Ok people what do you think?

Challenging? Unusual? Sensationalist? Compelling? Original? Worthy?

Or, none of the above and previous comments Q.E.D?

At least it deserves some debate . . . and we cant have it on the "front page" apparently . . .

none of the above!! ( sorry my opinion ) but deserves discussion.
I will have to read it again because the content screamed at me 'TOP SHELF - READERS WIVES' that loud that I couldn't even find anything else in it ( suppose that is from a female perspective)! Poetry? hmmm....can't say no because the boundaries of 'poetic liscence' stretch out infinitely in our post contemporary society. Creativity, who said that creativity was male dominated - 'it takes two baby......' . I find it quite chauvanistic, and it leaves a rank smell on my computer screen.

However that is my opinion and being of the piscean nature I am I may change my mind tomorrow, and find some underlying meaning somewhere.

Well i'll try. sorry poet of the poem of the month.

It's 2:45 and the neighbours are fighting.
Anal sex is preferable to the shit out-side.
A good rogering is prefered to eviction
And I am re-reading I Told You.
While walls spasm and the
Glotis grip-
The terror belches
A real good fuck.

Readers wives un-edited?

At the risk of making both myself and the poem sound ridiculous, I read it for the first time and managed to cotton onto the fact that it was graphic description of sexual intercourse.
I thought the first verse was very well worded but didn't think too much of the rest.
I then looked at the profile of Ernesto and realized that I might have got the wrong end of the stick so to speak. Or have I?
Either way (sorry) I'm again disappointed that the POTM has been taken from only one example shown on a profile with no other content.
As to whether the content should be shown on here, I do believe that sexually explicit verse may well need a category of its own, if for no other reason that children could stumble on it unintentionally.
As for sexually explicit verse per se, I think it possibly requires a very high standard of expression to do it justice, otherwise it's just rape and ill-thought out.

Also posted on POTM comments.

WOL is a pretty easy-going place where all sorts of sexually orientated material has been posted. That's fine - most contributors and readers would not want any form of censorship purely on the grounds of how sexually explicit a poem is. However, choosing a very explicit, very raw poem as POTM is another matter. It is an error of judgment.

Whilst I agree that this months POM is certainly sexually explicit and gratuitous... I think Dave your comments are a contradictionn i.e. you can't have it both ways ( no pun intended) freedom of speech is freedom of speech. No matter how you may feel It cannot be an error of judgement.

However, it may well be time to say that POM has now become a right pain in the arse!

Gus

I take your point Gus, but it's about the arena in which the poem is being published. I'd go along with Seamus' comment that the front page is not the place.

Or should all those magazines in the newsagents be taken down off the top shelf and put on the counter?

Voltaire - 'I cannot agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it' ....... does that also apply to homophobia? racism? etc.

The principle is fine, but it seems to me that everybody is quick to defend their 'rights' these days, without any recognition of the fact that the other side of that same coin is responsibility. We don't all have the absolute right to do, or say, exactly as we wish - if it offends, hurts or takes away the dignity of another human being - a fact that, perhaps, Mr Sarazale's partner should be made aware of.

I am not homophobic, nor prudish, nor easily offended, nor an innocent - but I cannot see one single reason for putting that poem on the front of WOL. It isn't well written, it doesn't amuse, it doesn't challenge my preconceptions or my thinking, in any way whatsoever, and it doesn't advertise or represent WOL accurately or well. It doesn't even shock.

I joined WOL about a year ago, and was blown away by the quality of much of the writing on here. I was eager to join, and give of both my time and my money to help support the site. I have learned a lot, and made some very good friends - until recently being a member of WOL has been a positive experience. Now - there is the odd thing worth reading amongst the tons of vacuous 'twitters' posted, and in case they should slip below the top of the pile - re-posted, daily. And had I seen this month's POTM - I'd have by-passed the site completely.

Where HAVE all the poets gone?

am removing myself from WOL for October. For me the "poem" is about abuse and whilst it may have a niche somewhere I cant support its being WOL poem of the month nor do I want my poetic efforts associated with it. sorry

We live in an era of increasing moral confusion - which is why vile material can get passed off as a 'Poem of the Month'.

