> On Oct 26, 11:09 pm, "Tom"
comcast.net> wrote:>>> On Oct 26, 11:28 am, "Tom"
comcast.net> wrote:>>>> "Erwin Hessle"
erwinhessle.com> wrote in message>>
>>
>>>>> On Oct 25, 11:20 am, "Tom"
comcast.net> wrote:>>
>>>>>> Erwin blusters like
>>>>>> A winter storm is squalling.
>>>>>> No fucking poems.
>>
>>>>> Erwin hears a cry.
>>>>> Only sounds of restless proles.
>>>>> Master throws them cake.
>>
>>>> Not bad, but you neglected one of the traditional elements of haiku,
>>>> which
>>>> is a reference to the season.
>>
>>> That's where you're wrong. You said yourself it's quiet around here
>>> lately. That's because it's off-school-season. And that's why you're
>>> restless. Hence the reference in my haiku. Q.E.D.
>>
>> Oh, you maintain that you *did* reference a season in your attempt at
>> haiku?
>> Where exactly?
>
> It's generally considered to be good form to read the paragraph you
> are replying to.
I did, of course. Your haiku attempt does not reference any season, not even
your neologistical "off-school season". Yet, you claim I am wrong in
pointing this out. Where in your haiku is there any reference to
"off-school season"? And as I pointed out in the line you chose to snip out
so that you would not have to account for it, the mere fact that it's always
some season or another does not mean that season is automatically or
implicitly referenced in your haiku. Ya gotta put it there.
>>> Apply some of that poetic license you were jabbering on about earlier.
>>
>> Don't plead for dispensation. You're no Catholic.
>
> So what? God loves all his children, as they keep saying.
Then plead for your dispensation from God. Only the Catholics use an
intermediary for such things.
>>> Lesson learned for Tom.
>>> Summer, winter, spring or fall.
>>> Erwin can't be beat.
>>
>> Better. But the seasonal reference is a lesson learned *from* Tom.
>
> Yet you agree with the sentiment. That's all that counts.
I applaud your adaptation in poetic form, following my instruction.
Sentiment is another matter. And it's not all that counts, since I'm
counting something else. It may be all *you* count, but that's just you.
Still, I won't argue your assertion that you can't be beat. Fortunately
for me, I am instructing you in the matter of poetic form, not beating you.
However, being a subject of the British Empire and a product of the school
system it has devised, it may be difficult for you to separate an
instruction from a beating.
