Stupid question: does "equivalence" have a special meaning in astro-physics or star biology or any other space science for which I am making up names? The poem is incredibly rich without understanding the title -- I sat here and thought about poor doomed little Lindsey Lohan and the nature of Mania/manic cycles and how they are like star cycles, and after exploding the bits will one day come together to make another star, and all these things... but I will say the title didn't do anything for me. In fact it seems almost wrong, the movement of the poem is this progression through time whereas "equivalence" is a very static, permanent word, and Being and Not Being are not Equivalent (unless you're saying they are). Maybe I am not a good representative lay-reader, though, and there is some science knowledge that makes meaning out of the title where I'm having trouble finding it. In any case, wonderful little punch in the gut here, Nina my darling.
The title was the last thing I wrote. It comes from the equivalence principle, which I don't really understand. I wrote this after I saw this korean documentary on cold fusion. The astrophysicists said that over time all will stars "banjak banjak" ("sparkle, sparkle") and then die. And that was the only part of the documentary I understood. I think what I first tried with the title was the idea that great things will always have greater deaths. Like, fair is fair? I don't quite like the title either. I agree it has too much weight for the poem.
I like the poem, but I really like the concept that the only part of the documentary was banjak banjak and then die. I feel like you could write an essay with that as a centerpiece that would be a real killer.
Let's just go ahead and say it: We Are Not AVerse is an online poetry collective. Now that the pretentious part is over, here's the meat.
We are a handful of young writers - some poets, some prosers - who had the good fortune of convening in one city and sharing each other's company for a few glorious years. We are now dispersed, but hope to use this blog (collective!) to share our work with one another and maintain some part of that communal spirit (of collective responsibility to supporting each other as artists).
Each respective work, obviously, is the property of its writer. So read and enjoy, but be kind and ask if you'd like to use anything you read.
Lastly, if you are visiting, please feel free to comment and participate in our discussions on art, life, fast food, and anything else. Try to keep it constructive, but really: we want your feedback!
Questions, comments, or feedback that doesn't belong on the public web? That's ok! Contact Dinah Finkelstein or Tim DeMay, we are very nice.
Stupid question: does "equivalence" have a special meaning in astro-physics or star biology or any other space science for which I am making up names? The poem is incredibly rich without understanding the title -- I sat here and thought about poor doomed little Lindsey Lohan and the nature of Mania/manic cycles and how they are like star cycles, and after exploding the bits will one day come together to make another star, and all these things... but I will say the title didn't do anything for me. In fact it seems almost wrong, the movement of the poem is this progression through time whereas "equivalence" is a very static, permanent word, and Being and Not Being are not Equivalent (unless you're saying they are). Maybe I am not a good representative lay-reader, though, and there is some science knowledge that makes meaning out of the title where I'm having trouble finding it. In any case, wonderful little punch in the gut here, Nina my darling.
ReplyDeleteThe title was the last thing I wrote. It comes from the equivalence principle, which I don't really understand. I wrote this after I saw this korean documentary on cold fusion. The astrophysicists said that over time all will stars "banjak banjak" ("sparkle, sparkle") and then die. And that was the only part of the documentary I understood. I think what I first tried with the title was the idea that great things will always have greater deaths. Like, fair is fair? I don't quite like the title either. I agree it has too much weight for the poem.
ReplyDeleteI like the poem, but I really like the concept that the only part of the documentary was banjak banjak and then die. I feel like you could write an essay with that as a centerpiece that would be a real killer.
ReplyDelete