You can't go banning people though, and I don't like to see writers flouncing off, saying they're leaving the site, like am-dram queens, just because a piece of writing they don't like has appeared.

Not all people who pass themselves off as poets can write poetically, or even grammatically.That's abundantly clear. Some are just playing at poetry and posing; trying (too hard and too crassly) to shock people.

Others enjoy being pretentious. Some who write and perform poetry may well simply be mentally ill (there's always been a lot of that on the poetry scene).

But quite a lot of poets writing on this site do so beautifully, authentically. You just have to sort the wheat from the chaff. In the end, quality will shine through - and be judged as such by people who are intelligent enough to know quality when they see it.

Wasn't suggesting banning anyone Steve, though I wouldn't be unhappy if the piece was removed. And I think if you're arguing that the writer has the right to pen any thing s/he wants free from censure or abuse, surely how people re-act to any work is as much their prerogative?

Chris - I think Steve is reacting to Jane's decision to take herself off the site and your statement that there is little of any worth now posted on WOL.
I am probably with him to a certain extent. Whilst I understand Jane's reasons, I can't think it would be a good thing for all the, sensitive, well balanced poets to withdraw, leaving the field open to the current poet of the month.
I also understand the frustration of Gus and yourself at the amount of light weight poetry on the site. 'Twitter' is subjective of course - others may perceive it as sociable banter. We also have to be careful not to blanket the whole site with our own personal opinion. There is decent or at least 'worked on' poetry out there - you just have to look for it a lot harder - multiple blogging not really helping.
I did have lots of witty comments about the current POM but I've decided that I really can't be arsed.....
Come all ye gentle poets and embrace WOLOP - I am taking votes up till 6th October - so far, not one fist in the ring.

Thanks for the explanation Isobel.....but there was really no need..........

I thought you were saving all those witty comments? Ouch! :-)

Yeah, I was reacting in the just way Isobel said.

But I must't get involved in these debates; it's too time-consuming. I've got two novels to complete - both on the go on the You Write On site.

Novels are the new poetry. Iain Banks, William Boyd, Glen Duncan, Michel Houllebecq are my new gods. Actually, Houllebecq is a poet as well as a novelist. Currently reading (nearly finished) 'I Lucifer' by Glen Duncan (an Anglo-Indian guy from Bolton, apparently) which is very good, very clever, very saucy.

Books, money, chips, red wine, money, books! No more time for poetry, and I'm certainly not tempted by the Bank Street Writers offer to take my money in entry fees to win a stingy "top prize" of £75 (gasp!) in their latest "international" poetry competition!

Those poets who do write quality poetry, keep it up, you know you HAVE TO!

Those who indulge in feeelthy, "shocking" rubbish ... GROW UP WILL YA!!

(Errrr, that doesn't apply to Gus, by the way, whose feelthy stuff I like.)

I re-read this 'piece' in the light of day, but won't be doing so again. I find it distasteful and offensive, and I am glad to hear that so many other members of WOL feel the same. How it can be classed as 'cool' and 'artistic', I do not know. It also casts aspersions on the judgement of the last potm.

I am all for the freedom of speech, and feel that it lies within the morality of the individual writer to use some self-restraint and censor his/her own work, especially when writing something of a sexual nature.

The face of WOL for the next month is a sexually explicit. pornographic and verbally abusive message which does not do any justice to the genuine quality writers who I have found frequent this site. Dissappointing, as this is the first time that I have followed the potm as an active member of the site.

As I said in the comments on the actual poem this poem ought not to be in the place where it is.

I would defend the author's right to free speech and he is free to write it, to say it and to discuss it. There is however no such thing as a right to offend so the place and audience where it is shared must be considered.

I will defend even more strongly the right of parents and their children not to be offended.

This site is on my computer a great deal of the time and I have accessed it and recommended it in the schools I work in. Often the WOL site is on screen while my children and their friends are around - imagine if one of the friends mentioned this one at home - where would I stand for letting them see such material?

