Degenerate Beast


Degenerate Beast, drooling with lechery,
God rot your bones! Your feet beneath the mire,
That’s where they belong! — You filthy liar,
Go fuck yourself into insanity!

Let Woman boil your blood and kindle fire
In your hot loins, until you have to come
And come again!—a Victim of the Vampire!—
You vile, you sick, you dirty rotten SCUM!


140 thoughts to “Degenerate Beast”

  1. jessel be not jeless
    this alice has no malice
    but in the bright dark moon of the night
    forest creatures are aflight – and ripe.

    1. what exactly was the Tree
      of the Knowledge of Good and Evil
      will you please tell me
      u little devil!

      Alice Alice, my Silver Chalice!
      Alice my Golden Bowl!
      Alice my princess in her proud palace!
      Alice the bane of my soul!

  2. let me climb out the gutter
    and give you an answer:

    to lead us
    from innocence to profanity
    from bliss to insanity
    so we not fear nor despair
    the Devil in his lair
    the rise of morality
    and the ghosts of duality
    wrought by focus and fire
    are we lifted higher
    away from vice
    onto victory

    1. that’s not a bad poem, alice. hmm, i bet there’s more to you than just a pretty face! anyone ever told you you’ve got “depth”? hey, not being condescending. just natural.

      if you’ve written any good poetry, why don’t you send it to horrid lady darkmoon for publication on this site? if it rhymes and is reasonably short, this dreadful ogress will definitely publish it provided it’s musical and sincere. it doesn’t have to make sense, dear alice, but it has to be sincere and meaningful.

      in my next post i will post for you a short and beautiful poem by william blake. please cooperate with me in this little experiment and tell me what you think it “means”? on the surface it has no meaning at all. it could mean anything. it has beauty of form without apparent meaning.

      so if you can spare the time, alice, please tell me what you make of this famous 8-line poem. it has a meaning for me, but I doubt if it with coincide with your meaning or anyone else’s. this is a bit like dream interpretation, where the meaning ascribed to the dream depends entirely on the interpreter.

      you can bet that freud and jung, both dream interpretation adepts, would interpret this poem in entirely different ways. So what is YOUR interpretation? This is a serious question, alice, so please take your time to answer.

      same question thrown open to lobro and other aficionados of the black arts. 🙂

      1. THE SICK ROSE

        by William Blake

        O Rose thou art sick.
        The invisible worm,
        That flies in the night
        In the howling storm:

        Has found out thy bed
        Of crimson joy:
        And his dark secret love
        Does thy life destroy.

      2. i am so proud of you jessel, you have made great use of that spellcheck and rhymelizer i gave you for your 15th birthday.
        stick with them and who knows, in time you could follow in steps of that other 50%-jewish, 100%-literary virtuoso, ellie kleist.
        it is a long road to travel for someone who started as 100%-jewish, 50%-literary dislekick, with only lobro who saw potential for greatness.

      3. Dunno bro, I also encouraged la lassie to get out more, take her sweet time fetching that water and wood … let the boys get a little look see! (big medicine)

  3. Pardon me, jessel, but I HAVE to throw-in my own consideration for you:

    It is the (sad!) inevitability of fading beauty. Worms eat decay. Beauty fades, dies, then decays. From his poetic consideration [of it], Blake softened the truth with verse (as poets are supposed to). How ’bout THAT, dear girl?? Might that be his sentiment? (figuring that most poets are ‘sentimental’ fools) 🙂

    1. “the invisible worm is ‘time’ ”

      I think you’re right, Pat.

      Nothing destroys like “time”. The “crimson joy” is the rose at its most beautiful stage of beauty. But its beauty can only remain if as a dream of imagination outside the inexorable erosion engineered by time. Because of this inexorability is its beauty held in an illusion called “memory”

      “Time” and “matter” are co-conspirators

      The dark secret that ‘kills’ the crimson joy.

      1. I also believe the ‘Rose’ to be a woman being in caps. The ‘worm’ is lower case, so it is neither man nor male appendage. Only Blake knows for sure.

        Woody Allen would likely turn his Jew mind loose with delight to show it to be a prelude to an orgy within his own family.

  4. The illusion of poetry, like any parlour trick, lies in its mystery. Ergo, I would not fain to be the unravel-er.
    But as you seem to insist, I will indulge you.

    The poem intertwines two classical (and romantic) concepts, Eros and Thanatos. The poetic license in truth, is only saved by the Thanatos element, which anchors the whole with the higher profusion of spirit… but the wicked mind that wrote this had more mischief, maybe even evil, in mind. Unless revealed in some private letter, I do not know who Rose (person/personification) is. And whether she wanted the sickness or not is up to interpretation. The crimson joy, you know well as a woman Jessel (though joy may have been excluded at first). I will restrict myself from divulging the darker interpretations, but I gave all the necessary guidance for those willing to delve deeper into darkness… at their own peril.

  5. jeez, how am i gonna pretend to be in the same league as alice, pat and gilbert.
    i can pretend and let’s see how quickly i am found out.

    ahem! left foot forward, head held high, right hand behind the back, fingers crossed.

    the rose is really pure and beautiful but a bit of a skank, you know how they can be (roses).

    so a jew-worm sneaks in and sweet-talks her into his den of vice, “the liar’s lair”, saying hey baby, you really are sumpin else (“sumpin worth humpin” he slobbers to himself in yiddish), i can make you a big star back home in california, hollywood! she thinks but no, we gotta start off gradually, first you learn the ropes in santa monica porn trailers.

    and thus her chaste purity withereth away while shekels (his dark secret love) make a lovely ringing sound as they pour into the worm’s offshore account.

    1. lobro –

      You could…join the ranks of Cervo… or Riffaterre…..or not…

      Nathan Cervo describes the poem as “One of the most baffling and enigmatic in the English language.” The rose and worm have been considered by critics as “figures of humanity”, although Michael Riffaterre doubts the direct equivalence of Man as a worm; when Blake makes this comparison in other places, Riffaterre notes, he is explicit about it. Nevertheless, the “lesson of the worm may be applicable to human experience”.

      The rhyme scheme is ABCB. The scansion is difficult to place, due to a lack of pattern; the stanzas are asymmetrical: the first has syllables of 5,6,5,5, and the second of 5,4,6,5. Punctuation is also irregular: there is no [,] after “O Rose”, and yet there is after “worm”.

      The poem has been set to music by Benjamin Britten in his 1943 song cycle “Serenade for Tenor, Horn and Strings”, where is forms the movement, “Elegy”. More recently, British rock band Amplifier set the poem to music on their 2011 album, The Octopus.

      1. pat, maybe it’s just a bad translation 🙂 …

        to me it sounds like they are all jews: cervo, rifaterre and britten (what did i tell you, rose is damaged goods, spqr wouldn’t touch her with his fishing pole)

      2. Look between the loins of either gender to find the Rose and the worm. If there is more meaning, it is because of the deeper truth that those two coordinating opposites represent higher forces.

      3. per aspera ad astra, huh?
        except that too many of us are happy to get bogged down by the lower forces and end up as lice worm in wonderland, not much room for flexing butterfly wings there.

        but to escape to where the higher forces await (because they don’t pull, gravity is 1-way), hah!
        hoc opus, hic labor est, no?

        jessel, help me out here, i feel distinctly inferior in the spiritual arena.

  6. IMO, a decent piece of poetry speaks to diverse people in diverse ways (like the eyes of a well-done portrait follow you around the room!). Not knowing the personna or temperament of the poet, you can engage in endless ‘guessing’. MAYBE the rose is just a rose – and meant to resemble the quantity of our lives. WHO TF KNOWS???!

    Some people write poems for one reason – some another.

  7. @ Alice Oswald

    You are the only one in my humble opinion who understands this poem and its darker meanings. All interpretations of the poem are NOT equally valid if they fail to explain every single allusion in the poem, just as all cosmological theories are not equally valid if they fail to explain all the phenomena associated with the theory.

    The poem, as Alice correctly hints, has a dark sexual meaning. Think “sex” and all the pieces of the jigsaw will fall into place. As Alice says, “Look between the loins of either gender to find the Rose and the worm.”

    What Alice has revealed, however, is only the tip of the iceberg. There’s much more. An entire scenario consisting of sexual abuse, rape, violation and victimization.

    Get the idea?

    Just join . . . the dots.

    1. Methinks you go too far afield, Jessel, with intimations of sexual innuendo in this poem of Blake’s

      This is a simple contemplation of our temporal existence where his object for musing is a rose. A bed of roses to be exact, the better to convey a “crimson joy”.

      The “invisible worm” can only BE time. What other “invisibility” inexorably destroys the beauty of a rose? Or the beauty in anything that withers and dies?

      And if beauty is truth, then time must be a lie – the thing which is not

      1. @ Brownhawk

        Methinks you go too far afield, Jessel, with intimations of sexual innuendo in this poem of Blake’s. This is a simple contemplation of our temporal existence where his object for musing is a rose. A bed of roses to be exact, the better to convey a “crimson joy”. The “invisible worm” can only BE time. What other “invisibility” inexorably destroys the beauty of a rose?

        I don’t think it would serve any purpose if I tried to persuade you to change your opinion, dear Brownhawk. Having once made up your mind, you will not wish to change it. That would entail loss of face, wouldn’t it?

