in other ways. The constraints, and the results, are all over the map.
>

Yes, I consider myself to be a Neoromantic poet, which is a more specified form of Neoformalism.

> The constraint I used here is the cento form. I didn't use complete lines; but every image I took was from Syd Barrett's lyrics to the first Pink Floyd album, The Piper at the Gates of Dawn. So the poem does have a dual purpose; it's meant as a pretty poem about a sunrise, and also a look into the mind (a sort of tribute to) Barrett. My hope is that those who do recognize the Barrett connection (I think the title's a dead giveaway) will get more from the poem, but at the same time those who know nothing about it can just read it at as a poem about a sunrise.
>

A couple of my college roommates were heavily into Pink Floyd, so I ended up hearing all of their songs. I'm afraid that I didn't pay much attention to the lyrics, have little recollection of them, and don't even recall the "Piper at the Gates of Dawn" title.

But... shouldn't a poem that comprises a series of direct quotes give credit to the original author? The album should still be copyrighted (even under International Copyright laws), and should be given some sort of official acknowledgement.

> > As a reader/writer of poetry, my sensibilities are decidedly middlebrow. If I don't get it, it's a good bet that the lowbrows will have equal (if not more) difficulty in following it.
> >And with its Batman-like sfx ("Blam pow pow"), it doesn't come across as highbrow.
> True; the imagery is all over the place. But I'll get into that later.
> > BTW: Middlebrows prefer poetry that's understandable (at least on its most superficial level) on the initial read. When we're in the mood to do a little decoding, we turn to the daily cryptoquote.
> There's a definite split in audiences there; I remember we discussed that a couple of years ago, with Northrop Frye's distinction between "popular poetry" (in which the meaning is plain at a single read) and "serious poetry" (which has a deeper meaning that must be decoded). I do try to make my poems "serious" - I want the reader to get more than the surface meaning - but I also want them to be "popular" - able to be read and appreciated in one pass. It's easy to fall off either side of the fence.
>

Ideally, a poem should be understandable on a superficial level on the first read -- but should contain additional levels of interpretation that are only brought out when one examines it over the course of several reads.

For me, there also has to be an additional factor -- its use of language must grab me. For instance, I recall being struck by Poe's use internal rhyme "ever dissever" and alliteration/(and possibly onomatopoeia) "demons down under the sea" in "Annabel Lee," when I first read it in my teens.

When a poem affects me, I want to memorize it: when it doesn't affect me, I simply forget it and move on.

[W-Dockery]

Dennis Teal wrote:
> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> At the Gates of Dawn
>>
>> Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,

>> the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

> That's all the nonsense of yours xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In other words, the pom went over your head.

:)

[Will Dockery]

Just at a quick glance I see that times with Pink Floyd has not been as hunky dory as I might have thought:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syd_Barrett

[Will Dockery]

On Monday, July 12, 2021 at 1:08:33 AM UTC-4, Fake Dennis forged:

> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
> > At the Gates of Dawn
> >
> > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
> > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
>

> That's all the nonsense

Says the forger and identity thief.

Why not just admit that George's poem was simply too deep for you, impostor troll?

[W-Dockery]

I think some of the readers missed the discussion and definition of the Cento poem, George.

[W-Dockery]

Karen Tellefsen wrote:

> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> At the Gates of Dawn
>>
>> Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
>> the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

>> when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
>> & from the icy waters underground
>>
>> a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
>> on all. Floating down, the light resounds
>> blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –
>>
>> & all the land is lime and limpid green.
>> Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
>> Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.
>>
>> Change, return, success, going & coming,
>> nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
>> Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
>> lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
>>
>> ~~
>> George J. Dance, 2009
>> from Doggerel, and other doggerel, 2011
>>
>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance..html
>

> I like this one.

Karen, this was an experiment with a poetry form called Cento, perhaps George should explain that.

I think it was Karla Rogers who also began introduced us to the similar Glosa poem, correct, George?

[Michael Pendragon]

I take it that you're trolling the plagiarism threads in order to have someone else (George) on the hot seat for a change.

The Writer's Digest article that NancyGene linked addresses the cento:

"Many poetic forms borrow from others, such as the cento, in which every line comes from another source. The title of a cento may also come from another source. As a result of the juxtaposition of the various lines and images, centos often create irony or humor. Had Ailey O’Toole titled her poem “Cento of Gun Metal” and tagged the list of people she borrowed from, her work would not be considered plagiarism."

You'll note that both the poems status as a "cento" should be noted and the source/s should be listed.

I'm sure that George believed most people would immediately pick up on the Pink Floyd references, and therefore didn't bother to list them.

Now let's see if you're willing to let this proverbial horse stay dead.