Sorry to say it but it has to go. The author or WOL should now show some decency and remove it.

Seamus

I am appalled and disgusted that this filth, placed on the front page, appears as an example of who we are. I am now very distressed that I have recommended this site to my family and friends. Its not even a good poem and I feel we have been highjacked.

I'm a little surprised that nothing has, as yet, been mentioned, but isn't it possible for this POTM to be removed?
It can't be that difficult surely. I know it's a major step, but in this instance I have to come down on the side of common sense (well, mine anyway)

I also wonder what Ernesto may choose for next month's POTM

I've only just arrived on this site and already someone's seems to have waltzed out due to a comment I left and the POTM has caused a meltdown. 'Cursed are those who live in interesting times'.

Just as well I posted my only poem for a critique today...looks like it was a 'good day to bury bad news!'

: )

Jx

We (WOL) have reached a crossroads. Which way shall we turn?

By writting 'we' I am indicating that I consider myself part of this amazing family and friends who meet both on here (In the virtual world) and in real life (At WOL and other events).
The strength of feeling from the rest of this family in this thread reflects the closeness and importance we place upon it.
Lots of sense has been said already. One thing we have not had is any input from the Poet (or the poet who chose him) himself. Will he come forward so we can hear his angle on it? He may even think the introduction to, or choosing of his poem as POTM is inappropriate, then again he may not. He may not even know he is POTM as he is not a regular poster. Remember he has no control regarding his poem being chosen.

We have reached a crossroads, which way shall we turn?

I think I was hasty in my initial reaction to this poem. I don't like it and I don't think I ever will, I don't think it is even particularly well crafted, the images seem crudely drawn and somewhat bizarre without being particularly effective. I don't think it should be given the POTM positioning. It has, however, created a lot of passionate response and created a buzz on the site, something not normally associated with POTM unless its from people demanding to know why this poem was chosen instead of that poem type stuff. Perhaps then there is something positive to be drawn from this. It is not a point that needs to be made again though, roll on next month, maybe a nice fireworks poem or something!

Winston
the cross road implies a journey, one we are all on, mine ended a while ago.
perhaps it will begin again, but not without the baggage of Dick Whittington breaking my back. The 'poem of the month' has just become a load of baggage we dont need, shame because the principal aint so bad.
Its the control and the judgement.
Poor judgement on last months winner.
Poor judgement because it shows a lack of sensitivity to other people.
I would be ashamed to parade this poem on the front page without warning everyone of its explicit content. Children visit this site, heck I have recommended it to such. I feel embarrassed should I see them and for what they may think I think is poetry.

I am not saying the poem should not be published, it should, it has a place in the depths somewhere, its an outlet, a dark expression, it needed to be written, but to have it sat there like that as an ambassador to WOL, as a this months flag, it really damages the sensitive environment so often associated with poetry. Soft, gentle, control, taste, awareness , common sense, CONTROL , all this poetic power crashes aimlessly without control.

there is no control or order, the natural order and balance has gone. Its a free for all, chaotic, shock factor fineness is fine I'll hide mine for the right moment, late at night, adult, in context of the pain perhaps, but in this cold and warm dappled front page serves to alienate the sensitive reader, pays no respect to male-female interpersonal relations, in that there is no warning, its not censorship I wish its common sense and control, good judgement the right time and place to do something. Respect to others whenever possible or whenever we can wake ourselves or remind ourselves thats its good manners to do so. i fail at this often so I dont feel as angered as it seems some are, I think that implication is far more sophisticated and challenging than raw graphic sex, its more of a challenge to write your inner sexual demons a few layers down . Of course the poet had no control on his poem being chosen, I feel that the poet who chose it chose poorly in respect of the fact that all visitors will obviously click straight to it. Also WOL is to blame for not exorcising an element of decency.

there sure is a time and a place.

