Quote:
Originally Posted by Trademark
Don't really know what categories to judge a topical piece on but Lar's verse was dope with the imagery and story line. I liked his verse much better and it was put together nicely. So props @ Lars
Other verse was okay, reason I didn't really like it as much as Lars' verse, is because. The beginning of the verse just seemed all over the place. I couldn't really make out what/where he was trying to go. Then it picked up and I started to get a sense of feel and imagery. But Lar's verse was nicely put together and painted a much better story Line, IMO. But I don't do topicals so, I wouldn't know what's dope or not, lol. |
I agree with this. A dead man verse is almost like a compilation of metaphorical one-liners. The problem I have, as you mentioned, is finding direction. I feel as though the content of his writing holds a lot of substance and wit, but isn't grounded to a topic, instead drifts off into a series of reflective thoughts that make his work entirely conclusive, opposed to depth and participatory value, leaving little to no room for interpretation. He sort of tells us the moral(s) of the story in greater details than the story itself. More swag, less objectivity. Abstract. Lateral thinker. That whole lack of capitalization and intentional broken grammar. I picture dead man as a person interested in the more grotesque nature of life. Semi-introverted and extremely specific. His sometimes over abusive usage of exotic & obscure words, I find, gains its aesthetic value from sound rather than syntax.
Lars, on the other hand, is the complete opposite of everything I just said. He's more the mathematician. Cold, formulaic, open-ended. The Armchair bandit.
Either way, I'm just a mid tier topicalist having a little rant. Both are part of the GOATs.