Michael Pendragon
“writing is just putting one word in front of another”.
-- Will Dockery

[Will Dockery]

Actually I often skip and ignore Nancy Gene's troll posts.

[W-Dockery]

At least it turned out with great music, Dark Side is an undisputed classic.

[W.Dockery]

jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:

> On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 9:59:39 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 9:38:12 PM UTC-4, jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 9:34:02 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> > > On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 8:46:26 PM UTC-4, jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:

(Moved from the troll thread)

>> > > > Have you heard any Pink Floyd? Can not more adamantly recommend and implore that you listen to the music of this top notch band!!! Saw them in ‘94 and was absolutely floored and transported! One of the very greatest bands EVER!!! Both lyrically and musically… love all of their albums from “Piper at the gates of dawn” upto and including “Animals”…
>> >
>> > > I never saw Pink Floyd llve, that had to have been a blast.
>> >
>> > Oh absolutely, the sheer high tech SPECTACLE of the concert was magnificent! The lights and lasers and special effects and videos etc… it was truly, literally “out of this world” 🙏❤️🎶
>> I am looking at your Pink Floyd list.
>>
>> I take it you're not fond of The Wall?
>>
>> Pink Floyd does get a bit preachy on that album.

> Yeah, “The Wall” and the following albums are all disappointing musically and lyrically, Imo, though they have their moments…

"The Wall" reminds me a lot of The Kinks "Schoolboys In Disgrace" album, which came out two or three years earlier and was made many of the same points about teachers and students.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schoolboys_in_Disgrace

(Moved from the troll thread)

[Will Dockery]

The jibes sound familar.

"The lunatic is on the grass." has to be one of the most famous lines in history, not just in Pink Floyd lore.

[George J. Dance]

On Thursday, July 15, 2021 at 3:29:20 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:

> I take it that you're trolling the plagiarism threads in order to have someone else (George) on the hot seat for a change.
>
> The Writer's Digest article that NancyGene linked addresses the cento:
>
> "Many poetic forms borrow from others, such as the cento, in which every line comes from another source. The title of a cento may also come from another source. As a result of the juxtaposition of the various lines and images, centos often create irony or humor. Had Ailey O’Toole titled her poem “Cento of Gun Metal” and tagged the list of people she borrowed from, her work would not be considered plagiarism."
>
> You'll note that both the poems status as a "cento" should be noted and the source/s should be listed.

Karen said much the same thing. That's been done on the blog, and it's pending for the book. (I just need time to get to that!)

> I'm sure that George believed most people would immediately pick up on the Pink Floyd references, and therefore didn't bother to list them.

That's pretty much how it happened. When someone mentioned the imagery, of course I'd mention it. That may have been good enough for a group, but I agree it's not sufficient on a blog, much less in a book.

> Now let's see if you're willing to let this proverbial horse stay dead.

I am, as long as I'm sure it is dead. I'll be keeping an eye on the beast for a bit longer to be sure.

[George J. Dance]

I have to agree; and I'd also have to rank "Meddle" and "The Wall" as classics as well. Waters taking over the band might have been the best thing for the band. (Just like Jagger's taking over Brian Jones's may have been.) It did mark a definite shift in the music, from psychedelic to progressive rock.

[Dennis Teal]

On Friday, July 16, 2021 at 12:43:57 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:

> "The lunatic is on the grass." has to be one of the most famous lines in history, not just in Pink Floyd lore.

How stupid, but with your limited education and exposure to the world outside of Shitkicker, Georgia I can see why you'd believe that.

[Will Dockery]

On Friday, July 16, 2021 at 10:22:43 PM UTC-4, Fake Teal forged:

> On Friday, July 16, 2021 at 12:43:57 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>
> > "The lunatic is on the grass." has to be one of the most famous lines in history, not just in Pink Floyd lore.
>

> How stupidxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

That's pretty funny coming from an identity thieving, forging fuckhead such as you, Fake Teal.

:)

[Will Dockery]

They do seem to have shut the fuck up about the matter, for now, at least.

[Michael Pendragon]

Then why provoke them?


Michael Pendragon
MMP: Have you been eating those marijuana brownies again?
WILL DOCKERY: No, but I will admit the one I ate was pretty good.

[W.Dockery]

>> They do seem to have shut the fuck up about the matter, for now, at least..

> Then why provoke them?


I'm not.

:)

[Will Dockery]

On Friday, July 16, 2021 at 4:48:20 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:

The comparison with the Rolling Stones is spot on, really.

[Zod]

Much better than the travesty Phil Collins made of Peter Gabriel's early Genesis...