I'm losing track of the times I keep saying "whats the point in all of this" I think its an erosion of myself, a scratch to move on.

those crossroads, im not so sure are leading to a roundabout where i make the same mistakes on the same exits, crossroads are where we often collide - I could sit at the junction for hours, still I doubt myself, feelings evoked by this debate add to the list of an already burdened slate of what to do, in the end, is it worth it.
I see a power plug at the back of my computer, pulling it out could be the most cathartic thing in the world.

I think that there is an old Buddhist aphorism....'If you reach a fork in the road...take it'.

I think I sort of know what it means....'all creativity is an act of daring'. (I'd love to know who first said that?).

It would be a shame if such a poor poem caused such a schism...it's not exactly the Wasteland...is it!

: )

Jx

i have never thought wol content suitable for children , and have always wished it took credit card credentials to try to ensure adult membership . there are many poems here , mine included that i wouldnt want a child to face
as a description of anal sex in a sub dom relationship i dont really mind the piece of work at all .

but is it a poem ? i am not qualified to comment

I think this poem has created precisely the effect that was intended in the choosing.
I won't apologize for including my comment after using my intuitive sensitivity on wol on this occasion. :-)

I think the common sense measures taken by WOL managers are excellent and I feel very comfortable with them. It is now up to the reader whether to access the work or not but is not portrayed as representative of the poetry content of the site which formerly I felt it was. I am now going to try to creep back on.....

Don't creep at all Jane - stride back on with your head held high. You made your point loudly and the powers that be listened. Like Chris Dawson, I am grateful that Julien and Paul listened to the grass roots.

haha..............what a carry on!

Well done julian - poem moved rather than censored. It was a good choice.

Couldn't help wondering about the chooser's motives for picking this poem. The POTM has had so much discussion and criticism that the cynical part of me (that's everything from my hair down) sees that a poet could deliberately stir things with a choice of poem.

Anyway it's nice to see the situation handled so well and nice to see that so many were prepared to comment because they felt strongly enough.

Seamus

still more 'carry-on'!

My, hasn’t this provided some forthright and vehement comment?! (Which, and I’m only guessing here, was probably precisely the intention of the previous month’s winner, judging by his almost impenetrable and most certainly “faux” introduction.) “There’s no such thing as bad publicity.” Or maybe, occasionally there is.

Since I kicked off the thread (and I expect there were a few others who would have been just as eager) I suppose I ought to get off the fence and commit myself to at least some kind of opinion – be that Lucifer’s Lawyer or otherwise.

I think maybe there are a few areas which need to be explored with this issue (some may even require a little “Crisco” (I admit, I had to look it up, and for those who couldn’t be bothered, it’s a U.S. commercial version of a kind of lard, or cooking fat (no Spoonerisms please!)) and some surgical-rubber gauntlets.

Most of the comments have alluded to the poem’s apparently obscene/filthy/deviant/perverted etc content. Ergo, we know enough of the terminology used in the intro - STD’s, fisting, (the only two I recognise as having vaguely sexual/anatomical connotations - but then I’ve led a very sheltered life) and in the poem (insemination, buttocks, rectum) to recognise what the poem’s about. For those who may not have noticed, or had simply assumed, there are no commonly recognised “swear words” either. True, there are a few biological/anatomical references – fertility, pain, violence, faeces, sweat, pulse, bones, umbilically, diarrhea taste (sic), mouth, arousing, ankles, shoulders, hands, hurt, breathe, blood, head, nails, scratches, pulse, cardiogram, heart, intestines, rectum, fist, elbow, torso, heart, hand, skin and finally, with the correct spelling this time, once again, diarrhoea.

Reads more like a medical textbook now I think; perhaps an overabundance of scatological reference, but now they are out of context nothing too “shocking” surely?

But, and there’s always a but, was the general gush of outrage to do with the content of the poem, or that it pricked something in us because we knew what Sr. Sarezale was inferring? Sr.Sarezale is, after all (or at least claims to be on his profile) a “cognitive scientist.” Maybe we are all his guinea pigs in some kind of weird sociological/Big Brother type experiment, and the redoubtable Mr Tyrone Jones his compliant “Pass me the brain Igor” accomplice. Were the “outraged” outraged at confronting something they obviously already knew about – or else how could they possibly be outraged – if you get my drift? Or do we all like to play the guardian of society’s moral values “angry of Biggleswade” role every now and then?

