Netcees - View Single Post

Vulgar · 09-04-2014, 09:11 PM

This is what makes you, you, and I'm no psychologist but I've learned a couple of things about you through your writing. If I'm wrong, it's because... well, I'm wrong, so bear with me. You're a person who prides himself on his accomplishments and the books he's read. You believe in your religion so much that you've sought out science to mend the loose strands left by a sole doctrine - now you have some microcosmic ammo to back up your position/stance too. Mix these elements together and you have a piece that starts off with heavy vocabulary words in the first line, enough to make me wince, tbh. You recovered though and settled into the rest of the verse naturally. I have no qualms beyond, maybe the first three lines. I didn't like how you said "Just kidding" - I didn't know you were kidding to begin with, unless I'm missing a point of humor. The second line was honestly like a bad Star Wars movie and didn't fit with the rest of the content.

What I took away from the central theme was anomalies, similar to Neo's identity in The Matrix, being an exception to the rule of consciousness, being a glitch but not really a glitch, being a symptom of a system that's overdue for reboot or alteration. Mathematics, the scale of the universe, and even multiple dimensions. Anomalies being sent to destroy other anomalies I don't really get. Are you referring to metaphysical hiccups, messianic figures, contradictions or moments of deja vu, as those embattled anomalies? I didn't get that part. God being a mathematician in the cosmos, working in mysterious ways, but bound by the language of numbers? This is why I'm neutral about religion, because I consider the truth to be less simple than we predict it is; I feel it must be incomprehensible, but that's my view on it.

All in all, it was solidly written and you surprised me by controlling your inner urge to go on a vocabulary spree or interrupt the stream of your approach. I've seen your work take tumbles when you start going with multiple rhyme schemes and lose track (and lose the reader) by initiating a rapid tangent. Last interpretation: God is indivisible? I don't know. Thanks for the read, good work.

Keep doing your thing.

09-04-2014, 09:11 PM	#11
Vulgar Razor-thin derision Join Date: Jan 2013 Posts: 4,422 Battle Record: 40-25 Accomplishments - OM HOF Champed - Fight Night LIV - Gimmick Battle League (2x) - Write Week II - Art of Writing League - Storytelling And Topical Invitational Tournament - STI - Haiku Writer Challenge - GWL Picture Challenge(2x) Rep Power: 49604320	This is what makes you, you, and I'm no psychologist but I've learned a couple of things about you through your writing. If I'm wrong, it's because... well, I'm wrong, so bear with me. You're a person who prides himself on his accomplishments and the books he's read. You believe in your religion so much that you've sought out science to mend the loose strands left by a sole doctrine - now you have some microcosmic ammo to back up your position/stance too. Mix these elements together and you have a piece that starts off with heavy vocabulary words in the first line, enough to make me wince, tbh. You recovered though and settled into the rest of the verse naturally. I have no qualms beyond, maybe the first three lines. I didn't like how you said "Just kidding" - I didn't know you were kidding to begin with, unless I'm missing a point of humor. The second line was honestly like a bad Star Wars movie and didn't fit with the rest of the content. What I took away from the central theme was anomalies, similar to Neo's identity in The Matrix, being an exception to the rule of consciousness, being a glitch but not really a glitch, being a symptom of a system that's overdue for reboot or alteration. Mathematics, the scale of the universe, and even multiple dimensions. Anomalies being sent to destroy other anomalies I don't really get. Are you referring to metaphysical hiccups, messianic figures, contradictions or moments of deja vu, as those embattled anomalies? I didn't get that part. God being a mathematician in the cosmos, working in mysterious ways, but bound by the language of numbers? This is why I'm neutral about religion, because I consider the truth to be less simple than we predict it is; I feel it must be incomprehensible, but that's my view on it. All in all, it was solidly written and you surprised me by controlling your inner urge to go on a vocabulary spree or interrupt the stream of your approach. I've seen your work take tumbles when you start going with multiple rhyme schemes and lose track (and lose the reader) by initiating a rapid tangent. Last interpretation: God is indivisible? I don't know. Thanks for the read, good work. Keep doing your thing. Last edited by Vulgar; 09-04-2014 at 09:18 PM.