Inspired War

[tectak]

You must use EFFECT and not AFFECT. AFFECT is the wrong word and both in the poem and in your explanatory perambulations you confuse by its use, as the reader does not know yet if your word skills are to be trusted. Lier, liar. How do we inspire those who lie to us? Do you mean "inspire"?

I agree, I could never figure out "affect vs effect". We inspire liars by rewarding them with fame, political power, and fortune.

The subjects you say you cover are immensely complex and need clear analysis, one way or the other, to make salient points. This kind of puzzle procedure makes you look a dilettante and it is your fault. As I say until I am bored with myself, once you admit that your poem CAN be explained it begs a question...why didn't you so do IN the poem?

I generally agree with you. I only posted the explanation because too many people couldn't make any sense of the poem (authors fault), I was just trying to clarify it so that I could get better critique.

I am still in catatonic shock trying to work out how a tool is a euphemism for a fool. Do you mean euphemism? In fact, do you mean tool?
Best and no hard feelings,
this poem is bigger than us both.
tectak

Tool is a pretty common euphemism, or slang. I also like the duality of it, in that the tool is also a tool used by the war machine. Im not sure what the hang up is. I feel you're being silly on this point.


No hard feelings, i appreciate your comments. If you had of written "well, how about that" I wouldn't learn anything.




I like the idea someone had of putting political figures in front of each stanza, I might play with that.

No. "Tool" is not a euphemism for anything...not under any circumstances...neither is it "common" slang, and even if it were it is out of context in this piece, being isolated by its singularity. Furthermore, you do yourself no favour by defending the interchangeability of "euphemism" and "slang". They are entirely and defineably different. The use of the word "tool" is comedic and almost an endearing term for a harmless and gullible idiot. It fails on that point,too.
As you think I am being "silly" I wonder do you actually mean "pedantic" one being a euphemism, or common slang, for the other...not.
You see, it is not that you use the word incorrectly, but that you argue for its use past reason...and so you risk credibility. The reader loses confidence in your wordplay and for any serious poet that is a disaster. You cannot assign new meaning to words in a random fashion. By all means write a piece with the sole INTENT of playing with words...though it has been done before...but don't try to fool anyone by pretending you know what you are doing when your arguement implies that you patently do not. In fairness, I believe you DO know what you are doing but you are making up this defence as you go along. Turn a tool, a page...huh?
Best intentions
tectak