Yes, I am playing Beelzebub’s barrister a little.

Of course there are issues for children who may access the site, but I can think of far worse places on this worldwidewasteland that are probably equally easily accessible. But then one wouldn’t be likely to recommend them, as others have correctly pointed out.

As for the motive of the “chooser”, one can only guess. It reminds me of when a child learns their first word that meets with strong disapproval from a parent; what do they do? They go and shout BUM! in public, as loudly and as often as they are able (admit it, we’ve all done it, albeit at a much younger age – it probably seemed like great fun at the time!)

Is it great poetry? That depends what is meant by great poetry. It certainly got itself noticed fairly quickly after being dragged from its stagnant backwater, which seems to give it that certain “X-Factor” credibility so apparent and seemingly essential these days. (Hmmm . . . maybe RTJ is really the Simon Cowell of the poetry world, and Sr. Sarazale his Susan Boyle!) Although popular consensus seems to suggest that perhaps it isn’t. Although according to Sr. Sarezale’s accolades and samples of previous efforts, it seems that there is indeed an audience for this felching (sorry, fetching) genre of porno-poetry. Just perhaps not in the leafy suburbs of WOL that we all seem to know and love. Was it representative of the work that more regularly appears on the site, by those who regularly contribute to and have kept the “Site Records Tumbling In September!”? Was it a good advert for the site?

All these questions have been well explored, debated and ignored in previous discussion threads. I am however, pleased to read Julian’s earlier comment –

“Perhaps, as we have discussed elsewhere, it is time to find a different approach to POTM?”

Meanwhile Dear Readers, I’m off to write a poem based on the contents of the aforementioned previous discussion threads. I have provisionally titled it “We Told You So.” I’m currently struggling with rhymes for the words “stable”, “horse”, “door” and “bolted.” Any suggestions greatly appreciated . . .

(Author exits stage right, giggling childishly and shouting -BUM! BUM ! BUM! . . .)

Regards,
A.E.

Sorry Anthony - it's not clear from your post - do you want any old rhyme for 'stable', 'horse', 'door', and 'bolted'? - or just anatomical ones?
Cx

Anthony- how about 'cable', 'force', 'floor', and i'm really struggling to find a word which rhymes with bolted.
Now i wish i'd bought a book i was looking at yesterday which was a dictionary of rhyming words. Typical!
It was only £1.99 as well. :-)

maybe - 'revolted'.

Hm,. well according to my new found link to rhyming schemes thanks to Anthony, there's only two.
Nicky's suggestion and the other is 'jolted'.

Personally i'd go for the former on this occasion. :-)

I don't often do rhymes but for the word stable you could have able (or unable in some cases), fable, sable and those mentioned already.

'cause I'm a bit Irish I could put on a Dublin accent and make a rhyme with the word "feeble" (pronounced fable). That gets me into thinking about this poem so then the other rhymes that come to mind are; "coarse", "poor" and "faulted"

Seamus

Seamus,
My daughter reads,and ocassonally even post stuff on WOL (aged 9) I agree with you absolutely in all that you have said in this thread re POM. A voice of reason, thank you. see you Tue.
Winston

Just out of curiosity, did anyone bother to google Ernesto and check out his work? The potm was quite mild in comparison. interesting viewing and reading for those of you who are not faint-hearted or have a strong stomach. I have posted a comment on Isobel's poetic response and on the comments on the potm. I had a discussion with him on his profile after all had calmed a little, around the subject that people where able to air their views on his poem as freely as he was able to write the poem. Which he deleted as soon as I made the observation that I was surprised that no-one else had contacted him in this way.

i did i even posted the link if you notice . now what has this got to do with the chosen poem .

winston , i know your daughter is here, i assume that as you are aware of much of the content of the site , which often deals with adult issues that she is supervised at these times

Hi Carol
Yes, she is thanks. It was more the fact that it was in the middle of the front page.
Win x

I didn't say it was to do with the chosen poem. Sorry did I not make myself clear enough.