[W-Dockery]

Zod wrote:

> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> At the Gates of Dawn
>>
>> Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
>> the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
>> when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
>> & from the icy waters underground
>>
>> a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
>> on all. Floating down, the light resounds
>> blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –
>>
>> & all the land is lime and limpid green.
>> Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
>> Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.
>>
>> Change, return, success, going & coming,
>> nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
>> Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
>> lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
>>
>> ~~
>> George J. Dance, 2009
>> from Doggerel, and other doggerel, 2011
>>
>> https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance..html
>
> Quite excellent....

A well crafted Cento, agreed.

[Zod]

> > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html
> I like this one.

Agreed, great tribute to Pink Floyd...

[W-Dockery]

And a great use of the Cento form of poetry.

[NancyGene]

Plagiarist.

[Will Dockery]

No, you'e still confused...have Pendragon explain it to you, Nancy Gene.

:)

[NancyGene]

Everyone but you, George "Plagiarist" Dance and George Sulzbach agrees that George Dance plagiarized from Pink Floyd by not including a credit to them. Go ask Dr. Schwimmer.

[Will Dockery]

On Friday, July 23, 2021 at 9:02:24 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 12:53:18 AM UTC, Will Dockery wrote:

> > On Friday, July 23, 2021 at 8:49:00 PM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
> > > > >> > At the Gates of Dawn
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
> > > > >> > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
> > > > >> > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
> > > > >> > & from the icy waters underground
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
> > > > >> > on all. Floating down, the light resounds
> > > > >> > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
> > > > >> > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
> > > > >> > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Change, return, success, going & coming,
> > > > >> > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
> > > > >> > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
> > > > >> > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > ~~
> > > > >> > George J. Dance, 2009
> > > > >> > from Doggerel, and other doggerel, 2011
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html
> > > > >
> > > > >> I like this one.
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed, great tribute to Pink Floyd...
> > > > And a great use of the Cento form of poetry.
> > >

> > > xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx bullshit snipped xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > No, you'e still confused...have Pendragon explain it to you, Nancy Gene.
> >

> Everyone but you, George Dance and George Sulzbach agrees xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

No, Pendragon and Karen both understand the Cento.

Look it up, Nancy Gene.

:)

[Michael Pendragon]

I'll thank you not to speak on my behalf, Donkey.

George should have identified the poem as a cento, and you're not doing him any favors by belaboring the point.


Michael Pendragon
“… giggling
at the gay guys
outside Sweet Gum Head bar
two green haired
punk rock boys
kissing…”
-- Will “I’m not a homophobe” Dockery

[W.Dockery]

Then speak up, Pendragon.

:)

[Will Dockery]

On Friday, July 23, 2021 at 9:34:53 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> George should have identified the poem as a cento

Basically the same thing I've been saying for years, at least since the "Karma Bombs" borrowing without credit by Cook.

George has stated his reasons, and you should inform Nancy Gene that writing a Cento isn't plagiarism.

[Michael Pendragon]

I just did, you moron.

Michael Pendragon
“I have not been to a Waffle House in months.”
-- Will “Poppin’ Fresh” Dockery

[Michael Pendragon]

She's aware of that, Donkey.

Learn to read.


Michael Pendragon
“…the Waffle House dining area was not open the last time I stopped by there.”

[Will Dockery]

On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 3:08:13 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 2:49:45 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Friday, July 23, 2021 at 9:34:53 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > >
> > > George should have identified the poem as a cento
>
> > Basically the same thing I've been saying for years, at least since the "Karma Bombs" borrowing without credit by Cook.
> >
> > George has stated his reasons, and you should inform Nancy Gene that writing a Cento isn't plagiarism.
> She's aware of that,

Okay, if you say so... Nancy Gene's posts about the topic seem to say otherwise.

[Michael Pendragon]

No, they don't.

She accused George of plagiarism because he failed to 1) credit the original source (Pink Floyd) and 2) because he neglected to identify his poem as a cento.

Writing a cento is not an act of plagiarism. Attempting to pass it off as an entirely original work, otoh, is.

Since George has published this poem without identifying it as a cento or crediting the source, he has committed an act of plagiarism.

As previously noted, I don't believe that he was intentionally trying to pass his poem off as an entirely original work. I believe that he thought that the lyrics were almost universally known, and that the majority of readers would immediately realize that it was a cento.

That's an excuse for his having plagiarized Pink Floyd. It doesn't absolve him of having committed plagiarism.

Again, your continued attempts to belabor this thread are not doing George any favors. He f****d up. He admitted his mistake. The best thing he and you (assuming that you give a damn about his reputation) can do now is to let the issue die.

But, like I said: you're jizzing in your pants because somebody other than you is under attack.

