Poetism Commentary update: "Illusion"

I was just reading through one of my poetry notebooks and found two different dates on Illusion than the one that is listed on the site. The site lists it as March 18, 1996. My notebook has March 12, 2006 and February 17, 1997. I remember enough to know that the version on the site is the February 1997 version, but I can’t explain the discrepancy of March 12 and March 18. Again, I wish I had the original.

It’s funny that my revisionistic practices put the newest version of the poem on the site while retaining the original (?) writing date.

*Sigh* Aye chi monkey.

Posted by grassmonk on 9 Oct 2006 in Poetism Commentaries | No Comments →

Poetism Commentary: "I’m The Monkey"

The poem in question: I’m The Monkey

This is another poem of pure silliness, separated by just over a month’s writing time from the last one.

For a bit of historical context, this poem was written right around the beginning of the poetry unit we did in my English class I first referenced in this post. A few upcoming commentaries will have more details on the depths of agony my friend Ben and I endured during this particular time in class.

Some notes:

The site lists this poem as being written April 30, 1996. My notebook says simply “5/96.” It’s one of the few–perhaps the only?–one of my poems that I don’t have an exact date for.

“DKC” refers to “Donkey Kong Country,” the great Super Nintendo game. I’m not quite sure how a country lout would play it, as such, but apparently that’s how I do.

I still ain’t too chunky, nor do I yet have a tail.

I haven’t climbed a tree in a long time. When I was about 13 we had a great big cherry tree in our back yard that I loved to climb. We also had a really, really tall tree–I don’t know what kind. I remember one of the neighbor kids was climbing it once and he was almost at the top. He asked me if I would jump down to the ground from the top of the tree to save a family member. When I said I didn’t know, he boastfully declared that he would have no hesitation in doing so.

That struck me as odd, because if you break every bone in your body from the fall, what help are you going to be? The only way I could see to avoid a bone-crushing landing was to be a ninja, and if you’re a ninja, why are you up in a tree? So you can see my puzzlement at the neighbor kid’s logic.

Anyway, I haven’t climbed a tree in a while, but my little brother loves to climb trees. Maybe we’re both the monkey.

Posted by grassmonk on 9 Oct 2006 in Poetism Commentaries | No Comments →

Poetism Commentary: "Aye Chi Monkey"

The poem in question: Aye Chi Monkey

You know that expression "aye chihuahua!!"? I hate dogs. Other than that, this poem is just pure silliness.

In this stage of my life, "aye chi monkey" was a common phrase of mine, one that has lost its frequent employ over the years. I should reinstate it as a matter of policy.

A few notes on the poem:

The third to last line is the only one of the sets that doesn’t contain a variation of the word "yell."

The word "wench" can be hilarious, especially a wench yelling "aye chi monkey!" You know I’m right.

I have nothing more to add, except, "AYE CHI MONKEY!"

Posted by grassmonk on 9 Oct 2006 in Poetism Commentaries | No Comments →

France and "The Little Mermaid"

Watching the new DVD release of “The Little Mermaid” reminded me again that France is going to be one of the first places to burn at the end of the world.

Now, these two topics may not seem linked, but in my head, anything is possible, given enough Grasshopper cookies. Here’s the story:

“The Little Mermaid,” as I am sure everyone is aware, has a funny little song called “Les Poissons,” sung with a boisterous and somewhat overdone French accent. While I was in the shower singing it to myself (don’t ask) I remembered there is a controversial reference to God, i.e. His name is taken in vain. I also was thinking about the accent of the character and then I remembered the Merovingian from “The Matrix” sequels. I remember seeing an interview with Lambert Wilson, the actor, who is, indeed, French, and he said that he overdid the accent on purpose; he actually speaks English with a much softer accent.

Then I remembered when I saw “The Matrix Reloaded” at the cinema in 2003, and the string of cussing the Merovingian unleashes in French, and how big my eyes got when I heard it.

Which brings me to why France will burn: one of their common expletive phrases literally translates as “name of God.” Somehow I just don’t think God appreciates that kind of eye-winking fun-poking at the second commandment.