What I did say if you had bothered to read properly,or read the comment I referred to on the potm thread, was that I had had a disussion with the poet on his profile because he had said that it was an attack directly on himself and his work! And that the poem was mild in comparison to the rest of his work, and the issue was that the poem should not be posted on the front page.

Win, my 13 year old is a budding writer, he won young writer of the year a couple of years ago, and he has a book full, bless him. He's been asking to put some of his up, some are quite good. Also this site is being promoted in schools etc, and projects are being developed to open the doors to people from different cultures to share their experiences in poetic form. Nicky x

Do you think it's about time we let poor Ernesto rest now and stop giving him any more publicity? There's so much more to talk about isn't there?

Graham, you are right.Thats all from me.Winston

I'm done too, Win and Graham. Can someone start a new topic and everyone get back to the normal heated discussion normality. I am tired of trying to explain myself, and I didn't think that I was that obtuse.

Lets talk about the weather in Manchester. It's a little cold, damp and windy today.x :-)

...there ya go.........The thought nannies have nappied thier moonyJoony play-pen...

sorry to stir it up, but I just fancy adding my 2 cents for a bit: For a start, I'd hate to think that we all need to police ourselves just in case there might be any children reading. Also: Who writes a poem which is obviously raw and contraversial, and then complains that people get a bit heated over it? What kind of artist are you who pretends to be totally unaware of your affect on your audience? What a phoney!

Beyond that: WOL is a community, and that community decided to have this piece moved, not removed, and their wishes were granted. If there were disagreeing voices then we can say that there was some elitism taking place but the voices were unanimous.

I didn't like the poem, but I believe it has some merit. Believe me I hear some toss on my travels, and have had my own work pretty harshly insulted at times. A good critique is a rarer thing (and still a good critique, whether the critic liked the work or not), but this is an open forum, you can write what you like, and your audience (other writers!) are entitled to comment how they like.

I think WOL is a fantastic site, and seems to be sensitively managed. All the artists here should be proud of their work and be prepared to defend it. And no one should be ashamed to voice criticism or praise about art. Now we should all scour the site for works we haven't read before, and relish some more heated debate.

Now we should all scour the site for works we haven't read before, and relish some more heated debate.


aye

Danni - I have to say - I do love your thought processes. I must say it has never really been about the children for me... I would love my kids to embrace a poetry website - regrettably I can't get them beyond watching the Simpsons... Your comments are totally bang on - a decision was made based on the comments posted up to a certain date - those who disagreed should have come forward sooner.

if i'd have been near a laptop sooner i would have...

It is probably a dangerous thing to touch this thread again but since when has danger ever bothered me?

Just wanted to say that I think this month's poem is rather beautiful. Tucked away in features it doesn't seem to be attracting much attention though. Is that because we appreciate sex more than love? Is it because we enjoy savaging more that lauding? Is it because we fail to appreciate beauty? Is it to do with where the poem is now placed? Or is it because people just can't be bothered with the whole concept of POM any more?

Am just curious...

This month's poem is rather hidden. I only thought of it after the WOLOP had been judged and had to go looking for it.
It is absolutely charming and very romantic. I for one seem to remember sex as romantic. Unfortunately it is portrayed far more these days as an aggressive act, mostly spoken of as "having sex" and not "making love",but what the hell do I know.

We've created the new section called "Features" not to hide things away but to prepare the ground for new developments in this area of the site that will become available in the coming months.

At the moment the front page doesn't show updates in Features, this is because software development is taking place to allow us more flexibility to put in and manage content. Once the new software is in place any changes to Features e.g. a new potm will show on the front page.

Features is a kind of embryonic magazine (ezine). It's overall editor is Dermot Glennon but each 'feature' will have it's own sub-editor.

We’ll be telling you more about it shortly but in the meantime, please feel free to pitch any ideas for a feature you want to run to dermot@writeoutloud.net.