Page 1 of 2

To be or not to be

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:42 am
by alongtimegone
This morning I reread the lengthy debate, re Marty's poem The Dying, and its use of a word that might or might not, depending, be considered objectionable. In a poem I wrote recently, I have used the word buggered, certainly a word in some contexts, that could be (would be?) offensive. I used the word because it is one that the character in this piece would have used. In the opinions of members, is context the saviour, or is it just plain unacceptable?

All those scientific eggheads,
well they’re always temptin’ fate.
Let them enchiladas loose now
and we’ll all be buggered mate.

Thank you,
Wazza

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 9:44 am
by Bob Pacey
Tell em all to Bugger off Waz.


Not a problem Mate.

Bob

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 12:20 pm
by william williams
There are various words in the Australian vocabulary that to some may be uncouth but it is our way of speaking with out fear of insinuating what some people may or may not interoperate to be quite correct according to peoples views, eg country speech is often quite different to city speech though the gap is narrowing as each year goes by


bill the old battler

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 4:04 pm
by Neville Briggs
If you are referring to my post Warren, I hasten to say that it was intended to be about a word not about Marty's poem. He can say whatever he wants, I just choose not to do the same, for my own reasons, applicable to me.
Description is not the same as prescription. We hope. :)

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 5:57 pm
by alongtimegone
No Neville ... it wasn't at all about your post mate, or anyone else's specifically. In fact I'd have to go back to the comments to read what you said. It's just that a question was raised about the use of cuss words (for want of a better name ) and as I have used buggered in a poem I'll be entering into competition, and given its technical meaning, I was wondering if it were a word too far. Just looking for opinion. :|
Wazza

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 8:14 pm
by Terry
It's in pretty common use these days but seldom if ever with it's more vulgar meaning.
I'd say it's fairly harmless the way you have used it.

Go to any Bush Poets breakfast or similar and you'll hear it used often enough.

It's not a word I'd use in a comp poem myself, but doubt that it would raise too many eyebrows.

Good Luck with it Wazza.

Terry

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Wed Feb 19, 2014 10:57 pm
by Maureen K Clifford
Wouldn't raise my eyebrows but then I've worked in shearing sheds :lol: :lol: It's innocuous enoguh IMO - tame compared to some of the foul language that one hears today that is truly offensive.

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 5:28 am
by Bob Pacey
Seriously Wazza if someone takes offence at that they have the problem not you.


Our language is colourful and will always remain so .

Cheers mate

Bob

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 8:34 am
by keats
Year Wazza, tell the bastards to bugger off. Bloody arseholes! Almost makes a man want to swear!

Re: To be or not to be

Posted: Thu Feb 20, 2014 9:55 am
by alongtimegone
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Wazza