steel
cable stretched,
torquing dangerously, squealing
silently within surface tension
hovering on the transparent edge
of action like a stalking predator
encased in glass, aware but arrested,
the crackle of synaptic lightning
illuminating typhonic thoughts of
frenzied kinetic release,
thunderful need
denied.
A contest entry
- Give Me Emotion by DemonicChanel420.
500 points, ended November 24, 2008, 16 entries
• next poem in this contest, remove from contest
Comments
1 - 7 of 7
-
"denied." that one word changes the whole aura of the poem. and i felt it sting. i think your poetry tells a lot about you as a person: not only are you an excellent writer, but you're very biologically aware, and you use your acute understanding of science to illustrate that which is the perfect opposite of science: emotion. very effective, and fascinating.
-
-
Interesting interpretation. I disagree slightly with the premise... Science and emotion are lovers, not opposites. No science could happen without passion. Bad science comes from people thinking *or* feeling. Good science comes from people thinking *and* feeling.
-
-
I have to disagree with you though. Because love does not agree with science. It can't be explained. It is illogical and unpredictable; it follows no laws and has no limits. Science is limited to what we as humans can think to comprehend.
-
-
Love is one emotion. And we humans, like everything else, are capable of comprehending, and doing, a whole hell of a lot more than we are currently aware of.
Incidentally, I think all the scientists studying love would beg to differ. There may not be "limitations" on love, but there are observable traits and patterns. There is data to be collected and analyzed, interpreted and sorted and shared.
The quantum level is not immune to scientific study, and it's at least as strange and seemingly incomprehensible as love.
And honestly love doesn't strike me as any different from any other emotion. All emotions are limitless and lawless. -
-
Love differs from other emotions only in the sense that it is more constant than they. But I don't think any emotion is scientific, although the concept of emotion itself is. I honestly know absolutely nothing about quantum levels, but if love were scientific, would it not be measurable or documentable? Could you not define it accurately? I have never come across any clear-cut laws distinguishing love from lust or infatuation, or even just "like."
-
-
Just because you've never run across it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There's actually a lot of research into this area, and, with enough data, it *is* possible to come up with a unified definition of "love" as opposed to "lust" or "infatuation"; more interestingly, it shows how and why people tend to label their relationships as 'love' or 'infatuation' or whatnot. I'd go on but, honestly, there's a *lot* of it and I only remember it patchily. You'd do better doing your own research if you're interested. I have a book on the topic around here... I can dig up the title if you want. Also, a good Human Sexuality class will include a section on love and relationships which will discuss the latest research on love and emotions.
Everything is *potentially* measurable, if only as "infinite". The thing is, we just may not be using the right measuring criteria or looking at it the right way. Our brains may not be capable of doing what we're trying to do in some cases yet. But we'll evolve and things will change.
-
-
-
-
-
-
You used a lot of great imagery and the flow was really good too, it was very well written and all in all it was just a great write. Good luck in the contest!
Adding your comment:
1 - 7 of 7
