Little Girl

[George.Wright]

Little Girl


You had to be careful of that little girl in that dress
She would scream abuse and invite you to caress
Walled you up in the fixations of her mind
Changed your sexuality around, to the other kind

Now you are caught like a butterfly pinned on her dress
Wearing her skirt, you are in a awful mess
A plaything for her deranged brain
Nothing ever will feel normal or the same

A woman who desexualises a man
Is either horrible or has some twisted game plan
Lack of understanding of the importance of duality
Now you are insane or part of her insanity

A serial killer in the making
You have nothing left for orgasmic faking
As she twists her body into your skin
You understand the meaning of original sin

Now you are merged and she was the snake
Your sexuality was false, it was always a fake
You begin to see through her eyes
Look at the world with utter despise

Georges.

[che]

I think this is mierda.

[Cate]

Hi George,

Is this a piece that you are just sharing or are you looking for critique as well?
Second question - not trying to be a smart ass - Your lack of punctuation - Is this your style or are you uncomfortable with it?

[blonde madonna]

deleted

[lizzytysh]

I agree with Blonde Madonna, Georges. This one is off the charts in the ways she mentions. I don't know the meaning of the word "mierda" that Che used, but it reminded me of "weird" and that works for me. I'm trying to imagine what could have prompted you to have written this. Give us back the apes with angel glands.


~ Lizzy

[Cate]

Cate, I'm sorry but you've got to be kidding, surely? I agree completely with Che. What's the excuse this time Georges? Poteen, pot, paranoia or plain old pedophiliac tendencies?

This is a highly questionable rant, not poetry.

BM

Hi BM - nope I wasn't kidding.
I never said I liked the poem - it pisses me off. I'm assuming that is the intent and I'm not assuming that the author and the narrator are the same. Maybe George is exploring the mind of someone he's read an article about - maybe he's trying to offend - or maybe he's just really fucked up. I have no idea.

Usually when I don't know someone and I want to make more then a light comment about a poem they have posted, I private message them to see what kind of feedback they are okay with. I did not want to PM this person, so I asked in the open.

Lizzy your kinda close - mierda means shit.

[lizzytysh]

That works for me, too, Cate.

Georges ~ I do 'know' you... and I got an odd, creepy feeling from just seeing the title alone before I clicked to get to the thread to read the poem. Would you mind sharing your motivation for writing this? It's not even 'poetic' in its style or word choices. It really does come off as more of a rant and an unpleasant one at that. Sorry to jump on it like that, but it has a disturbing quality, and not in the way of "one sign of true art is its ability to prod and disturb." More like a Charlie Manson thing going on... "the lousy little poets comin' round, tryin' to sound like . . . " Hoping you'll explain because more than one woman's intuition is alarmed by it.


Respectfully to you, Georges,
~ Lizzy

[George.Wright]

It was indeed a style meant to shock and it looks like it has. Excellent.

Georges.

[lizzytysh]

Oh, dear... that's all you have to say? That sounds like a cop-out, Georges. At least I tried to give and get feedback that was real.

I guess you can move on to answering Cate's question about punctuation.


~ Lizzy

[George.Wright]

Ladies. ladies, everyone is entitled to their style. I thought the poem was funny yet still carried some message. Look deeply at the meaning of the poem....

Georges.

[lizzytysh]

Hi Georges ~

I really don't want to spend that much time with this piece of writing. Truly. If you could sum it up, that would be helpful.


~ Lizzy

[Cate]

Punctuation – It’s cool if you don’t use it, lots of poets don’t. Myself I struggle with it, so I’ll keep trying to use it until I’m comfy, then maybe I’ll give it up.

It does make a difference to interpretation though;
For example your first line

You had to be careful of that little girl in that dress

I think this what you mean

You had to be careful of that little girl, in that dress

But I’m a woman, I’m reading the poem through my eyes. This is what I read.