Michael Pendragon
“…the local Waffle House locations are closing at 9pm, so are not good for late night coffee and Wi-Fi.

[Will Dockery]

On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 3:25:29 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 3:10:45 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 3:08:13 AM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > > > > George should have identified the poem as a cento
> > >
> > > > Basically the same thing I've been saying for years, at least since the "Karma Bombs" borrowing without credit by Cook.
> > > >
> > > > George has stated his reasons, and you should inform Nancy Gene that writing a Cento isn't plagiarism.
> > > She's aware of that,
> > Okay, if you say so... Nancy Gene's posts about the topic seem to say otherwise.
> No, they don't.
>
> She accused George of plagiarism because he failed to 1) credit the original source (Pink Floyd) and 2) because he neglected to identify his poem as a cento.
>
> Writing a cento is not an act of plagiarism. Attempting to pass it off as an entirely original work, otoh, is.
>
> Since George has published this poem without identifying it as a cento or crediting the source, he has committed an act of plagiarism.
>
> As previously noted, I don't believe that he was intentionally trying to pass his poem off as an entirely original work. I believe that he thought that the lyrics were almost universally known, and that the majority of readers would immediately realize that it was a cento.
>
> That's an excuse for his having plagiarized Pink Floyd. It doesn't absolve him of having committed plagiarism.
>

> Again, your continued attempts to belabor this xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

You're wrong, it has been Senetto and Nancy Gene making multiple posts about this, not me.

Why do you lie about me so much, Pendragon?

:)

[Michael Pendragon]

There are 67 posts in this thread. 37 of them were made by you.

Why are you such an obtuse jackass?


Michael Pendragon
“I’m only here for the waffles”

[W-Dockery]

On Tuesday, July 20, 2021 at 9:09:15 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> On Monday, July 19, 2021 at 3:27:26 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
>
> > One question: GD said he was going to credit Syd because it was requested of him.
>
> Not true As I showed in the OP, I 'credited Syd' (and not for the first time) on July 14, the day before NGBS reported their scandal. That's how NGBS discovered the connection to Syd Barrett; because I told them about it.
> > Everything I saw about cento said
>
> "Everything" you 'saw about cento' was probably Pendragon's quote from the writers' market link that NGBS posted. (but either didn't read, or decided to not mention, what it said about centos). There's no reason to think you even knew what a cento was a week ago.
> > crediting was mandatory otherwise it is can be considered plagiarism.
>
> "Can be considered plagiarism" is a mealy-mouthed nonsense. Plagiarism is a serious offence; and calling someone a plagiarist is a serious charge, that has to be backed up and supported.
>
> "Plagiarism" has a strict definition: "attempting to pass another's work off as your own." It's not a matter of technicalities.

Another thread (not my doing) you may have missed, Pendragon.

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/Vjh64-mHxsw/m/HXkvWKETAgAJ

:)

[Michael Pendragon]

Again, why are you promoting other threads that accuse your supposed friend of plagiarism?


Michael Pendragon
“It us self-explanatory, Corey.”
-- Will Dockery, insisting on the clarity of his writing

[W-Dockery]

To rebuke.

George wrote a Cento, that's the answer to the question.

[Michael Pendragon]

When you 1) don't respond to a thread, and 2) don't post links to a thread, it dies.

When you continually 1) bump it to the top, 2) post links to it, 3) call people's attention to it, it keeps going.

Why do you seem hellbent on keeping these threads alive and kicking?


Michael Pendragon
“Over a twar later, where do we sand, in your opinion?”
-- Will Dockery

[W-Dockery]

Michael Pendragon wrote:

> On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 4:40:29 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>
>> > On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 3:41:24 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
>> >> On Tuesday, July 20, 2021 at 9:09:15 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>> >> > On Monday, July 19, 2021 at 3:27:26 PM UTC-4, Ash Wurthing wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > > One question: GD said he was going to credit Syd because it was requested of him.
>> >> >
>> >> > Not true As I showed in the OP, I 'credited Syd' (and not for the first time) on July 14, the day before NGBS reported their scandal. That's how NGBS discovered the connection to Syd Barrett; because I told them about it.
>> >> > > Everything I saw about cento said
>> >> >
>> >> > "Everything" you 'saw about cento' was probably Pendragon's quote from the writers' market link that NGBS posted. (but either didn't read, or decided to not mention, what it said about centos). There's no reason to think you even knew what a cento was a week ago.
>> >> > > crediting was mandatory otherwise it is can be considered plagiarism.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Can be considered plagiarism" is a mealy-mouthed nonsense. Plagiarism is a serious offence; and calling someone a plagiarist is a serious charge, that has to be backed up and supported.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Plagiarism" has a strict definition: "attempting to pass another's work off as your own." It's not a matter of technicalities.
>> >>
>> >> Another thread (not my doing) you may have missed, Pendragon.
>> >>
>> >> https://groups.google.com/g/alt.arts.poetry.comments/c/Vjh64-mHxsw/m/HXkvWKETAgAJ
>> >
>> > Again, why are you promoting other threads that accuse
>> To rebuke.
>>
>> George wrote a Cento, that's the answer to the question.

