I
When he enters the town–
Is it Jerusalem?
With thorns stuck sharp in his crown,
spare a thought for his ass.When he crosses that bridge
all the light bulbs explode–
even the one in the fridge,
in a splintering rain.
II
An atheist half-Jew
and a sceptic too,
I know squat about JC,
but I remember that donkey,
all sweetness and bite.
Bottoms up and etwas Sachertorte all round;
Just a raw carrot for me, said Zarathustra,
from the high moral ground,
sitting there with flypaper
waiting for his ideas to stick.
A Ladybird.
The first book I ever bought
was hardcover
Ladybird
called Ned, The Lonely Donkey.
That would be Der Einsam Esel in German
the language of Nietzsche,
who made his own sensibility the measure of all things,
and spoke about himself in the name of Zarathustra.I've always had a thing about donkeys–
and so it seems, does Zarathustra
like Ned
leaves home in search of friends.
Guided by the twittering wisdom of an owl,
Ned tries a number of alternate lifestyles,
until 52 pages later,
Ned, the lonely donkey finds happiness
with Timothy, the lonely boy.
It takes Nietzsche 297 pages to walk off into the sunrise.
III
You can hear a donkey's hee-haw
over 3 kilometres away
or so they say.
IV
The First World War depended on the mule.
Since then, various politicos have tried
to pin the Aussie values tail on Simpson's donkey,
a beast
by the name of Duffy.
V
Saint Francis, Aesop, Sancho Panza
Winne-the-Pooh, George Orwell, jackets and work
associate all with Equus asinus.
Ditto King Midas of the golden touch
in another myth
Pan and Apollo have a musical play-off
the judge says Apollo's the winner
Midas says no
so Apollo gave him donkey's ears.
Midas tried to hide them under a steep-sided hat
but his barber knew
and his barber knew
he was a chatterbox
so he dug a hole, whispered the secret into it,
and layered earth
over the top.From this spot within a year
sprouted reeds that murmured:
Midas has the donkey's ear–
each time the north wind blew.
VI
Then there's Chesterton, G. K.
with his blood-moon moments
of anti-Semitism
critics say we should understand
in the context of his time–
and his time was the nineteen-20s and 30s
and they were nasty times
to be a Jew.
VII
After Ned
I read
Robinson Crusoe,
the story of a lonely man.Jesus meanwhile has got off his ass
and is doing something
with the chickens that count
the horse in midstream
and the fish
in the plentiful sea.
VIII
Nietzsche is the man who said
God is dead
Which makes Jesus just another random bloke.
Nietzsche is the man who said
Get a-head
Be an Übermensch
Change the light-bulb, get the joke.
IX
Last night Googling around
I hit the wrong key
missed the donkey
and ended up at Lego For Adults:
How to build a working gun with Lego.
I'm not kidding.
Bang, bang–
You're dead
God is dead
but Zarathustra is still talking
the hind leg off the proverbial.
I picture him scrawny and stoop-shouldered,
sharp nose and not much face below.
Nature made her point
then lost interest,
leaving his face to dribble
back into his neck.
His favourite sound is the gasp
as the rubber lips of the fridge door unstick.
He leans into its cold air
and there's his hairy ass …
and the carrot at the wrong end of the donkey.
31.0: EPIC
Poetry Editor Ali AlizadehReleased 1 December 2009
Index of Poems
Cover image: Eddy Burger
Our thirty-first issue was suitably gigantic, with poetry editor Ali Alizadeh selecting a wide range of epic works. Read his editorial, then check out the craziness of the sequel, POST-EPIC.
Another boring poem. Can't anyone do anything interesting? And who decided to publish this crap?
A raw, toungue-in-cheek collage. an absurdist looking in the literary mirror – terse lines wrenched out of the mirror, naked, unadorned. Absurdism is a very sane response to the short-circuiting board of meaning.
Justice, by the way, do you actually have anything to say, beyond 'crap'? nothing wrong with 'crap', just the inane way you use it…
jaja this is really a pretty appealing poem
Hi Shwarmer,
while we're flattered to receive so many comments from you in such a short space of time, it'd be great if you tried to restrict yourself to one at a time!
