John-Keats.com Allowing Nonsense In Their Forums!!!

Morrigan said:
OH NOES!!!

Seriously, who cares? Woos are everywhere. Argue with them if you want but why should the JREF be informed and alarmed at this?

Quick everyone, let's make a list of every forum on teh Intarwebs that are heavily into woo!
Click to expand...
I'd expect to run into astrology believers in a typical forum, but John-Keats.com is a site dedicated to high poetry. It should be held to a higher standard.
 
-Fran- said:
To defend that with being a "large person" who contains many contradictions is kind of a rather lame excuse.
Click to expand...
The "Do I contradict myself" bit is a (well-known) passage from Song of Myself by Walt Whitman. My quoting it wasn't really a defense - it was just me being a smartass.
 
Last edited:
clerihew80 said:
I'd expect to run into astrology believers in a typical forum, but John-Keats.com is a site dedicated to high poetry. It should be held to a higher standard.
Click to expand...

Why would you "expect" to find fewer believers in a poetry forum? Do you have any evidence to show that the value of literature under consideration correlates to the level of stupid beliefs people hold? If not, your expectation is pure assumption.

Even better, how do you value the poetry? Why is Keats "higher" than other poets? Should fewer Keats forum members believe in homeopathy than Dylan Thomas fans? If so, why?

It looks to me as though you're guilty of a few beliefs with no evidence yourself.
 
Do you have any evidence to show that the value of literature under consideration correlates to the level of stupid beliefs people hold?
Click to expand...
The point is well taken. I suppose I assumed that anyone educated enough to read Keats in this day and age would have also absorbed enough scientific knowledge to be able to recognize astrology for what it is.

The Atheist said:
your expectation is pure assumption.
Click to expand...
Maybe so.

Even better, how do you value the poetry? Why is Keats "higher" than other poets? Should fewer Keats forum members believe in homeopathy than Dylan Thomas fans? If so, why?
Click to expand...
"High Poetry" is merely a literary term used to refer to poetry of large aesthetic merit as opposed to, say, doggerel or pedestrian verse. Dylan Thomas would certainly be included under the rubric of High Poetry although he is not considered to be of the same stature as Keats (personally, I am not qualified to make a distinction because, with the exception of "Do Not Go Gentle Into That Good Night," I am unfamiliar with Thomas's oeuvre.)

I would expect to find fewer homeopathy believers among readers of high poetry than among devotees of inspirational, new-age mush or homiletic religious verse, but I have no evidence to support my conjecture.
 
Last edited:
clerihew80 said:
The "Do I contradict myself" bit is a (well-known) passage from Song of Myself by Walt Whitman. My quoting it wasn't really a defense - it was just me being a smartass.
Click to expand...

I've read it, still... missed totally that you were quoting that. Does it matter?
 
Why do I keep feeling that I'm going to see someone soon sobbing on YouTube, "Leave Keats Alone. You wanna pick on Keats? You're gonna have to go through me!"
 
clerihew80 said:
The point is well taken. I suppose I assumed that anyone educated enough to read Keats in this day and age would have also absorbed enough scientific knowledge to be able to recognize astrology for what it is.
Click to expand...

Aha! We make progress.

I don't know many scientists, but I do know lots of engineers, who seem to be very much the same as scientists in many - very smart, logically-inclined, evidentiary approach, test/re-test - and very, very few of them have any interest in aesthetics at all.

For starters, what percentage of Keats forum members are women? It's very well established that astrology is overwhelmingly a female thing and I imagine that a forum dedicated to a poet kight have a high female content? Is it just that simple?

Anyway, it looks like your premise was wrong, so what to do about it? You've complained to the owners and they seem quite happy to link astrology to the forum, so you appear to be dead in the water. If a whole load of us sign up there and have a rant about astrology being the load of bollocks it is, the only real result I can see happening is that we'd upset all of those members and probably most of the others who'd see us as a bunch of meanies.

Is it really that important? Nobody's ripping anyone off, it's just a bunch of sheilas having a gossip.

clerihew80 said:
"High Poetry" is merely a literary term used to refer to poetry of large aesthetic merit ....
Click to expand...

Yeah, I knew all that, I was trying to establish whether one poet os more worthy of being removed from the realms of fantasy than another.

Poetry by nature is a very subjective kind of pleasure and I know more women than men who enjoy poetry. Blokes I know are far more likely to enjoy dirty limericks and the doggerel you mentioned. None of them are stupid.

(Do read more of Dylan Thomas, though)
 
The Atheist said:
I don't know many scientists, but I do know lots of engineers, who seem to be very much the same as scientists in many - very smart, logically-inclined, evidentiary approach, test/re-test - and very, very few of them have any interest in aesthetics at all.
Click to expand...
Blake's "Single Vision," eh? Or maybe all they care about is making money.

I imagine that a forum dedicated to a poet (might) have a high female content?
Click to expand...
Why would you imagine that? I don't know any women who are serious poetry readers. I've known some who pretend to be interested in poetry in order to make themselves appear deeper than they really are. That's women for you, though - all about appearances.