        Suffice to say that I have my own “informed” opinion on this question, based on an actual study of the poetry of Blake and the social milieu in which he lived, and there is no doubt whatever that this poem has a “dark meaning” reflecting the dark mind and mystical leanings of the poet.. Blake would never have written a silly conventional poem about “fleeting time” and “gather ye rosebuds while ye may” and other such Greeting Card platitudes. He left that to other more mundane poetasters.

        Alice has already told you what this poem is about. She is spot-on. Let me spell it out to you clearly.

        Rose = vagina
        Worm = penis.

        That’s only the tip of the iceberg. I refuse to explain more. As Alice wisely said, let the mystery be unraveled by others. Why spoil their fun by unraveling it for them?

        I will take Dr Green’s advice and only talk to people on this site who speak my own language and who are courteous and kind to me and capable of changing their opinions.

        There can be no wisdom without humility.

        I find almost every poster on this site, apart from one or two notable exceptions, totally repellent: arrogant, aggressive, brutish Untermenschen.

        Alice is is such a refreshing change, but she won’t be staying here very long. You guys will make sure of that. You uncouth lot will drive her away with your bad manners and low-browed incivilities.

        Not you personally, Brownhawk. You’re not that bad really. But you tend to commune with the boors and brutes on this site instead of giving them the cold shoulder. You move in the wrong circles, casting your occasional pearls before swine.

      2. @ Jessel

        You need a good spanking, young lady! Not from me though. I am far too courteous and kind and only move in the most elevated circles! 🙂

      3. Jessel –

        Bad guess, Jess…..
        ‘W’ in worm is not in caps in the original poem. ‘R’ in Rose is in caps. One is a proper noun, in caps, a person’s name, the other is not. You must have missed that kindergarten class.

        Literary genius abounds.

      4. “I’m not that bad really”

        Talk about damning with faint praise! (Or is it praising with faint damnation? I can never seem to get them straight)

        But if you’re right about the subject of this particular poem by Blake, then I can only express my disappointment in a poet for whom my esteem would be held too high.

        To ascribe to Blake a “dark mind and mystical leanings” over the melodrama of sex bespeaks a youthful rapture with its tenuous intrigue.

        For only a tongue of early maturity could yet but see the real face of the dark mind and destroyer of beauty

        May your life be as long as it needs to be, dear Jessel, to understand the real face of the ravager.

      5. @ Pat

        Bad guess, Jess….. ‘W’ in worm is not in caps in the original poem. ‘R’ in Rose is in caps. One is a proper noun, in caps, a person’s name, the other is not. You must have missed that kindergarten class. Literary genius abounds.


        Literary genius is one thing no one is ever going to accuse YOU of, that’s for sure!

        If you had the slightest knowledge of English literature, you would know that CAPITAL LETTERS at the beginning of words were used in a completely different way in the EIGHTEENTH century from the way they are used in the TWENTY-FIRST century.

        The fact that “Rose” begins with a capital ‘R’ does NOT mean that “Rose” is a “person”, as you foolishly state. In the 18th century capital letters were often used for common nouns.

        Thus Blake could easily have written, “Every Rose has its Thorn.”

        I guess you never knew that, But never mind! You strive very hard for omniscience, and I guess you need to to be given a “pat” (no pun intended) on the back for your heroic attempts to pass as an educated person! 🙂

        Keep up the good work.

      6. Dr Dave –

        Thanks. I am very familiar with that practice of the time. My library is full of examples in original bindings.
        However, there were numerous chances for Blake to capitalize the common nouns, but he did not.

        As you suggested, I shall keep up the good work… as you should keep ‘practicing’ to get it right one day. 🙂

      7. pet peeve alert!

        Pardon my analness, Dr Green, but usually when people say “no pun intended” they are most definitely intending it.

        Better to say “pardon the pun” 😉

    2. Jessel says: All interpretations of the poem are not equally valid if they fail to explain every single allusion in the poem, just as all cosmological theories are not equally valid if they fail to explain all the phenomena associated with the theory.

      At first, I thought I wrote this. But no, it was you. It is cold at the top of mountains, but the view is stunning.

      1. Alice,

        I wrote a long comment for you yesterday but I lost it. So disheartening! One question: what brought you to this site? Did you stumble on it by chance? And was it an interest in poetry that brought you here, or was it politics?

  8. Jessel –

    All ‘guesses’ are equally valid;
    Only Blake knew for sure.
    And why the R was in caps;
    Tis just a part of the lure.

    1. All ‘guesses’ are equally valid;
      Only Blake knew for sure.

      I agree with your second statement — “Only Blake knew for sure” — but not with your first statement “All guesses are equally valid.”

      With all due respect to you, all guesses are NOT equally valid. A wild guess is not as valid as a guess based on on expertise and knowledge of the subject matter.

      If you know nothing about the life and poetry of Blake and Alice and I have made Blake our special area of expertise, with a detailed knowledge of life in 18th century England. then your guess as to what the poem means is simply a “wild guess”. It is not as valid as our interpretation.

      Wild shots are not as good as targeted shots, Pat.

      My guess as to what disease Patient X is suffering from would be a wild guess — not as valid as the diagnosis of an experienced doctor.

      My guess as to what wine we have been served at a banquet would be a wild guess — not as valid as the guess of an experienced wine connoisseur.

      I have written a lot about 9/11, but I would hesitate to claim that my amateurish comments about the subject are as “valid” as the detailed analyses of Prof. David Ray Griffin, author of 13 books on 9/11! 🙂

      So please don’t say “All guesses are equally valid.” That is manifestly untrue, as I have just shown.

      1. Jessel –

        Thanks for your guesses.

        I always say as I please, which usually pleases few. I do not win popularity contests, but many others fall behind me in battles.

        I shall repeat a stubborn claim of mine… ‘everyone has their own truth.’

        And, if one waits to become expert, one just continues to wait, following those who step forward.

        ex = a has been.
        sp(e)rt = a drip under pressure.

      2. Jessel – Thanks for your guesses. I always say as I please, which usually pleases few. I do not win popularity contests, but many others fall behind me in battles.

        Congratulations, you adorable creature!! By all means continue to win battles and lose popularity contests! 🙂

      3. Jessel –

        Thanks. I, too, believe I am a ‘create-ture’…created. But adorable might be incorrect. Other less favorable adjectives have been hurled even on this site. Jews really hate me. I do not easily compromise.

        I will continue to be as Paine, who had only five in attendance at his funeral, and no family members.

        Liars have the biggest funeral attendance. Mine will be composed of very few.

    2. Pat, I mean you no injustice, except the justice you deserve for any hate you might have, but that is not my comment to you. Excluding those words of worth that you shared, you are wrong. You can continue to believe in something wrong. You’ll be in the good company of a few billion.

      “All guesses are valid” is only a comment made by someone who does not know, while concurrently resenting the people who do know. That is the type that says: all guesses are equally valid.

      Surely, some things are difficult to know, while other things to the discerning are not. All guesses are not equally valid. As for men falling behind you, men charged with the light brigade too. Men died in the winters of Russia. Now, we all make mistakes so I take nothing away from valour. Some leaders however would not have made the same mistakes. And they cannot be faulted for their better judgement. God favors fools. But only select fools. Most of us fools pay for our errors.

      Be gentle, I am a lady.


      1. Alice –

        I like your guesses. I have never abused anyone here. Not to worry. I will argue, though.

        All are both right and wrong until they declare themselves otherwise. Only the ‘self’ is qualified to judge the ‘self,’ for only the ‘self’ knows for sure. A guy in sandals stated that as recited by a few others c. 80 AD….and placed in a testament. “…lest ye be judged.”

        I hate only those who hate me…. Self defense is allowed. Jews are mandated to hate me.

      2. @ Alice

        I’d be sorry to see you chased away from this website by the boorish stupidity of a particularly pigheaded poster who has never been known to concede a point to anyone. Once this man has made up his mind that 2 + 2 = 5, nothing you can say to persuade him that 2 + 2 = 4 will make him budge an inch. His ill-informed opinions, he firmly believes, are as good as your well-informed ones.

        For this man to admit that you are right and he is wrong would mean loss of face; it would be like admitting that he had an inordinately small penis.

        What you need to do when you come on to a site like this for the first time is to figure out who are are the fools and time wasters and have nothing to do with them. No good can come from communing with these boorish oafs. They leave a nasty taste behind.

        At least your few exchanges with the mysterious poster known as “Jessel” were a pleasure to read. I have no idea who this Jessel character is, but I was always under the impression that she was a teenager (age 14) suffering from acute dyxlexia and the most appalling grammar.

        She has suddenly flowered into an educated young lady. How she managed to acquire such erudition so quickly is a mystery to me.

      3. But this would presume, Dr. Green, that “Jessel” and “Jessel Meyer” are one and the same. Unless of course that you’re simply having a little tongue-in-cheek fun. Then again, you didn’t end your post with the yellow smiley face guy.

        Which makes me wonder, how do you get him to have a bulge in one of his jowls? 😉

      4. Alice –

        Just remember that anyone with ‘DR’ in front of their name….

        is still ‘practicing.’