You had to be careful of that, little girl in that dress

I’m reading a potential act of violence may or has befallen this young person because of someones physical attraction to her. Your use of the word careful also implies that it would be her own fault. You see a comma can make a difference.

A few of the lines that I liked

Now you are caught like a butterfly pinned on her dress

I like this image.
I don't think you need the words now you are – they just add bulk and take emphasis away from the word caught.

As she twists her body into your skin
You understand the meaning of original sin

Great lines – love to see them in a different poem

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
As for being funny - ?????
Peoples reaction to it might be funny

I was at the zoo the other day and this gorilla ate its own feces and then to make matters worse regurgitated it back into its hands, examined it and then re-ate it. Now the gorilla was disgusting – but my kids reaction to it all – that was funny.
Yes – just in case you’re not clever, I am comparing you to a gorilla that is producing and eating its own shit.
Deeper Meaning – I’m sure there is one (I hope so anyways), I just hope it’s not about understanding things from the girls perspective.

[Red Poppy]

It was indeed a style meant to shock and it looks like it has. Excellent.

Georges.

George,
I would defend any writers entitlement to adopt the persona of his character when telling a story but what you say above doesn't appear to me to be the attitude of someone who takes either his work or his character seriously.
If a style is there simply to shock it means the story and character come further down the agenda and that seems an odd way to approach any literary creation.
I doubt Nabokov (for example) set out to produce a shocking style and then a story and then characters.
Actually, I think your response to the reactions of others suggests that you're more interested in shocking than writing. If that's the case why not just have a wank in the local park at lunchtime. It would probably get a stronger reaction - and you'd have the added bonus (pun intended) of getting your name in the paper!

[George.Wright]

The worst thing about women is they get all disgusting if you dare cross their line, their line is without logic and goes back to baseness, wank in the park and eat your own shit is a good example, as portrayed in the meaning of the end of the poem.

Thanks for showing me your true colours.

Georges.

[Red Poppy]

First things first, George -
I'm a male not a female.
I can't speak for the other posters

Your tirade against women seems to catch something deeper than the rhyme you have posted.

Second thing -
I make my living as a writer so what I said in my last post was intended from a literary point of view.

Thirdly,
if I may, a few literary points on your piece of work.
In terms of poetic construction it's very loose on the one hand and very traditional on the other -
rhythm seems important, rhyme is forced into place, I think you're rapping.

In terms of character, your narrator can't be all things - he can't know himself and at the same time know the mind of another character, as you presume as early as stanza one:

"You had to be careful of that little girl in that dress
She would scream abuse and invite you to caress
Walled you up in the fixations of her mind
Changed your sexuality around, to the other kind"

How does your narrator know what's going on in someone else's mind?

Grammatically "you are in a awful mess" is rubbish


I would suggest that your narrator might come up with something stronger than "horrible" in this stanza:

"A woman who desexualises a man
Is either horrible or has some twisted game plan"

Can you explain what you mean by "the importance of duality?" in this section:

"Lack of understanding of the importance of duality
Now you are insane or part of her insanity"

I think this verse:

"A serial killer in the making
You have nothing left for orgasmic faking
As she twists her body into your skin
You understand the meaning of original sin"

is a load of rhyming bollocks to be honest - all sound and very little sense.

And the imagery here - drawn from some notion of Eden - is weak:

"Now you are merged and she was the snake
Your sexuality was false, it was always a fake
You begin to see through her eyes
Look at the world with utter despise"

Your last line works neither grammatically nor in terms of sense.

That's why I suggested you have a wank in the park as a surer way of getting a reaction, based on the fact that you said that's what you wanted.

You also say: "I thought the poem was funny yet still carried some message. "
You thought it was funny or it was intended to be funny? THere's a difference.
And what is the message?
And why (as an aside) are you George in your handle and Georges in your signature?

As for eating your own shit, I wasn't the one who suggested that but that's really very much down to your own taste and far be it from me to dissuade you.