Blokes I know are far more likely to enjoy dirty limericks and the doggerel you mentioned. None of them are stupid.
Click to expand...
No, just shallow.
 
clerihew80 said:
Why would you imagine that? I don't know any women who are serious poetry readers. I've known some who pretend to be interested in poetry in order to make themselves appear deeper than they really are. That's women for you, though - all about appearances.
Click to expand...


If you choose not to use smileys to indicate sarcasm after this type of statement, people may get the impression that you are a misogynist. Just saying.
 
clerihew80 said:
Blake's "Single Vision," eh? Or maybe all they care about is making money.


Why would you imagine that? I don't know any women who are serious poetry readers. I've known some who pretend to be interested in poetry in order to make themselves appear deeper than they really are. That's women for you, though - all about appearances.


No, just shallow.
Click to expand...

Speaking AS an engineer, engineers do not, as a general rule, only care about making money. Not spending money, sure, but making it isn't a necessary and sufficent qualification to be an engineer. Yes, we are well paid for what we do, but we are by far not the highest paid profession.

Also, many engineers are interested in the arts, in general, and poetry specifically. Many of may cow-orkers are musicians of some ilk, many writing their own music.

Complexity said:
Don't blame Keats for this - he's blissfully dead.
Click to expand...
clerihew80 said:
No, he's not. In fact, he's holding his living hand towards you right now.
Click to expand...
I'm going to chose to believe that you mean this in a poetic sense. That his words are still available to us to read, interpret and otherwise consume. I will remind you that this is not a poetry forum, so using poetic language will get you misinterpreted, usually badly.

Now, to the OP. I have to echo the "who cares" sentiment. Unless you can show how the activities on some random forum that, AFAIK, only you frequent, affects this board or its members why the hell should we care? There is no evidence that a reader of "high poetry" is any less susceptable to fuzzy thinking than the rest of the population. Hell, as we've seen recently, even veteran skeptics can fall prey to woo-ish modes of thought.
 
The reference is to one of Keats's poems, "This Living Hand":


This living hand, now warm and capable

Of earnest grasping, would, if it were cold

And in the icy silence of the tomb,

So haunt thy days and chill thy dreaming nights

That thou wouldst wish thine own heart dry of blood

So in my veins red life might stream again,

And thou be conscience-calmed—see here it is—

I hold it towards you.


I didn't expect anyone to get it.
 
kmortis said:
Many of may cow-orkers are musicians of some ilk, many writing their own music.
Click to expand...
Which is bet is atrocious. Why is it that every male between 15 and 40 thinks they have musical talent?

Your "cow-workers" sound like spoiled, egotistical, overpaid brats. Just because their mommys and daddys put them through college, they think they're entitled to bray their pretension to the world.
 
Last edited:
clerihew80 said:
The reference is to one of Keats's poems, "This Living Hand":

<snip>

I didn't expect anyone to get it.
Click to expand...


I haven't read much Keats for the past thirty years.

I liked him when I was younger, but I've found several other poets who better challenge me and suit my needs.

I'll have to revisit Keats now that I'm older. I'm sure I'll appreciate him in different ways.

One of my favorite poets for the past several decades has been Richard Wilbur.
 
clerihew80 said:
Which is bet is atrocious. Why is it that every male between 15 and 40 thinks they have musical talent?

Your "cow-workers" sound like spoiled, egotistical, overpaid brats. Just because their mommys and daddys put them through college, they think they're entitled to bray their pretension to the world.
Click to expand...

I love nitpick posts on spelling or grammar that have glaring typos of their own. (Which is bet is...)

More important, though, is why you'd make such an assumption about the cowo-rkers. Do you know them? Do you have anything to go on other than some artsy fartsy assumption that someone not starving in an attic has no musical talent? Do you have any idea of the number of very talented but not professional musicians holding down "normal" jobs? Can you cite statistics on that for me?

I don't really care for Keats, by the way. Oh, his work is okay... but I'd far rather read, say, Dylan Thomas or Wm. Blake (just to pick two of many who I prefer to Keats). And therefore, to stay on topic of the OP, I don't really care if a couple of Keats fans meander off into a discussion of Astrology, and I'm certainly not going over there to join the crusade.
 
Foolmewunz said:
I love nitpick posts on spelling or grammar that have glaring typos of their own. (Which is bet is...)
Click to expand...
I wasn't picking on his spelling or grammar. I just found the unintentional neologism humorous.

Do you have any idea of the number of very talented but not professional musicians holding down "normal" jobs? Can you cite statistics on that for me?
Click to expand...
I work in bars and nightclubs. I meet musicians, most of whom work day jobs, on a nightly basis. Most of whom, incidentally, are not very talented. So, while I can cite no statistics, I can well attest that the number of deluded or oblivious nincompoops is enormous.

And therefore, to stay on topic of the OP, I don't really care if a couple of Keats fans meander off into a discussion of Astrology, and I'm certainly not going over there to join the crusade.
Click to expand...
Fine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom