What is a poem.

[Zondrae]

I did say I am/ was under the influence ....

I had in mind hewn as in 'cut from'. hank you for the correction. I'll have to go back and see what I put there.

OK Maureen I'll give you this one. I suppose the sculptor had the 'tear' form as a kind of tangible metaphor. But, as with a piece of good writing, .. if you have to explain it, perhaps is isn't.

Now, as the drugs are wearing off, I'll go get a heat pack. Any suggestions Dr Steve? (How do you spell Torti collies?)

[Glenny Palmer]

I think what Neville is referring to is what I call....'Documentary' writing as against 'Lyrical' writing.......? I know which I prefer.

[Stephen Whiteside]

Yes, but if you go out of your way to deliberately write in a 'lyrical' rather than a 'documentary' way you are probably going to end up with something that sounds overwritten, self-conscious and dull. Surely the key is to write as spontaneously as possible, hopefully with passion, or humour, or some emotion, and hope that you finish up with something worthwhile. Both 'lyrical' and 'documentary' writing have their place - as do many other styles - and all can be good or bad, depending on how they're done. Too much planning and forethought can kill things.

[Stephen Whiteside]

Torticollis.

[Stephen Whiteside]

Plenty of water.
Plenty of rest.
Plenty of aspirin (unless you're allergic to it).

[Stephen Whiteside]

By the way, Neville, I don't think writing to a 'high standard' is going to blunt any criticism of bush poetry. Most of these critics, in my experience, have strongly held opinions and closed minds, and they regard bush poetry as bad by definition - the quality of the poetry has nothing to do with it.

[Wendy Seddon]

My Sad Peppytweak - more kid friendly - no nightmares here!

[Stephen Whiteside]

That's a very large head for a very small animal. The brain case looks especially large. I'm not sure how such a small body could support it in the air.

The wings look undersized to me, but I still don't see evidence of sufficient paraspinal musculature to support them. That's a very thin body.

Also, what does the creature stand on when it is not flying? Its arms? Do they double as legs? The joints attaching them to the torso appear to function as shoulders. This would make them pretty unstable for the purpose of weight bearing, I would have thought. Also, they're positioned too far forward. The tail would drag - unless the animal had the ability to lift it high, but that would consume a lot of energy.

It looks very cute, though.

[Stephen Whiteside]

Kids might like it, but it would give any self-respecting comparative anatomist nightmares!

[Neville Briggs]

Marty that sounds sensible and to the point. I was just a bit disappointed that the thread was lost so quickly, I know we are bound to stray eventually. It always happens.

Have to go, I''ll read the others later.