HOME | DD

Description
So, today I wrote my first piece of cyber poetry, and it came to me that half of what is necessary for the syntax gives the poem a rather drab feel, which I guess was kind of what I was trying to convey in it, but it's still driving me absolutely nutty. I can't edit it out because without it, nothing makes sense, but with it, the poem loses its meaning.

Meaning is the most important part of most poetry, so a loss of meaning caused by even one small word sends the whole piece spiraling down into the garbage heap of ordinary works, even if the original idea was exceptional. Unfortunately, the original meaning is easy to lose sight of when one searches for the most poetic, the most beautiful, way to say it. Sometimes, such a work can be salvaged by another, unintended meaning, but oftentimes, it could be deleted for all the good it would do.

The quandary is where meaning is lost in the useless verbiage required simply to have what's being said make any sense. Without such babble, the intended meaning is sometimes easier to see, if one can find the poem. Trying to find the meaning in the vast wordiness is impossible: trying to see the forest when all one can find are trees. Without it, though, there are no trees to make a forest, just the bees floating in the sky where branches ought to be, and squirrels climbing air as if there was a pole to hold them up.

Somewhere, there is a balance between meaning and comprehension, and there is sometimes only one way, so difficult to discern to the human mind, one way to describe things in order to hold both these necessary features in the mind's eye. This balance is lost in so many forms of poetry, such as most cyber poetry, which depends on the syntax of a language both similar and different from our own English, and the loss of such a balance makes for wasted words and meaningless mingling rather than poignant specificity that the best poems offer to the reader.

Description
So, today I wrote my first piece of cyber poetry, and it came to me that half of what is necessary for the syntax gives the poem a rather drab feel, which I guess was kind of what I was trying to convey in it, but it's still driving me absolutely nutty. I can't edit it out because without it, nothing makes sense, but with it, the poem loses its meaning.

Meaning is the most important part of most poetry, so a loss of meaning caused by even one small word sends the whole piece spiraling down into the garbage heap of ordinary works, even if the original idea was exceptional. Unfortunately, the original meaning is easy to lose sight of when one searches for the most poetic, the most beautiful, way to say it. Sometimes, such a work can be salvaged by another, unintended meaning, but oftentimes, it could be deleted for all the good it would do.

The quandary is where meaning is lost in the useless verbiage required simply to have what's being said make any sense. Without such babble, the intended meaning is sometimes easier to see, if one can find the poem. Trying to find the meaning in the vast wordiness is impossible: trying to see the forest when all one can find are trees. Without it, though, there are no trees to make a forest, just the bees floating in the sky where branches ought to be, and squirrels climbing air as if there was a pole to hold them up.

Somewhere, there is a balance between meaning and comprehension, and there is sometimes only one way, so difficult to discern to the human mind, one way to describe things in order to hold both these necessary features in the mind's eye. This balance is lost in so many forms of poetry, such as most cyber poetry, which depends on the syntax of a language both similar and different from our own English, and the loss of such a balance makes for wasted words and meaningless mingling rather than poignant specificity that the best poems offer to the reader.