> When you 1) don't respond to a thread, and 2) don't post links to a thread, it dies.

False accusations like these don't just die, they remain in the archives.

Let's set the record straight and then let the thread die, or rather, go to the archives.

George Dance wrote a poem in the Cento style or form, that's it, the other accusations about him are false.

Last word... if you allow that.

[NancyGene]

Will, you don't get to have the last word. George Dance wrote a poem that consisted of rearranging lines from a Pink Floyd album and then presented it as his own poem. He may have written it as a cento but he did not attribute the lines to Pink Floyd in his book, in several postings of the poem, or recently when he was challenged. He was wrong. He should not do this again. He needs to go back to every single place where he posted or published that poem and put in that it is a cento and give credit to Pink Floyd. Plagiarism is taking other people's work and presenting it as one's own.

[Will Dockery]

On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> >
> > At the Gates of Dawn
> >
> > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,
> > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,
> > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
> > & from the icy waters underground
> >
> > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
> > on all. Floating down, the light resounds
> > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –
> >
> > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
> > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
> > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.
> >
> > Change, return, success, going & coming,
> > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
> > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
> > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
> >
> > ~~
> > George J. Dance, 2009
> > from Doggerel, and other doggerel, 2011
> >
> > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html

> Speaking of Syd Barrett.
>
> :)

Right here, from the start, Syd Barrett is attributed.

[Will Dockery]

> Will, you don't get to have the last word xxxxxxx

I can and will correct a misrepresentation, though.

George Dance wrote a poem in the Cento form, simple as that.

[NancyGene]

That was YOUR comment, not one from George Dance. His posting of the poem made NO mention of cento or Pink Floyd or Barrett. If a person, for obvious reasons, did not want to read YOUR postings, that person would think that the poem was written by GEORGE DANCE alone, without help from any band or album lyrics.

[W-Dockery]

We have been discussing the Cento, and this poem, for about 14 years, now.

It is no secret this is a Cento quoting famous lyrics from Pink Floyd.

[Michael Pendragon]

I didn't know that George was quoting Pink Floyd.

Nor did I know that the poem was a cento.

George may have thought that people would immediately recognize the lyrics, but he was wrong.

And just because AAPC is your whole life, doesn't mean that the rest of the world even knows that it exists. Mentioning that a poem is a cento at AAPC is not going to ensure that people who read the poem elsewhere (George's book, for instance) will be aware of that fact.

This is now the third time tonight that I've had to explain to you that George, technically, plagiarized the poem. That's not the kind of publicity any of us here need, and I feel bad for George that you keep forcing the issue.

George made a mistake. He admitted that he was wrong. Get over it... and let the subject end.


Michael Pendragon
"Because you simply don't have the capacity to make the leaps f creatve thought that I have."
-- Will Dockery

[Will Dockery]

On Wednesday, July 14, 2021 at 1:46:12 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 8:13:22 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 5:27:26 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:31:27 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:

> > > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:04:59 PM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
> > > > > > At the Gates of Dawn
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,

> > > > Like the fog, night comes on little cat feet.
> > > >
> > > > Not bad... but irrelevant to the remainder of the poem.

> > > > > > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

> > > > Cute and fanciful -- but out of place with the rest of the poem's tone.

> > > > > > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
> > > > > > & from the icy waters underground
> > > > > >
> > > > > > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
> > > > > > on all.

> > > > Now you've lost me.
> > > >
> > > > If darkness is increased 1 to 7 times, there needn't be a comma. If the line has some other meaning, I've no idea what it might be.
> > > >
> > > > A scarlet (red) eagle doesn't seem like it should shine gold, but crimson.

> > > > >> Floating down, the light resounds
> > > > > > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –

> > > > Was there some sort of explosion? Nuclear?

> > > > > > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
> > > > > > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
> > > > > > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.

> > > > Mankind is extinct and Earth has reverted back to its natural state?
> > > >
> > > > The final line (above) is nice... but... if it's foggy, the buttercups would have a hard time catching any rays of sunlight.

