Join for FREE | Take the Tour Lost Password?
[x]

deviantART

 




Analyzing ethics is similar to rolling a
dalmatian in mud;
there may be black and white somewhere underneath -

but

all you see
and all they talk about
in the heat of the moment
is the chocolate lab
wiping dirt on the carpeted floor.
:iconsqueak-the-freak:

Author's Comments

Short, jokey poetry.
Again, the categories baffle. But there you go.

I'm taking a course on early twentieth century literature and we're struggling through Hemingway at the moment: the man hoarded words like they were lemons and he was a marooned navyman dying of scurvy. A boon to over-eager English teachers everywhere.

Hope your year is shaping up okay.

Comments


love 0 0 joy 0 0 wow 1 1 mad 0 0 sad 0 0 fear 0 0 neutral 0 0
:iconmasa-chan:
Wow, this is genius.

You're good at this poetry stuff, for real.
I totally dig the sardonic slouch of this piece.
Mmm, such delectable sarcasm!

Hhm, Hemingway. Good luck with everything. ;]
+fav~

--
Cuckuhim 'o 'ab him.
Wepeghim 'o 'abai him.
:iconm-v-d:
Really nice Squiffers.

I am really impressed with the way it sounds when read aloud. I know I tell you this often, but. You've got a real knack for pace and flow. (I may be a little envious of your skills! Hahah!)
:iconwhatsherface:
Hey! you're back to classes? :clap: I like this, the comparison is great. we started reading of mice and men, I'm only to around page4 but so far I really like it. how's life?

--
- You know your in trouble when you stand on your head and the world is right side up.
:iconquesoloco27:
An interesting comparison, but it works quite well. I love the first 3 lines after the "but" - they set up the comparison quite nicely.

Because it doesn't matter that it's black and white - all that matters is that it's getting the carpet dirty.
:iconmbryn:
A good description of ethics.

--
"Writers aren't exactly people...they're a whole lot of people trying to be one person." --F. Scott Fitzgerald.

"Writing is a socially acceptable form of schizophrenia." --E.L. Doctorow.
:iconpanda-vision:
Hey, for a joke you hit some pretty decent nerves there =O
It benefits from the brevity I think.

Maybe it was a fleeting silly thought for you, but even so you're talking about something reasonably serious, right? Ethics/etiquete, judgement/analysis and resulting double standards or hypocrisy, perhaps just a few possible connotations?
And sure, you've gone and wrapped it in a humorous scenario, but in any case you're still delivering the theme with a simple and constant metaphor. So the punch is short, the lines not convoluted, and you're reader has plenty of time and energy left to think about it afterwards.

Believe me, I sure did :P
:iconsqueak-the-freak:
Quiet, just getting back into the swing of things.
Steinbeck, eh? Exciting.
How far are you along now?

--
Should we talk about the weather?
Should we talk about the government?
:iconwhatsherface:
I'm just speeding along, I think I may have progressed to page 10! but it was midterm week so I had to study & couldn't read. Now I have 1 1/2 days to read it.

--
- Not blue, not green, not aquamarine...
:iconsqueak-the-freak:
I can see that!
Ethics has always fascinated me in the way that car crashes seem to some individuals. The idea that talking about a situation will change the outcome is simultaneously appallingly naive and endearingly optimistic. But it seems too often that even that simple exchange of ideas is out of our reach.

Loving your comments, incidentally. Your time's much appreciated <3

--
Should we talk about the weather?
Should we talk about the government?

Details

January 22
384 bytes
2.6 KB
100×100

Statistics

10
4 [who?]
276 (1 today)
0 (0 today)

Site Map