But I find it funny that the non-swearing French will employ a substitute phrase that literally translates as “name of a dog.” Those poor, poor Frenchies.

Back to “The Little Mermaid.” It was my favorite Disney movie as a kid, at least until “Aladdin” came out three years later. I still love it. It rekindled the Disney animation department and was followed with a string of greats throughout the 1990s, including “Beauty and the Beast,” the aforementioned “Aladdin,” “The Lion King,” “Mulan,” and “Tarzan.”

I love the music the most, I think, though my wife claims that I really just like the seashell bikini. I dated a girl just after high school who hated “The Little Mermaid.” I’m pretty sure that was one of the major factors in our break-up.

Posted by grassmonk on 8 Oct 2006 in Uncategorized | No Comments →

Mormons vs. Ex-Mormon Atheists

So here’s the story on the forum Illusion reminded me of.

A few days ago my cousin told me about tribtalk.com, which is apparently the online forum of the Salt Lake Tribune newspaper. They have a religious discussion forum, but what it actually consists of is about six individuals who argue with each other. Half of them are LDS and the others seem either to have formerly been LDS and are now atheist or were just atheists to begin with.

The formerly-LDS atheists are dedicated to exposing the dark history of the LDS church, ekcetra; standard anti-Mormon stuff, really. Some of their arguments may hold some merit, but the way they are presented leaves me quite unable to consider them valid. You know how you could say the sky is blue, and the sky is blue, but it comes out of your mouth, “The sky is blue, dumb***“? It’s like that, but sillier.

What I find funnier than people attacking their former church, however, are the defenders of the faith. Come on, people, your arguments are just as ridiculous as the other side’s, if not more so. Each side dodges questions, carries a self-righteous attitude, and claims to be open-minded while defining “open-minded” as “How can you possibly be right when I can prove my point by writing it on the internet?!?” (Unfortunately, it’s not a geek forum, so you don’t get to see comments punctuated with “1”s or “one”s instead of exclamation marks.)

So while I find it completely ludicrous that one of the atheists has filed a complaint with the FCC about the recent broadcast of the LDS General Conference—and apparently does so every six months, timed with each broadcast—and likened its content to child pornography, I also have to laugh at the response and overall exchange, which seemed to go something like this:

Atheist: “General Conference is evil. They may as well broadcast kiddie porn.”
Mormon: “So was it Word of Wisdom problems that started you on the path to apostasy? Tithing? A porn problem of your own?????”
Atheist: “It’s fits the FCC’s definition of obscenity: [cites definition from FCC web site and attempts to back up his claim].”
Mormon: “Seriously, did someone in Relief Society offend you or something? What’s your problem?”
Atheist: “I’m tired of paying taxes to subsidize my neighbor’s six kids’ public education and having to sidestep their strollers.”
Mormon: “You don’t just lose your testimony overnight. You really need to pray for forgiveness.”

Ad nauseum. A few things to note:

  • Yes, the guy really did liken General Conference to child pornography. Yes, he was serious, as far as I could tell.
  • Yes, he complained about his neighbors’ strollers.
  • No, he did not get all the apostrophes in the right places. That was entirely me, folks.

Now, I’m a firm believer in the LDS faith. I have read criticisms and suchlike of the history of the Church, Joseph Smith, ekcetra. If the Church ends up not being true, so be it. I believe it is, and God will smite whom He seeth fit to smite in the end. I just don’t want to be smited. Smitten. Whatever.

But do you have to feed the trolls, Mormon-guys-on-forum? Trolls come back to food. They’re like cats that way. (Cats are evil.) And do you have to be even dumber than they are?

There seemed to be a few level-headed posts on the forum scattered here and there, but the vast majority of them seemed to be just to fuel fires that were already gasoline-soaked, and the result of arson in the first place. Overall, the forum just provided comic relief for me, until I got bored, and disturbed at a few of the topics discussed.

Also, someone wrote “irregardless.” That’s always good for a laugh.

That’s my story. I’m going to bed.

Posted by grassmonk on 6 Oct 2006 in LDS | No Comments →