  9. Pat –

    The subject poem, ‘Degenerate Beast’, is a man-hating poem – sometimes valid, sometimes the product of lesbian minds. It set the tone for the reiteration of Blake’s piece, I suppose. No use contending with their analyses, anyway. A poet or a lesbian or a faggot or a heterosexual ‘otherwise’ can make anything of it he wishes. (BOTH are pretty good pieces, though I like the Blake piece the better.)

    1. @ Gilbert Huntley

      Is Lasha a man-hating lesbian?


      The subject poem, ‘Degenerate Beast’, is a man-hating poem – sometimes valid, sometimes the product of lesbian minds.

      So what are you getting at, Gilbert? If you’re saying Lasha is a “man-hating lesbian”, why don’t you state this clearly and unequivocally?

      As far as I can see, Lasha is no “man-hater”, as you are clearly implying. At the very most, she is the hater of a particular man at a particular time. She has quarreled with her boyfriend, it seems. and is giving him the lash of her tongue.

      Baudelaire wrote similar “hate poems” to his mulatto mistress, Jeanne Duval. He called her a “vampire, for example. This doesn’t mean Baudelaire hated ALL women. It means he just hated Jeanne Duval at a particular time, In fact, it was a love-hate relationship. He also wrote Jeanne Duval love poems. When he wasn’t calling her a “vampire” and a “bitch”, he was calling her his “angel.”

      Which just goes to show what “love” does to some people!

      As to the light hint you drop that Lasha could be a “lesbian”, this was actually suggested by a mischievous Zionist troll recently. He suggested slyly that Lasha and Ellie K could have a lesbian thing simmering between them, but he could give no evidence for lesbianism on Lasha’s side.

      Ellie K, yes, she emerges as pretty much a lesbian in her numerous posts. Lasha did address Ellie as “darling” and even “darlingest”, but this was done quite openly on the site and it does not make her a lesbian.

      In England this kind of affectionate talk is common among the upper classes. “Darling” is equivalent to the American “honey” and “darlingest” to “honeybunch”. Just a mode of speaking. Upper class women often address waiters and barmen as “darling” in England, as in “l’ll have another martini, darling.”

      Here is what I said to this guy recently (in a comment) who was suggesting maliciously that Lasha was a lesbian who was hung up on Ellie K:

      I wrote to Lasha a couple of years ago and asked her if she was a lesbian. This is after I had read a few of her poems. She replied:

      “I have never had a lesbian experience in my life, though many women have hit on me. I really do believe that sex is sacred and that it should be confined to man and woman, preferably with children in mind. All other deviations from this are regrettable and inevitably lead to an inner poisoning. Chastity is best, and second best is married love, and third best is the pure love between friends. All other loves lead to Satan’s pit.”

      Nothing could be clearer that Lasha is not a lesbian.

      1. Sardonicus –

        When my mom called someone ‘darling’ I ducked under a table. The pans and rolling pins and anything else handy were soon to become missiles. Even hot coffee on my dad one time. Too much Choctaw there.

      2. @ Pat

        When my mom called someone ‘darling’ I ducked under a table.

        But you wouldn’t have ducked under the table if she’d called someone “honey”, would you? That’s quite common in America and no one thinks anything of it.

        The word “darling” in England has exactly the same connotation as the word “honey” in America. English people also use “sweetie” as the equivalent of “honey”.

        “Sweetie” is the more general term, used by all classes in England. “Darling” tends to be used much more by the upper and upper middle classes.

        This is something I don’t think you Americans have, i.e. these fine class distinctions, with different terms being used by different classes.

        Thus in England a person of the lower classes will always use the posh word “serviette”, thinking that a fancy French word will confer extra distinction on them. An upper class person never uses the word “serviette.” He always uses the word “napkin.”

        Similarly, a person of the lower classes will refer to his apple pie and custard as his “sweet” or his “dessert.” A person of the upper classes will never do this. He will refer to his apple pie and custard as his “pudding.”

      3. @Sardo –

        ‘Sometimes valid’ means the subject bastard is DESERVING of the curse. ‘Sometimes of lesbian mind’ would indicate a tendency to man-hating. (Don’t know how much you’ve been around, but there ARE those ‘man-haters’, in England, America, and elsewhere.)

        Anyhow, the poem was not displayed as Lasha’s work – but I thought it might be. I have read enough of her poetry to discern her diversity of mind (just as my own wanders about, often), and have discerned what I believe her ups and downs and moods. She is NO lesbian, and I resent your having implied that I wished that to be conveyed. I have to agree that good poetry is most often a product of tranquil reflection of extreme emotion. In the case of ‘Degenerate Beast’, I think Lasha must have been PRETTY PISSED OFF, and penned before cooling. (Wouldn’t want to be HIM!)

        Anyhow, I never was much good at verse nomenclature. I just like to write it, sometimes, and let the chips fall where they may. Alice and Jessel and, of course, Lasha, are much more learned in letters than I. 🙂

      4. @Gilbert Huntley

        “She [Lasha] is NO lesbian, and I resent your having implied that I wished that to be conveyed.

        Gilbert, a thousand apologies! I misjudged you badly. But I couldn’t allow the slur of lesbianism to be attached to Lasha in any way. I’m afraid misinterpreted your innocent comment. I put 2 and 2 together and got 5.

        It is absolutely true, as you say, that most man-hating women are lesbians. No doubt about it. Radical feminism and misandry (man-hating) go hand in hand.

        But Lasha, of course, does not suffer from misandry.

        Allow me to say Gilbert that you are one of my favorite posters here. Your sunny nature and modest good humor never fail to impress me. Accept a fraternal hug or friendly handshake from the foolish and contrite Sardonicus. 🙂

      5. Thanks, Sardonicus. 🙂

        I have tended horses this morning, changed oil in a wood-splitter, and fixed the hub on a wagon. See?? I am no English scholar – but have just read a lot, since I was little.
        Wrote poetry, too, from a young age. When I went to college, I was expected to go to ‘commerce’ school for a major, although the dean said he thought I SHOULD have done Enlish Lit. and writing. My family wanted me to be president of a certain railroad (on the lines of which I worked summer jobs in college), but I decided, in my junior year, to ‘Fuck it!’. Corporate ass-kissing was NOT for me! Started a couple
        businesses, instead, after the dean made me stay out a year and ‘reassess [your] priorities’. 🙂

        Don’t like formal schoolin’, no way. Lots more to learn in life! I’ve learned a lot of ‘martial’ stuff (which I cannot relate, here), business, and waaay too much other stuff to ever be bored. First, and last, I am a farmer. (So, said he, was Thomas Jefferson – so I believe I’m in pretty good company, yet!)

        Thanks for your kind regards, sir. 🙂

      6. Choctaw, eh Pat?

        That may explain why I like you, you incorrigible rascal.

        I had a girlfriend back in the day whose Mom had some Choctaw in her. Both her parents Creole who grew up in Alabama. How I loved that little girl. I find myself thinking about her more, the older I get. Whatever brings a smile to your face, doncha know?

        And I guess it takes an American to appreciate “darling” when used sardonically.

        If you, Sardonicus, were born and raised over here I’m certain you would get the appreciation 😉

        And here’s a little story on the Choctaws that Pat may appreciate:

        “…Then, in 1540, the Spaniards reached the territory of the great Choctaw chief Tuscaloosa.

        The chief, seated on cushions in a raised pavillion in the town plaza, received the strangers with regal pomp. About his shoulders hung a floor-length feather cape; behind him stood an attendant holding a fan-shaped parasol. De Soto demanded 400 bearers, which Tuscaloosa graciously provided, and also 100 women. These, the Choctaw said, would be waiting at the next town, Mabila.

        So the Spanish set off. At Mabila they entered a massive stockade with 15-foot high mud-plastered walls and tall defensive watchtowers. Suddenly Choctaw warriors poured into the central plaza and fell upon the intruders. De Soto had been ambushed. After hours of ferocious combat, thousands of Tuscaloosa’s men had fallen to the Spaniards’ guns and swords; tribal legend tells that the survivors hanged themselves rather than surrender.

        The conflict was also devastating to the Spaniards. The Choctaw cut down many of their horses, destroyed most of their supplies, killed perhaps 40 Spanish soldiers, and wounded almost all the others. It was a hungry and haggard force, then, that De Soto led west to Chicaza on the Mississippi-Alabama border. There, subjected to numerous hit-and-run attacks by the local people – the Chickasaw – he sought to rest his troops and restock his supplies before moving on to the Mississippi River in 1541.”

      7. B-Hawk –
        My mother’s grandmother was full-blooded Choctaw on her father’s side. He was a mean one. When the sheriff couldn’t handle the bar fights they called him. Mississippi was his birthplace. Incorrigible was he.

  10. spqr made an interesting statement: “Never write poetry in anger“, something worth pursuing a bit further, imo.
    nothing special about poetry in that context, why not extend to the whole sphere of arts.
    and it is true that the enduring visuals of the classic era project timeless tranquility, caryatids’ eyes staring transfixed into infinity.
    sitting down in a shade of a fig tree in ephesus surrounded by these magnificent ruins, the temple of hadrian, cicadas screeching stridently in the heat, the shimmering cobalt of the aegean a short distance downhill, it makes no sense to be making ridiculous grimaces because your lehman brothers portfolio took a hit.
    the ancient art endures because of this emotionless quality connecting with the mystery of eternal.
    spoken like a classicist.

    but is that it? emotions such as rage, hate, tragedy, lust, pain, madness should be excluded from art …
    what about poetry of ezra pound, was it not mostly in anger?
    listen to this rendition of usura.
    much of iliad and odyssey has anger, lust, revenge in it.
    dostoevsky wrote practically everything in anger and discomfort.
    much of beethoven’s music expresses anger.
    almost anything i see by leonardo has this mixed quality of pent up frustration going into cynicism, divine showing loathing and contempt for earthly creation.

    and how about ecstasy of st teresa by bernini, as dark as it is spiritual, maybe the most sexually arousing (to me, anyway) work ever produced, totally illuminating miss oswald’s “the deeper truth that those two coordinating opposites represent higher forces“.

    and i don’t think that quality needs to be enduring either, it is all about the impact on the art consumer and the impetus it provides for further travel, spiritual fuel as it were.
    and lust can do the job under circumstances (when i was a teen, my friend’s father had his beloved shelby cobra monster that he would take out for a spin every weekend, jim had to stand by, fire extinguisher ready in case the giant carburetors caught on fire … it kind of ties in with lust as road fuel).

    i recall listening to some indian guru explain the stages of the trip (yoga), i think there are 8 of them and the last few are withdrawal of the senses, intense focus, meditation and finally release.
    but preceding this, the emotional kinks need to be ironed out, they must settle down like grits in the turkish coffee, so they have all these mindboggling carvings of hyperactive sex scenes squirming all over some of the temple exteriors – if you can’t tear your mind from them, don’t enter is the message, i think.

    1. Well said, Lobro. What you say about art being the product of emotion makes sense. You have mentioned Beethoven, Leonardo, Dostoevsky. Don’t forget Papa Baudelaire, the sex addict. Most of his poems are fueled by a decadent sexuality… the emotions of sex.

      However, don’t forget Wordsworth’s famous definition of poetry: “emotion recollected in tranquility.”

      Emotion is the basis of art, but it need not be raw emotion, it can be a ripe and mellowed emotion. In other words, Beethoven does not necessarily compose a particular piece of music while in a state of wild anger, the veins popping on his forehead and froth flecking his lower lip! Nope, he calms down first. He recollects his anger in tranquility and then he composes his music.

      If you’ve ever had a girlfriend who has driven you bananas, you’ll know what I’m talking about. You can compose a poem about her while still in a rage at the injury she has done you… or you can wait a few years until you’ve cooled down a bit and can view the whole situation from a distance.

      Mind you, I’m not in full agreement with Wordsworth that “emotion recollected in tranquility” will guarantee a better literary product than raw emotion at the time of injury. Why wait 10 years to tell your femme fatale that you hate her? Why not tell her straight away when the anger is raw and the blood still boiling?

      1. Why wait 10 years to tell your femme fatale that you hate her? Why not tell her straight away when the anger is raw and the blood still boiling?

        which is why the “lowbrow” (sometimes lobro, most of the time not) art has this immediate, visceral appeal, eg, this.
        is it art? why not, i am sure that such artforms existed throughout the history, their instant popularity roughly inversely proportional to their staying power.

        why didn’t bach or mozart compose such stuff, is it proof of its worthlessness?
        it’s like this (in case of mozart at any rate i believe):
        from the earliest times right up to maybe a century ago, part of the package of honor and nobility was emotional control.
        a gentleman never loses temper and maintains a lordly smile even as he challenges the offender to a morning duel, this was driven into them from birth, that to express rage was like breaking wind at a formal gathering in buckingham palace.
        and who were the main, paying consumers of composed music, why, the same nobility.

      2. @ lobro

        Beautifully put, you man of consummate genius! You know your social history and your knowledge of European culture…

        Outward displays of anger, so common among the lower classes, are totally despised by the nobility and gentry. Their unwritten motto has always been “Play it cool.”

        Consider: why are so many women drawn to men who remain cool and aloof, and why are they repelled by men who cannot control their emotions? I do believe it’s because they are instinctively hoping for a better partner: someone “genteel”, of better blood, rather that a boorish peasant.

        However, dear Lobro, is goes deeper than this! Believe me. I know,

        A man who “plays it cool” but is inwardly seething with anger is NOT as worthy a specimen of manhood as the man who is GENUINELY cool — the man who, in spite of provocation, remains imperturbable. That man is truly superior.

        That man has learned something very precious that his inferior has yet to learn.

        Reflect that when Christ was being nailed to his cross, he did not rage and spit at his torturers as a common boor might have done. Instead, he turned away his head and murmured, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.”

        Christ was the Ultimate Nobleman — Christ the Cool.

      3. let me explore this topic tangentially for just a little ways.
        you are right jessel, to say that the truly superior man remains calm under fire (grace under pressure) and that is expressed in kipling’s if (was part of my english curriculum in high school).

        now, i humbly submit that one artform that should be recognized as such is humor, specifically the kind that skewers hypocrisy, it naturally being jew’s stock in trade, he is the master of promoting it under myriad disguises.
        it goes for all sorts of contradictions ingrained into social fabric but hypocrisy is the most egregious of them all, precisely what your man christ primarily railed against.
        as such, humor has the shortest of lifespans being highly radioactive, as it were.
        its style changes as rapidly as paris fashion, being a form of urban warfare, eg, banksy’s graphics.

        the purpose of humor, in a way similar to poetry is to say the unsayable, truth to power without triggering outright legally sanctioned repression.

        many ways to skin katz, no?

    2. Using emotion in your work is different from writing in a highly emotional state. Good artists guide their emotion and are not guided by it. This is what separates actual poets from rappers and punk rockers.

    3. lobro, my essential amigo..

      EK would be well served serving your breakfast..

      Me too, for that matter.

      1. Actions speak louder than words, Ellie.

        For starters, have you ever noticed that cute, frilly little thing your maids wear on the outside of their walmart dresses? It’s called an apron. How about you deign to put one on and trade places with the hired help for a few days or more?

        Better still, remember the story of the prince and the pauper? Why don’t you get yourself out there amongst the goy rabble and learn yourself some lessons in humility and empathy that no mere thoughts and written words can teach, eh?

        I look forward to your reports from the bourgeois wilderness (and no, we don’t want no stinkin’ cake!)

      2. And just think of some of the side benefits. You could learn to be a master juggler (jugglerette?)

        Yeah, you could eventually have say, 5-balls movin’ around above your hands with deft precision. All of these balls signifying tribute to the alleged family members that you have allegedly parted ways with.

        One ball is paying the landlord “on time” (God how I hate that term) to keep a modest roof over your head. A second ball keeps some food on the table under the roof. A third ball pays the massive electricity grid to keep you from freezing to death, not to mention the pipes that carry the water that is a FOURTH ball I might add (Christ, what have we come to, the state of our water so bad that we have to pay to clean it up) And the 5th ball is a beauty. That would be the one that keeps a car on the road so you can get to your slave tasks (i.e.; “job”) to ensure the other 4-balls stay in the air

        Good luck to you

      3. @ BROWNHAWK
        October 15, 2014 at 1:50 pm

        Actions speak louder than words, Ellie.

        BH, can you please explain? Why are you addressing Ellie? Ellie is not posting on this thread and is unlikely to be reading these comments of yours. As far as I know, Ellie has left this site completely.

      4. Just having some satirical fun, Sardonicus

        Wish I thought of it when she was still fresh on the site 😉

  11. (Dhanasi-raga)..

    He wore a peacock-feather crown. His jasmine garland was surrounded by black bees. Intoxicated by the scent of His garland, how many humming bees filled the four directions?

    (Refrain) O gopi-friend, was that person I saw Kamadeva Himself? A hero of playful pastimes, He gracefully danced under a kadamba tree.

    Moving the archer’s bows of His eyebrows and emptying the two quivers of His eyes, how many flower-arrows did He fire? Many playful girls’ hearts were wounded. Those girls could not gaze on anyone but Him.

    Shark-shaped jewel earrings swung from His ears. Govinda dasa says: I think that person must have been more enchanting than Kamadeva himself.


    He is splendid like a sapphire mirror. His limbs eclipse even Kamadeva.

    I do not know of any eyes like His reddish eyes, eyes that shoot Kamadeva’s arrows.

    O gopi-friend, whom did I meet? It was Nanda’s son. Because of Him a palace has now become a wild forest and a blazing fire has become cooling sandal paste.

    Because of Him the southern wind now blows from the north. Because of Him I cannot bear the glistening moonlight.

    Please make a bed from lotus leaves and petals. This pious girl will rest upon it.

    My thoughts rest in Him. My eyes yearn for Him.

    What fruit will come from the great disorder in this girl’s life? Govinda dasa says:
    She will meet Krishna.

  12. An entire scenario consisting of sexual abuse, rape, violation and victimization.
    Get the idea?
    Just join . . . the dots

    not me, i don’t get it nor can join the dots.
    someone abused sexually our previously 14 year old jewish dyslexic and now she spouts poetry with the best, writes way better than the rest of the squawking rabble, understands deep woman stuff.

    left poor lobro choking on the dust, jessel, you did.
    don’t know much about history, don’t know much about woman stuff, but i do know i love you, like a worm loves his rose …

    1. i did join the dots, like this (previously) “. . .”, (now) “___”.
      is it some secret emoticon or just a wide jewish mouth?

      1. Could be that Julian Jew watching you…. The ‘EK’ Hunter….

        Get ready for another bout of chapters with the ‘EK entity’ being kept in isolation in Sierra Leone or Diego Garcia…. or Tower of London, held by Julian Jew agents….etc

  13. nah pat, jessel and i go some ways back, i know that she won’t take offense at my plebeian jibes.

    and for whatever she is, i do like ellie’s writing, seen a lot worse.

    as long as she delivers a good product, i am buying and i do have a very discriminating nose for bullshit too.
    there are specialized olfactory buds for picking up the spoor of a real jew as opposed to the ones whose guts rebel and revolt against their former brood-mates.

    i am quite sure that had i been born a jew, i’d take up arms against them at some point, even as shabbos run across chasing the filthy lucre.

    hitler was a big enough man to recognize that and for the most part, it paid off.

    1. I admitted to Sardonicus that EK’s writing was good… It was the re-hashed content which was boring. A compendium of 100s of writers over many decades.

      1. HP –

        Good one!! 😉

        Still appropriate:
        It is never wise to end a sentence with “the bird.”

  14. reader’s digest, eh?

    good enough for me, i hate reading as much as some people love reading, quantity kills this cat’s curiosity.
    so if leonora can chew, digest and hmm/hmm, deliver the gist of 100 writers in a 3000 word article, i will subscribe to her channel.

    but i wouldn’t be the judge of that, not having read 100 writers.
    i did appreciate ellie telling me about “my pet goat”, that was astounding.

    aside … what if someone, some jü like jülius did a massive search using his home cray supercomuter and came up with the exact same conversation we are having right now, would that qualify for plagiarism?

    julius thinks so, i don’t think he thinks.

    so just because eleanor said something and one of the 100s of writers had said the same thing in different language, different candywrap, different century doesn’t make her a cheap regurgitator.

    1. could be an upper limit to human wisdom, as regards capacity and productivity, could be that we reached it back in the days of hammurabi.

      it has always been the same damn water on earth for hundreds of millions of years (did i read somewhere that earth’s water actually predates the solar system?), but given the right conditions, it precipitates as snow and we have snowball fights like we just invented it.

  15. jessel October 14, 2014 at 11:38 pm
    I wrote a long comment for you yesterday but I lost it. So disheartening! One question: what brought you to this site? Did you stumble on it by chance? And was it an interest in poetry that brought you here, or was it politics?

    to Jessel
    That’s unfortunate. I am curious of what you wanted to share. Do share again. I will refrain from telling you how I got here because it is embarrassing. But it is the poetry. I shy away from politics. Nothing good comes from it. I’ll pay attention if a hero comes to town. Speaking of which, as you asked my insight regarding a sick Rose, I would love to hear your insight on the Romantic idea of the role of the poet.

    1. Alice, you’re my kind of person, and so I will reply to you later when I have some more time. Don’t get me started on the function of poetry or I’ll be at it until the cows come home! 🙂

      Another quick question, a gnomic one which no one here except you will understand. (A question which the Delphic oracle would be proud of! ) Just answer it briefly and I’ll know who I’m dealing with … but no one else will!

      Question: r u closer 2 . . . the waste land or dumbledor’s court?

    2. @ Alice

      Regarding poetry…

      “…thanatus element which anchors the whole with the higher profusion of spirit.”

      For myself, I don’t see sexual content in any explicit sense in analyzing Blake’s rose and worm poem.

      As it would involve male-female relationships directly, and considering the mysterious Beulah…

      “…deeper truth that the two coordinating opposites represent higher forces.”

      Please allow me to offer a brief excerpt from my “constant work in progress” book that you may find interesting:

      “Perhaps the true reality behind a gender orientation is what you might call an ‘interrelation of countering energies’. In this cloaked world it’s called sexual energy, whose expressions reflect either conditions undermining spiritual integrity, or ones which can serve to help maintain it by keeping it whole (holy; to heal)”

  16. At first glance, I thought you should have said “…the Cumaean Sybil would be proud of…” but maybe that would have been too revelatory. The Waste Land. Final answer. But that was easy. Here’s a difficult one. Are you closer to the sermon on the mount, or the one on the field of righteousness? And who do you pick, Lancelot the father, or Galahad the son?

    1. The Cumaean Sybil, eh? Was she the one who, when asked by certain boys, “Sybil, what do you want?” responded rather sadly, “I want to die.” (apothanein thelo).

      More tomorrow, Alician Sphynx. Too late now for riddle solving. Time for bed!

      Are you the Alice who probably does her weekend shopping in Totnes and is familiar with the River Dart, or are you the Alice who writes pastiches of Harry Potter? . . . or can the same Alice be doing BOTH these things?

      Your secret is safe in my hands. Trust me, dear. Betrayal is foreign to my nature.

    2. *Sigh* . . . you are not answering my question, having given your “final answer.” Never mind. As to your question, I’m not sure I understand its purport:

      “Are you closer to the sermon on the mount, or the one on the field of righteousness? And who do you pick, Lancelot the father, or Galahad the son?

      I will answer quite simply that I have no problem with the Sermon on the Mount and am far closer to it than I would be to Isaiah 32 — assuming that you are referring to the Old Testament passage here.

      The Sermon on the Mouth encapsulates for me the very heart and soul of Christianity: its quintessence. These sublime utterances remain for me the Mouth Everest of human spirituality. Few of us wretched mortals can live up to its ideals. Even the holiest saints fail to climb to the dizzy top of the Ice Mountain, shimmering in luminous and numinous beauty.

      “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is perfect.”

      — Matthew, 5.48

      Ah, easier said than done!

      1. admin: feel free to correct and wipe out my comments, promise not to sulk (coz i am a good sock puppet).

  17. Jessel says: The Sermon on the Mouth encapsulates…

    Well, yes, that could be correct from certain vantage points. Of course, the Sermon on the ˆMount is something else.

    As to answer your earlier questions, allow me to remain the Sphinx. After all, you ask revelations of self, without offering any yourself. And your Sermon of the Mouth, if intentional, leads me to believe, you may be what we call on this ethereal orb, a male.

    Right sermon on the mount. Wrong sermon on the field.

  18. Sermon on the Mouth

    I had no idea a simple typo could call forth such a caustic response from two separate posters. How I could have made such a typo TWICE in a row is a mystery to me. Probably fatigue is to blame. A little reflection, however, ought to have convinced a really shrewd person that if the mistake were intentional, I would have used the word “Mouth” rather than “Mount” the first time I used the word — as here in this paragraph:

    “I will answer quite simply that I have no problem with the Sermon on the Mount and am far closer to it than I would be to Isaiah 32.”

    Even if the mistake I made were intentional, Alice, I fail to see how you can infer from it that a man rather than a woman would have to be guilty of it. Aren’t women capable of cynicism and mockery too?

    I happen to have the greatest reverence for Jesus Christ.

    1. how could a simple typo call forth such a caustic response from two separate posters.

      simple typo, simple answer.
      poster see, poster do.
      i was first and offered my own removal after fixing up the typo.

      aren’t men capable of generosity and kindness too?

      1. @ lobro

        “aren’t men capable of generosity and kindness too?”

        I doubt it, Senhor, especially in your case! You have always been mean and unkind to me about my dyslexia! From day one you have been an inglourious basterd!

        You recommended that I get me a Spell Check, remember, and brush up my spelling? So I did! And I managed to learn me spelling in six months, even mastering English grammer with help from my mom. Between you and I, that was some feet.

        So why did you have to point out my typo, huh? Was that kind and generous? I don’t thank so!

      2. So why did you have to point out my typo, huh?

        because i liked the image
        (and like i said, by pointing it out quickly, i gave you the shot to fix it and remove my comment before the grammar sturmbahnführer dragged you off to sobbingbor, dairy unfinished)

    2. Well, I was perhaps leaving too much out of my comment to make the connection. I was assuming your maleness from:

      – your asking me to reveal – strip so to speak – while revealing little about yourself.
      – the (obvious, but slightly less obvious because repeated twice) typo potentially alluding to a mouth, a sermon, and something or other being encapsulated by said mouth.

      These combined led to the inference of maleness. Of course, it seems I am mistaken.

      There really was not intention to be caustic. Also, overwhelmed by the originality of using my first name with “in Wonderland,” I will now become Oswaldee.


      1. Tut tut! you lost your cool, Alicia, and for the first time in these hitherto pleasant exchanges revealed yourself as discourteous to the only one on this site who had shown you respect and kindness. So disappointing!

        Thus am I rewarded for my pains by being dissed by the Queen of Wonderland.

        A word of advice, gentle Alicia.

        This is the wrong place to come to discuss poetry. You will find no one here except a bunch of raving anti-Semitic lunatics , a notorious set of scoundrels who want to exterminate the Jews, the Muslims, the Blacks, and yes, even the Christians!

        And when they have destroyed everyone, using extreme violence and bloodcurdling torture, they will then have Utopia.

        I am the only person here who does not wish to discuss these horrid things and have come here solely to find my soulmate and discuss magick and mysticism.

        What do I know about Poetry? Absolutely nothing! Which is why I cannot answer your question about the Romantic role of the poet. Shelley himself tackled this tedious subject in his Defence of Poetry and concluded rather pretentiously that “Poets are the unacknowledged legislators of mankind.”

        Poppycock! Piffle! Fiddlesticks! He only said that, the sniveling brat, because he was a poet himself! Poets may well have strutted the world stage a bit more in the 18th century when there was no competition from the thousands of other things that engage our attention today.

        Modern man, “distracted from distraction by distraction”, has no time for poetry any more. He has the movies. He has TV. He has internet pornography. Poetry means nothing to him, especially the wretched chopped-up prose that passes for poetry today.

        Ah, if only poetry were what it were when poets were musicians instead of the navel-gazing wankers they are today! Anyone who writes poetry today, in the end days, with Armageddon on the horizon, is profoundly to be pitied. You know something, Alicia? Poetry today is little more than verbal masturbation.

        And on that note I will say goodnight.

  19. Jessel, yes, you are definitely a woman…

    Ah, so much truth in your comment mixed with truth pretending to be falsity – some very personal. Some even touching.

    Jessel says: “Poetry today is little more than verbal masturbation”
    Only if you are not doing it right… but truly I could not agree more. Of course, the key word in the statement is “today.”

    As you were so intentionally or unintentionally revealing, I will do the same: you are likely incorrect in your earlier questions. Likely.

    Regarding your crowd of misfits, well, no comment. Not my crowd.

    But of magick and mystery, what do you know? If you really want to insist on “going down the rabbit hole”… how deep do you want to go, Jessel? Just how deep? Are you prepared to become the Mad Hatter to find out?

    1. “As for a wound, it may be bound up; and after reviling there may be reconcilement: but he that betrayeth secrets is without hope.”

      Ecclesiasticus, 27:21 (Apocrypha)

      This is my last post as “Jessel”. Henceforth I am “Ravenna”.

  20. “Are you prepared to become the Mad Hatter to find out?

    Maybe I’ve already become the Mad Hatter. I’ve already been down the rabbit hole several times. This I have discovered: that to emerge from the rabbit hole, into the sober light of day, is often deeply disappointing. Wonderland has its own reality, which may be every bit as authentic as the the world we presume to be the “real world.” Maybe this shimmering world of phastasmagoria is what we will experience after death.

    I don’t think I am being “pretentious” in saying this — pretentious only to “the Scoffing Classes”, my term for the self-crowned cognoscenti who pride themselves on their skepticism and cynicism and omniscience but who in fact know as little a blindworms.

    Keats spoke of “the truth of the imagination” and Blake said “Whatever can be imagined is an image of the truth.” Maybe not his exact words, but something like that. The best thing I ever heard along these lines is a quip in a long-forgotten play by an absurdist writer known as NF Simpson: “Reality is a delusion caused by mescalin deficiency.”

    1. “The material world is simply a shadow of the spiritual world. So real life, real variety, real beauty, real knowledge, everything in reality is there in the spiritual world. This material world is only reflection. Just like if you create a clay doll, a very nice beautiful girl. But it is imitation. It is shadow of the real beautiful girl.” (Srila Prabhupada)

      Hayagrīva: Now Aristotle would say that the flower is real because it has its basis in the ultimate reality, God.

      Hayagrīva: Plato would say that the flower is a shadow of reality, a perverted reflection of reality. So which point of view would be…?

      Prabhupāda: Yes, it is… When the flower is in the material world…, material world is perverted reflection of the spiritual world. That’s a fact. We have got experience that material things are created, but in the spiritual world things are not created; they are already there, everlasting. So it appears Aristotle has no knowledge of the spiritual world.

      Hayagrīva: Aristotle defines God as pure form and pure act and purely nonmaterial. He is absolute spirit and is the unmoved mover.

      Prabhupāda: Yes. He is absolute spirit, there is no doubt upon it, but why He should come to know Himself through material world? That is defective.

      1. @ hp

        “So it appears Aristotle has no knowledge of the spiritual world.”

        Thank you for posting this brilliant comment! I enjoy reading all your comments and I am delighted that a person of your high culture and spiritual awareness should take the trouble to post on this site.

        With Sri Prabhupada we move into the upper airs. All he says is true, for he draws on the wisdom of the Vedic sages. Plato would have been quite at home sitting at the feet of these great Indian masters. Aristotle, on the contrary, would have been sorely out of place.

        Plato, with his theory of Universals, which basically states that the Idea of the table was more real than the table itself, is an Idealist. As were the Vedic sages. Aristotle, however, was a “Realist” as opposed to an Idealist. He believed that the table itself was far more real than the abstract Idea of the table.

        Plato and Aristotle represent the twin polarities of modern philosophy and science: Plato the mystical idealist, his head forever in the clouds; and Aristotle, the materialistic scientist, his feet planted foursquare on the ground. Science needs both, but to a large extent has rejected the Platonic worldview.

        Christianity, while relying on Aristotle to a certain extent for its logical apparatus, is far more deeply rooted in the mystical doctrines of Plato and his great disciple Plotinus. In fact, Christian mysticism is Platonic mysticism.

        My apologies for this off-topic comment. At least no one here has yet accused me of being someone else’s “sock puppet” 🙂

      2. Ravenna, how nice to hear you say such things.

        This, if you have not already perused it, is for your enjoyment.

        Seeing that philosophies and theologies could not give
        him a clear picture of God’s personality, Jung concludes: “What is wrong
        with these philosophers? I wondered. Evidently they know of God only
        by hearsay.”

        Dialectic Spiritualism: A Vedic View of Western Philosophy

  21. Blake said:
    “Every thing possible to be believ’d is an image of truth.”

    That is what has compelled me over the decades to reiterate:

    “Everyone has THEIR OWN TRUTH.”

    1. @ Pat

      Blake said: “Every thing possible to be believ’d is an image of truth.” That is what has compelled me over the decades to reiterate: “Everyone has THEIR OWN TRUTH.”

      Pat, your comment is not very helpful in adding to this discussion initiated by the profound and semi-mystical “Ravenna”, whoever this mysterious character is.

      By stating “Everyone has their own truth”, you are basically restating your erroneous view that all opinions are equally valid.

      I remember you saying that your interpretation of the Blake poem was equally as valid as Alice’s interpretation and Jessel’s interpretation, and I think it was pointed out to you politely that this was false.

      Why? Because your interpretation of the poem — that the “worm” meant “Time” — failed to explain satisfactorily what the poem was actually about, whereas Alice’s and Jessel’s interpretation explained every single facet of the poem and every single line .

      Let’s forget that for a moment and come to your latest gem of wisdom: “Everyone has their own Truth.” Garbage! The Flat Earthers have their “own truth”, don’t they? They believe, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, that the world is flat . The Flat Earthers’ “truth”, in other words, is “false”! 🙂

      We live in a universe, dear Pat, in which Newton’s law of gravity applies. Gravity explains all the visible phenomena. Someone who theorizes that gravity is nonsense and that Newton is wrong is basically a fool. He is entitled to his opinion, of course, just as the Flat Earthers are entitled to their opinions. But at the end of the day, Pat, their opinions are false.

      It follows that your statement “Everyone has their own truth” is nonsense — because what you are saying is that all opinions are equally valid.

  22. Semi-mystical Ravenna? Mysterious character Jessel? I’ll tell you who that is: L A S H A ! No doubt about it.

  23. Dr Dave –

    I restated Blake. Your argument is with him.

    Keep ‘practicing.’ You might find a way to add to the discussions one day.

    BTW – I heard that three doctors and two lawyers at the bottom of the ocean was a good start. 🙂

    1. Your comment comes as no surprise to me, dear Pat. It’s what I expected from you. Men like you never learn, for I have never known you to revise your opinion or concede a point to anyone.

      1. Dr Dave –

        You stated, “We live in a universe, dear Pat, in which Newton’s law of gravity applies. Gravity explains all the visible phenomena. Someone who theorizes that gravity is nonsense and that Newton is wrong is basically a fool.”

        A fool?? ALL visible phenomena?? Really??

        I will show you where YOUR truth is different than some OTHERS’ truths. These are people who you referred to as ‘fools.’ Here is a short list of those ‘fools’ who have amended and changed Newton’s Laws:
        Max Planck, Ernest Rutherford, J. Willard Gibbs, Neils Bohr, Max Born, Ernst Jordan, Paul Dirac, Carl Anderson. There many more right now. I intentionally left out Albert ‘the patent clerk.’

        No one today can really explain a ‘neutrino’ which in nuclear engineering in the 60s was explained that it was that amount of energy whose half-thickness is 100 light years of water. It is a way to label an unexplained energy loss, which fits NO ONE’s models.

        You have YOUR truths, Doc. They have theirs. I have mine.

        As a note – Here is a piece of ‘visible phenomena’ which is not explained by Newton’s Law of Gravity:
        You can see light enter a piece of glass at a certain angle, angle of incidence, then slow down while in the glass, being bent in accordance with the index of refraction of the glass, at the angle of refraction. Then when it emerges from the other side of the glass, it emerges parallel to the original incident light beam, meaning it has regained the original velocity.

        UNWARRANTED concessions allow Jew-Creep. UNWARRANTED.

      2. @Dr. Green

        In a nutshell, it’s called thinking outside the box. You know. Abstract thought. You should give it a try. Highly recommended.

        So alice and Jessel have the interpretation of this Blake poem all locked up, eh?

        I agree with Pat that the worm is “time”, and analyzed its facets and lines. Was my interpretation less credible? False?

  24. Could Jessel and Ravenna perhaps be acquainted with a person called Davina who likes to go for a walk with a dog? Don’t worry, darling, I won’t out you. Carry on…

  25. Ravenna,
    Why would you, a ”guest” be delighted if a poster posts a comment here? Unless, that is, this site is yours, of course! Admit it: IT’S YOU, LASHA! For shame! And whatever happened to my last two comments???

  26. Achtung! Achtung! Person posting as Jessel and Ravenna is none other than Lasha! Achtung! Achtung! A sock puppet has just been caught!

  27. Ach mein Gott!!
    Where is my sock, it fell off my head, now I can’t find it (the head, never mind the f*&%$n sock).

    Everyone can see me naked, it is me, me Lobro, poor li’l me, woe betide me, I lost my credibility, Standard & Poor downgraded to just Poor.

    Puppet theatrics beat real issues any time, are puppets Lobro and Jessel breaking up, even after Lasha approved the budget for Jessel’s breast enlargement? “That will be 45c per scrunched up sock, regular size”, National Enquirer all sold out, headline says “Top Harvard docs discover puke has no nutrients, makes for ideal weightloss diet!!!”, Israel planning carpet bombing of Lebanon while no one is looking.

    By all means, let the puppet show roll on, I jest lerrvvv it, as Max would say.

    I say let’s debitchify the proceedings (stop bitching, for those unused to poetry) and get back to the core business.

  28. anyway … a low growl directed toward that moyon crowd.

    i’ve been generally and specifically supportive of all of youze, even when i thought i was seeing double, triple and multitude, it was always fine by me.
    as long as your focus was on jews. that was the background growl.

    but if your purpose in these threads is to run down lasha, be aware that i will drop my neutrality as readily as if i picked up a paper bag and discovered it had ellie’s spaniel’s poop inside.

    1. i would step in front of a comet for lasha

      assuming she is real, genuine, and a good witch not a bad one


    Let me lay my cards on the table. Though I am partly Jewish and sympathize strongly with the small band of valiant Jewish whistleblowers on this website who have been unfairly described as “Ellie K’s sock puppets”, I am myself in no way connected with this group. I am an independent investigator who has been closely following the internet career of “Lasha Darkmoon” for at least 20 years. I know more about this so-called “female” than any other other person alive today.

    Let me tell you the incredible truth: “Lasha Darkmoon” is not a single person. S/he is an fact a very sinister Jewish organization operating out of Tel Aviv and specializing in anti-Semitic disinfo and weird conspiracy theories on an almost unbelievable scale. If you take this site alone, she has been posting here not only as “Lasha Darkmoon” and “Xanadu” but also as “X”, “LD”, “Ruth Bernstein”, “Jessel” and “Ravenna”. In addition, through multiple other part-time volunteers she has been manufacturing almost all the other posters who have been commenting on this site and numerous other sites too.

    I have convincing evidence that the poster known as “Lobro” is in fact one of Darkmoon’s most prolific and dangerous sock puppets. He is always supported and complimented on his comments by a poster called “Hp” who pretends to be interested in Hinduism and spiritual matters but whose main function here is to pass coded messages (using Sanskrit words and phrases) on to to headquarters in Tel Aviv.

    The following posters on this site are almost certainly Darkmoon sock puppets: Tyron Parsons, Max Bilney, Pat, Alice Oswald, Brownhawk, Franklin Ryckaert, Arthur Topham, SPQR, and John Kaminski. We have no certain proof about this, but our statistical and linguistic analysis tells us there is an estimated rate of 90-95% certainty that all these posters are pure fabrications and do not exist at all in the real world except in the incredibly “dark” imagination of the golem known as “Lasha Darkmoon.”

    Through a complicated network, the sexless entity known as “Lasha Darkmoon” is linked to a number of other notorious spreaders of lies, half-truths, disinfo, and psyops, viz., Gordon Duff, Mark Glenn, Jeff Rense, Henry Makow, Gilad Atzmon and Ariel Toaff.

    It all goes back to the son of Jewish rabbi, Ariel Toaff, the super-brain behind this criminal organization. This man has helped to whip up hatred against the Jews by saying Jews were engaged in ritual murder ever since the Middle Ages and even earlier. He has spawned this spider’s web of intrigue and mass misinformation.

    Turn to earlier threads on this site and what will you find? Entire posts quoting Toaff chapter and verse by the Darkmoon puppet known as “Lobro”. Why does “he” do this when there is not even a single article about ritual murder on this website? I will tell you why. Because “he”, his puppet threads pulled carefully by “Darkmoon”, is here secretly doing the bidding of his grandmaster Toaff.

    Yes, the grand master, Toaff, sits in Israel and orchestrates the whole show. He is the evil genius behind it all and is financed by the Rothschild family — the same family, incidentally, from which our good friend Ellie Katsnelson springs.

    The only difference is that Ellie K is a good Rothschild, a reformed Jew who is doing her utmost to bring down this edifice of evil known as the Rothschild Empire. And the entity known as “Lasha Darkmoon”, alas, is not cooperating with Ellie.

    This is because she, Darkmoon, is secretly in the pay of the Rothschilds. She is a Rothschild agent, pure and simple. The only reason Lasha invited Ellie to meet with her at 7 pm on 25 October in Claridges Hotel, London, for dinner and drinks, is that she intended to secretly administer poison to Ellie. Yes, a subtle poison that is undetectable and which always fools the forensic experts into claiming that the victim died of a massive heart attack.

    Fortunately, Ellie was alerted in time to this criminal stratagem of Darkmoon to get rid of her, which is why she turned down Darkmoon’s seemingly friendly invitation.

    BTW, I forgot to mention: all these people connected to Darkmoon are into ritual murder and homosexual pedophilia. They carry out child sacrifices in underground crypts posing as Christian celebrants. Now you know why Darkmoon knows Latin and is always quoting it. This is because she needs to know Latin for the Black Mass where the Pater Noster is recited in Latin backwards.

    All I have told you is true. I take my oath on it. I have no motive for lying. The sooner Darkmoon is outed as a dangerous agent for criminal Jewry the better.

    I doubt this comment will be posted. If it deleted, no matter! I have saved it for posting on another site.

    Death to Darkmoon and her evil ways!

    1. “I am lasha darkmoon!”

      “I am lasha darkmoon!”

      “I am lasha darkmoon!”

      A solidarity

    2. Ha-ha! The entity known as Lasha Darkmoon first poses as a Jessel, then as a Ravenna, and finally, having been uncovered as being her own sock puppet, he/she then deftly tries to downplay the attempted deceit by hinting that it had always been self-evident, you know, always there, as it were, if only you knew how and where to look. This is a common trick amongst the impostors: they first try to wheedle their way in, and then, having been caught, they cleverly try to belittle YOU, THE DISCOVERER, for not noticing it much earlier, after which, of course, they begin to talk profusely about themselves in such a manner as to render their immature little trick self-evident. But, what makes her half-clever attempt to pass off as another really clever, is the sentence at the end of her/his last post, where this entity known as Lasha Darkmoon says, ” I doubt that this comment will be posted!” Tra-la-la…!

      Also, notice how the other non-entities such as David Green, Pat, HP, Brownhawk, Ruth Bernstein et al., have not said a single word about this, and yet are unbelievably quick to demolish anyone whom they so much as suspect, let alone know, as being a sock puppet. Always, always I recall Lasha’s Darkmoon’s own description of them: ”semi-moronic apes, lemmings.”


      At no point has Lasha Darkmoon described any of the posters mentioned above as “semi-moronic apes” or “lemmings.” On the contrary, she thinks highly of these posters. Cornelius has no scruples in fabricating another quotation.

      Note that “Ellie K” fabricated a quotation about Lasha, putting words into Lasha’s mouth that Lasha never said. Note also that “Alan Merc”, another sock puppet of Ellie K’s and probably the same person as “Cornelius”, not only fabricated a quote from the New Testament but even ADMITTED he fabricated it!

      This is what these dishonest, less intelligent Jews need to do to wage hasbara. Lacking true scholarship, they fabricate their facts, their figures, and even their quotations.

      So, then, lemmings, I have just proved to you that you are a morbid and spineless lot, so up Lasha’s thick pudenda, that you no longer have the capability or the will to treat her as you would treat others, namely, fairly. I believe we refer to a lot such as you as COWARDS! In American, TOADIES!

      At least Ellie K., was neurotic from the start, spoke with her own voice, and made absolutely no pretension at being perfect or normal. In fact, she wasn’t normal. But Lasha, who is now Lucy Skipping, now Jessel, now Ravenna, now X, now Doctor of Classics, now not the owner of this site, now, as clearly written in the bottom of her website ”This is the website of Lasha Darkmoon,” now this, now that…., this entity is more unstable and unnormal than all the Ellie K’s and mercuries of the world put together! I believe she is long, long overdue for a good tumble, you know, just so as to disperse the cobwebs within her and re-align her dark and lonely psyche a bit, if you know what I mean.