Thanks
Sorry, but why? I find this a weird and quite creepy restriction. Do writers want feedback or not? Do readers wish to contribute to a dialogue on poetry? Is this not the beauty of new media blogs? Have I been unjustifiably abusive or rude? Have I written too much or too little? Don't worry, I won't write again; I will only say that such an editorial suggestion seems conjoined to a fantasy of control, and not to comment or community.
You just don't get it do you 'schwarmer'? People are interested in reading fair and intelligent comment and not have their experience blighted by snide remarks from some goblin in the corner hiding behind a ridiculous moniker. Let me guess, you submitted a little poem of your own but were told it wasn't good enough? That's just too bad.
Hi again Schwarmer (sorry for misspelling your handle previously), it's not a question of being controlling or whatever – it's just that after 13 comments from you in a row, claiming to be contributing to a 'dialogue' is a bit rich.
Joshua, ridiculous monikers are okay by us – as long as those who use them are prepared to be critiqued in turn …
Quite right. I'll be sure to keep this in mind the next time I am using a ridiculous moniker.
cordite i think you were a bit harsh on schwarmer. its not their fault if other readers dont post comments, & its not as if the 13 posts were commenting on one thing. dialogue is a hard thing to get going in a context such as this – a literary one – & it is the idea perhaps of dialogue that schwarmer could be said to be contributing to – dialogue being a (virtual) analogy rather than something that actually happens in places like cordite (as opposed to say chat rooms..(tho this is another metaphor)). schwarmer was dialoguing with 13 posts by others – not 'saying' 13 things to a post. which might well be the basis of a poem – as might 13 things said by a post (i dont mean youre a post schwarmer) like a recent poem in the age virtually was i believe .. i think its a bit unfair that you seem to support joshua's styling of 'schwarmer' as a ridiculous moniker, and that you have another go at schwarmer in that post as if schwarmer wasnt prepared to be critiqued. schwarmer did fly off the handle a bit – their 'why' was perhaps initially sufficient – but you didnt critique their posts in terms of substance rather their right to exist which is a bit different. this does seem to be controlling – you are cordite after all, not just another reader. i dont understand why joshua said why he said or why you seem to be tolerant of his post when it seemed uncalled for, whereas shwarmers posts seem relevant . cordite i think you should apologise and ask schwarmer to come back
im sorry that my post is commenting on other posts rather than the epic issue itself (see – fences are themselves a community)
Hi Michaelf,
Thanks for your comment. I agree absolutely that dialogue is a hard thing to get started online … and we're happy to keep trying, even if I get it wrong sometimes.
But first let me say that if anyone is controlling this situation, it's the authors of the poems, including Noëlle, who elected to open their posts to comments in the first place. This is a very delicate line for us – it's not that conventional for poets to open themselves up for critique this way. I definitely don't want to be seen as an overbearing moderator …. but somebody has to do it!
schwarmer's comments were neither moderated or deleted; schwarmer's IP address was not banned or blacklisted. all of those 13 comments are still there. And while it may seem like I came down too hard, not once was it suggested that anyone should *stop* commenting. I'm not convinced however that 13 comments by the same poster constitutes a dialogue – but of course I'm not the governor of dialogue either …
Just one other thing, though: when I was responding to Joshua's point about monikers, I was not necessarily agreeing with or justifying that position – merely trying to point out that we actually don't mind people posting anonymous comments. That means anyone is free to post under whatever moniker they like.
The alternative to anonymous comments is that everyone who wants to comment has to register, log in and then comment. Personally, I think that would really stifle any discussion, dialogue or conversation on the site – but I'm happy to hear other views on the matter …
David
Balaam was a magician sent by the king of the Moabites to pronounce a curse on the Israelites as they entered the Jordan Valley. As Balaam was riding his ass through a vineyard the beast three times refused to go forward and was three times beaten. Then God opened the mouth of the ass and she said to Balaam, What have I done unto thee that thou hast smitten me these three times? Balaam then decided to bless the Israelites instead of cursing them. When the king protested, Balaam prophesied that there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel.
The ass on which Christ entered Jerusalem was said to be descended from Balaam's mount.