> > > > > > Change, return, success, going & coming,
> > > > > > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
> > > > > > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
> > > > > > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
>

> > > > Why end the poem with Tarzan-speak? I realize that it could be thought to reflect Earth's return to her natural order... but Tarzan-speak isn't so much natural, as the invention of Hollywood writers.
> > > I never know how to respond to posts like this. On the one hand, here's someone who doesn't 'get' the poem, and doesn't care for the bits he did get; but he doesn't want to provoke a confrontation by panning it to my face. So if I jump in to explain it, it could sound like being confrontational, or overly defensive; and it could spoil the poem for those who like to decode poetry. And there is an old code here that an author should not talk about their work, as his opinion doesn't count; it's the reader's first impressions that matter.Those are all reasons for my not saying anything....
> > >
> > > On the other hand, I like talking about my poems; I'm always hopeful that someone who knows what I was doing ends up being more sympathetic to the poor poem, perhaps even friendly; while if I don't say anything, it may sound as if I agree with, or at least can't answer, any of the criticisms. Those are reasons for writing a prose explanation ...
> > >
> > > So, as always, I'm torn. I see downsides in either alternative.
>
> > I'm not trying to pan your poem, George -- I'm asking questions to 1) point out the parts that could use some clarification, and 2) to learn what you were trying to express (in which case I could possibly offers suggestions to make it more clear).
>
> I appreciate that. I'll be explaining what I did, in a line-by-line, later today. As a sort of introduction, for now it's important to explain why I can't and won't be rewriting.
>
> This is 'conceptual poetry'. I don't know if you know that term. It's part of the backlash against the free-form, anything-goes poetry of mid-century. One reaction was "neoformalism," which I'm sure you do know all about, trying to restore the formal constraints of verse. "Conceptualism" was another reaction; an attempt to write poetry constrained in other ways. The constraints, and the results, are all over the map.
>
> The constraint I used here is the cento form. I didn't use complete lines; but every image I took was from Syd Barrett's lyrics to the first Pink Floyd album, The Piper at the Gates of Dawn. So the poem does have a dual purpose; it's meant as a pretty poem about a sunrise, and also a look into the mind (a sort of tribute to) Barrett. My hope is that those who do recognize the Barrett connection (I think the title's a dead giveaway) will get more from the poem, but at the same time those who know nothing about it can just read it at as a poem about a sunrise.
>
> > As a reader/writer of poetry, my sensibilities are decidedly middlebrow. If I don't get it, it's a good bet that the lowbrows will have equal (if not more) difficulty in following it.
>
> >And with its Batman-like sfx ("Blam pow pow"), it doesn't come across as highbrow.
>
> True; the imagery is all over the place. But I'll get into that later.
>
> > BTW: Middlebrows prefer poetry that's understandable (at least on its most superficial level) on the initial read. When we're in the mood to do a little decoding, we turn to the daily cryptoquote.
>
> There's a definite split in audiences there; I remember we discussed that a couple of years ago, with Northrop Frye's distinction between "popular poetry" (in which the meaning is plain at a single read) and "serious poetry" (which has a deeper meaning that must be decoded). I do try to make my poems "serious" - I want the reader to get more than the surface meaning - but I also want them to be "popular" - able to be read and appreciated in one pass. It's easy to fall off either side of the fence.

I agree we should let this thread rest, Pendragon, but this was posted by George Dance to you... you didn't understand what George was explaining about the poem, that it was a Cento of Syd Barrett?

[Michael Pendragon]

We've already established that I wasn't aware that George's poem was a cento. That's the issue.

George has already agreed that he should have labeled it as such. The issue has been settled.

Let it go.

Michael Pendragon
“…the local Waffle House locations are closing at 9pm, so are not good for late night coffee and Wi-Fi.

-- Will Dockery

[Will Dockery]

Agreed.

[Will Dockery]

Yes, he did.

Read the thread.

[Michelangelo Scarlotti]

How stupid can one Donkey be?

George made no mention of it when he recently posted his poem. That's why I hadn't realized it was a cento when I reviewed it.

The fact that he'd mentioned it 12 years ago has no bearing on the recent thread where he'd reposted it.

Now be a good little donkey and choke to death on a waffle.

Michael Pendragon
"Waffle House locations here close at nine at night so they are not open all night, which explains why I stated that they were closed."
-- Will Dockery

[W-Dockery]

George J. Dance wrote:

> On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 8:13:22 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Tuesday, July 13, 2021 at 5:27:26 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>> > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:31:27 PM UTC-4, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:

>> > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:04:59 PM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
>
>> > > > > At the Gates of Dawn
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,

>> > > Like the fog, night comes on little cat feet.
>> > >
>> > > Not bad... but irrelevant to the remainder of the poem.

>> > > > > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

>> > > Cute and fanciful -- but out of place with the rest of the poem's tone.

>> > > > > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
>> > > > > & from the icy waters underground
>> > > > >
>> > > > > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold
>> > > > > on all.

>> > > Now you've lost me.
>> > >
>> > > If darkness is increased 1 to 7 times, there needn't be a comma. If the line has some other meaning, I've no idea what it might be.
>> > >
>> > > A scarlet (red) eagle doesn't seem like it should shine gold, but crimson.

>> > > >> Floating down, the light resounds
>> > > > > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –

>> > > Was there some sort of explosion? Nuclear?

>> > > > > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
>> > > > > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
>> > > > > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.

>> > > Mankind is extinct and Earth has reverted back to its natural state?
>> > >
>> > > The final line (above) is nice... but... if it's foggy, the buttercups would have a hard time catching any rays of sunlight.

>> > > > > Change, return, success, going & coming,
>> > > > > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
>> > > > > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
>> > > > > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.

>> > > Why end the poem with Tarzan-speak? I realize that it could be thought to reflect Earth's return to her natural order... but Tarzan-speak isn't so much natural, as the invention of Hollywood writers.

>> > I never know how to respond to posts like this. On the one hand, here's someone who doesn't 'get' the poem, and doesn't care for the bits he did get; but he doesn't want to provoke a confrontation by panning it to my face.. So if I jump in to explain it, it could sound like being confrontational, or overly defensive; and it could spoil the poem for those who like to decode poetry. And there is an old code here that an author should not talk about their work, as his opinion doesn't count; it's the reader's first impressions that matter.Those are all reasons for my not saying anything....

>> >
>> > On the other hand, I like talking about my poems; I'm always hopeful that someone who knows what I was doing ends up being more sympathetic to the poor poem, perhaps even friendly; while if I don't say anything, it may sound as if I agree with, or at least can't answer, any of the criticisms. Those are reasons for writing a prose explanation ...
>> >
>> > So, as always, I'm torn. I see downsides in either alternative.

>> I'm not trying to pan your poem, George -- I'm asking questions to 1) point out the parts that could use some clarification, and 2) to learn what you were trying to express (in which case I could possibly offers suggestions to make it more clear).

Again, George clearly explained that the poem was a Cento right here, in Jos reply to you, Pendragon:

> I appreciate that. I'll be explaining what I did, in a line-by-line, later today. As a sort of introduction, for now it's important to explain why I can't and

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> won't be rewriting.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> This is 'conceptual poetry'. I don't

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> know if you know that term. It's part of the backlash against the free-form, anything-goes poetry of mid-century. One reaction was "neoformalism," which I'm sure you do know all about, trying to restore the formal constraints of verse. "Conceptualism" was another reaction; an attempt to write poetry constrained in other ways. The constraints, and the results, are all over the map.

> The constraint I used here is the cento

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> form. I didn't use complete lines; but

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> every image I took was from Syd Barrett's lyrics to the first Pink Floyd

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> album, The Piper at the Gates of Dawn.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> So the poem does have a dual purpose; it's meant as a pretty poem about a sunrise, and also a look into the mind (a

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> sort of tribute to) Barrett. My hope is

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> that those who do recognize the Barrett

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

> connection (I think the title's a dead

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There George clearly names the poem a Cento, based on Pink Floyd.

> giveaway) will get more from the poem, but at the same time those who know nothing about it can just read it at as a poem about a sunrise.

>> As a reader/writer of poetry, my sensibilities are decidedly middlebrow. If I don't get it, it's a good bet that the lowbrows will have equal (if not more) difficulty in following it.
>>And with its Batman-like sfx ("Blam pow pow"), it doesn't come across as highbrow.

> True; the imagery is all over the place. But I'll get into that later.

>> BTW: Middlebrows prefer poetry that's understandable (at least on its most superficial level) on the initial read. When we're in the mood to do a little decoding, we turn to the daily cryptoquote.

> There's a definite split in audiences there; I remember we discussed that a couple of years ago, with Northrop Frye's distinction between "popular poetry" (in which the meaning is plain at a single read) and "serious poetry" (which has a deeper meaning that must be decoded). I do try to make my poems "serious" - I want the reader to get more than the surface meaning - but I also want them to be "popular" - able to be read and appreciated in one pass. It's easy to fall off either side of the fence.

Again, see above ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

In this post, George Dance labels the poem a Cento, based on Pink Floyd.

That said, we can end this here.

[Will Dockery]

Again, yes, he did.

Again, read the thread.

[Michael Pendragon]

Why don't you ask George if he thinks you should persist in this line of argument. AFAICS, you're only making him look more guilty than he is.