      Lemmings, dogs, semi-moronic apes – do you hear?!

      ”Don’t get me wrong, I love Plato, but truth is dearer still to me.”


      It seems that the above quote by Aristotle may also have been fabricated. A quick check in the Google search engine yields the following message:

      Your search – “Don’t get me wrong, I love Plato, but truth is dearer still to me” [by] Aristotle – did not match any documents.

      1. Cornelius –

        You might need to clean your glasses.
        You stated, “Also, notice how the other non-entities such as David Green, Pat, HP, Brownhawk, Ruth Bernstein et al., have not said a single word about this,”

        Not a “single word” is CORRECT!! I posted SIX words in my comment about this, IN BOLD, and not just one.

        Look right above your post….. and you will see…

        October 18, 2014 at 1:16 am

        Damn…. I hate when that happens…!!

      2. For Lucy Skipping,

        ”Plato is dearer to me, but dearer still is truth.”

        MONITOR: Fair enough. But this is not the quote the unscholarly Cornelius gave. Which is why Google rejected his quote as inauthentic.

        This is Cornelius’s quote: ”Don’t get me wrong, I love Plato, but truth is dearer still to me.”

        Aristotle never said, “Don’t get me wrong.” Cornelius said that. Which is why Google, quite rightly, rejected the quote.

    3. lol

      arthur topham a sock puppet? arthur doesnt parrot the east v west hasbara … are you trying to destroy a reputation or rebuild one

      is mephistopheles catching up? dont worry about him … slow down … god is waiting


    4. my man, blow-whistler! i am officially retired and will only drop in to say hi to puppeteer, my favorite boss of all time, even better than the portuguese lady when i tried my hand one night worm picking for fishing bait at a local golf course.

      i got me shekel pogey tied up with all the retirement benefits, including semi-annual blood infusions, organ transplants in moldova, all free!!! (and i don’t accept no nigrah organs, gotta be blond nordic kids, i want video proof or else i blow whistle , i swear on the stack of shuchal ankhas or whatever they are called – need a remedial course now that i got time)

      and … just one more thing, you never know, i just wanna put a bit down by way of online insurance for lasha.

      should the blog be brought down for any reason, know that “any” means “only one”, One Reason to bring them all and in the darkness bind them In the Land of Kol Nidre where the Shadows lie.
      and lie, and lie, and lie, so help me G-d.

      at which point, just get back to the grindstone, move one, nothing to see here.

      1. lobro –

        “and i don’t accept no nigrah organs”

        You have no choice there. Your body would reject them. Not a fit. Big difference, not publicized.
        And the ebonites are too superstitious to donate them. Walter Payton could find no black livers and died.

      1. @ oswaldo

        “20 years is a long time. 20 years… so much could have been achieved.”

        I guess you are referring to this post above:

        October 17, 2014 at 10:03 pm


        “Let me lay my cards on the table. Though I am partly Jewish and sympathize strongly with the small band of valiant Jewish whistleblowers on this website who have been unfairly described as “Ellie K’s sock puppets”, I am myself in no way connected with this group. I am an independent investigator who has been closely following the internet career of “Lasha Darkmoon” for at least 20 years. I know more about this so-called “female” than any other other person alive today.”

        Allow me to tell you, dear Oswaldo, that the poster who calls himself “Whisteleblower” is an arrant liar. He couldn’t have been following Lasha Darkmoon’s internet career “for at least 20 years” for the simple reason that 20 years ago Lasha Darkmoon was still at school learning to read and write!

        Lasha’s very first article for the internet was published in 2008. She has been writing for the internet for only 6 years.

        Here is her very first article in 2008:


  30. Lucy Skipping,

    Here is Lasha describing her own readers on July 20, 2014. And no, the Aristotle quote has not been fabricated. Here is the link to the quote:

    Get your facts straight, Lady!


    Cornelius: You FABRICATED the opening words “Don’t get me wrong.” Aristotle never said that. YOU did! Which is why the Google search engine, quite rightly, rejected you doctored quote.

    Can’t you Jews ever quote anyone correctly? Why did you (i.e., your other Jewish sock puppet “Alan Merc”) have to fabricate that New Testament quotation? Are you Jews so incapable of intellectual honesty that you need to fabricate and doctor people’s quotes? No wonder you Jews are no longer trusted! You seem to lie as a matter of policy.

    Lasha, speaking on July 20, 2014,

    ”You have encountered here such incredible credulity, such infantile posturing, such paranoid impotence, that you need not fear that this degenerate race of semi-moronic apes without tails is ever going to get the better of you Jews! No way.

    ”Reflect, that the people you have been dealing with here are more intelligent and clued-up than the average member of the goyim lumpenproletariat. Many have graduated from universities. Some have doctorates. Yet even these, for all their superior knowledge, are mere children wandering in a maze of perplexities compared to the canny Jews.” Et cetera, et cetera…


    Yes, but you fabricated the NAMES OF SPECIFIC INDIVIDUALS! Nowhere did Lasha mention these specific names in the quote you give! You are just trying to make mischief with your typically Jewish divide-and-rule tricks. Lasha was referring to the Zionist trolls who are infesting her site: scumbags like you and your sock puppet gang of sickos!



  31. And the capper: a jew lectures about truth. He should have attributed the wise adages (as he sees them) to his dad, like he usually does. And what happened to that Ken Burns documentary, letters from John Adams tone? Maybe he should watch those again for 60 hours. They have a talent for aping others too.

  32. @ Ravenna

    Great poets satisfy our craving not to be alone… but still fail. Only friendship can achieve that.

    “As for a wound, it may be bound up; and after reviling there may be reconcilement: but he that betrayeth secrets is without hope.”

    Ecclesiasticus, 27:21 (Apocrypha)

    From here comes true friendship.

    And when all else fails, revert back to a haiku of a famous warrior-poet.

    A sword in a rose bush
    A cool breath against the cheek
    Who minds the world?

    1. @ oswaldo

      I don’t know what you’re getting at, m’dear. You have perfected ambiguity into a fine art. Too much poetry writing! The function of good prose is translucent clarity. Cut to the chase!

      1. ALICE: But what does your poem mean, dear Mr Madhatter? I can’t understand it!

        MADHATTER: You’re not meant to, ninny! The function of good writing is to conceal one’s meaning.

        ALICE: Is it…?

        MADHATTER: Of course. If a thing isn’t incomprehensible, it’s not worth saying!

        ALICE: In that case, you’re talking nonsense!

        MADHATTER: Why so?

        ALICE: Because you’re making sense now!

        MADHATTER: How dare you accuse me of comprehensibility! You need a good spanking, young lady! (Starts pulling Alice by her pigtails)

        ALICE: Ouch, I’m outa here! (Takes to her heels . . . and somehow arrives on Darkmoon site) Well, I never! Knock me down with a feather! Where am I…?

        LOBRO: (loomimg up out of the mist): I’m warning you, young lady, you’re on an anti-Semitic site! Beat it, or I’ll complain to the monitor and have you ejected!

        ALICE: Heeeeeeelp! Yoweeeeeee! Get me OUTA heeeeeeere! (Disappears up rabbit hole)

        LOBRO: (mopping brow): Whew! Good riddance! Girls in pigtails are real creeeeepy!

        — Alice in Wonderland (banned edition)

      2. lack of qualifications does not preclude input, does it.
        so here i go with my take on it.

        when friendship fails, sepuku (exit by caesarian cut).
        a plan recommended by simplicity of decision flow.
        the only complication, maybe not applicable to japanese culture is what if there are more than 1 friend.

        what would we orphaned sock puppets do, lying scattered on the ground like plastic rose petals?

  33. ACHTUNG! ACHTUNG! Person(s) posting as Oswald, Oswaldo, Oswaldee, Oswaldee the Queen, Jessel, Jessel Mayer, Ravenna – all these names are but sock puppets of Lasha Darkmoon. Please notice the flowing soliloquy between the seemingly two or more different posters, when all along it had been Darkmoon talking to herself.

    MONITOR LUCY SKIPPING: Is there something seriously wrong with your brain? Everyone knows that the poster originally known as “Alice Oswald” has changed her name OPENLY several times: Oswald, Oswaldo, Oswaldee, and Oswaldee the Queen are all the same person who can’t make up her mind what to call herself. I assure you this is not Lasha Darkmoon using five diferent sock puppets! Cui bono? Lasha has better things to do with her time!

    As for “Jessel”, “Jessel Meyer” and “Ravenna” being three other sock puppets used by Lasha, you really must be bordering on insanity to make such ludicrous remarks. Everyone here apart from yourself knows that Jessel and Jessel Meyer are the same person, not Lasha pretending to be two different people! And everyone here also knows that Jessel decided to change her name to “Ravenna” quite legitimately. After all, didn’t she announce this openly? “This is my last post as Jessel. Henceforth I am Ravenna.”

    I’d like to remind you that Alice Oswald/Oswaldo and Jessel/Ravenna have been engaged throughout in an innocent discussion of poetry. Unlike you and your obnoxious Zionist troll sock puppets, they have not been attacking Lasha Darkmoon and this website and trying to create trouble. They are serious posters and may continue to post here if they wish.

    You and your gang of psychopaths are no longer welcome here.

Comments are closed.