Michael Pendragon
“Incoherence is a matter of individual perspective.”
-- Will Dockery

[W.Dockery]

> Why don't you ask George xxxxxxxxxx

Okay, let's ask him.

[W-Dockery]

>> Again, see above ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>>
>> In this post, George Dance labels the poem a Cento, based on Pink Floyd.
>>
>> That said, we can end this here.
>
> Why don't you ask George if he thinks you should persist in this

Good, George is here now... let's ask him.

:)

[George J. Dance]

Frankly, I think it would be best if you dropped out, Will. All you can say is what you've already said and supported: a cento's a legitimate form of poetry, and has been for centuries if not millennia. That's on record, and no one (HT to Corey) is disputing it.

As I see it, there's nothing else to discuss with Pendragon, really. He and Karen can correct me if I'm wrong, but their position is that it's better, since there are people unfamiliar with Barrett's lyrics and people unfamiliar with centos, that I label the poem a cento and credit Barrett; and if I did that, the issue was closed. I can't see any reason to argue with that.

The only discussion still going is with the Vulcaneers, who are taking the position that, whether I do that, I've already "plagiarized" and I'm now a "plagiarist" for life -
"You can write a hundred poems, and people still won't call you a poet; but suck one cock ...."
- , and at least one of them will be examining my poetry and contacting lawyers about me. (A tactic you'll remember from the past.)

Anyway, considering it's a discussion with the Vulcaneers, and they're too rude and ignorant to discuss anything with you, I can't see your intervention there to be anything but a distraction. So, please, feel free to drop out of the discussion.

[W-Dockery]

So be it, George.

"Vulcaneers" is clsssic, By the way.

:)

[Edward Rochester Esq.]

Clsssic indeeed.

[W-Dockery]

For once we agree, Senetto.

:)

[Dennis Teal]

On Friday, July 23, 2021 at 9:02:24 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 12:53:18 AM UTC, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Friday, July 23, 2021 at 8:49:00 PM UTC-4, NancyGene wrote:
> > > On Saturday, July 24, 2021 at 12:14:21 AM UTC, Will Dockery wrote:

> > > > Zod wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 2:04:59 PM UTC-4, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >> On Sunday, July 11, 2021 at 10:26:48 AM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> > At the Gates of Dawn
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Night prowls, scratches sand, & then pads on,

> > > > >> > the gnomes are sleeping in their gnomish homes,

> > > > >> > when darkness is increased by 1, to 7
> > > > >> > & from the icy waters underground
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > a scarlet eagle rises, shining gold

> > > > >> > on all. Floating down, the light resounds

> > > > >> > blindingly – flap flicker flicker / Blam pow pow –
> > > > >> >

> > > > >> > & all the land is lime and limpid green.
> > > > >> > Amidst the grass, dandelions thrive.
> > > > >> > Buttercups cup the light in the foggy dew.
> > > > >> >

> > > > >> > Change, return, success, going & coming,
> > > > >> > nothing can be destroyed once & for all:
> > > > >> > Look at the sun, look at the sky, look at the river
> > > > >> > lazily winding, finding its way to sea.
> > > > >> >

> > > > >> > ~~
> > > > >> > George J. Dance, 2009
> > > > >> > from Doggerel, and other doggerel, 2011
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > https://gdancesbetty.blogspot.com/2021/07/at-gates-of-dawn-george-j-dance.html
> > > > >

> > > > >> I like this one.
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed, great tribute to Pink Floyd...
> > > > And a great use of the Cento form of poetry.
> > >
> > > Plagiarist.
> > No, you'e still confused...have Pendragon explain it to you, Nancy Gene.
> >
> Everyone but you, George "Plagiarist" Dance and George Sulzbach agrees that George Dance plagiarized from Pink Floyd by not including a credit to them. Go ask Dr. Schwimmer.

Will Dockery was banned from at least one website by his peers after being caught plagiarizing. These weren't "trolls" as he likes to cry about on here so he can't use that excuse. Dance has shown himself to be dishonest and his low standards are evident when he took on the role of rewriting Dockey's gibberish for his bait store book. The book has failed, just as Dance has failed in life.

[George J. Dance]

On Sunday, July 25, 2021 at 11:43:37 AM UTC-4, Dennis Teal wrote:
>
> Will Dockery was banned from at least one website by his peers after being caught plagiarizing. These weren't "trolls" as he likes to cry about on here so he can't use that excuse.

"Banning" someone from a site where they've never posted, or tried to post, sounds pretty "trollish" to me. YMMV.

Dance has shown himself to be dishonest and his low standards are evident when he took on the role of rewriting Dockey's gibberish for his bait store book. The book has failed, just as Dance has failed in life.

You haven't read any of it, have you?