Poetry / Let me see

Thanks for the review. Criticism is welcomed. I will give your review an f- for creativity as well, because to the end that you were able TO criticize my poem it passed the creative-failure test. To fail would be to garner NO response  on the creativity from you. However. You DID respond, and therefore I would say it is necessary that I passed with at least a D for the creativity. To deny this would be to deny the reason I am using.  

Also, to stick it solely to grammar would be to argue (with your own words) that you don’t take into consideration the meaning the poem itself might have had, to either yourself, an audience other than you, or to the writer (i.e. me) and in that respect I have to say your review is narrow minded considering the point of this site is to assist others in writing/editing to an audience.  

Allright Michael, There’s a part on this poem where it sounds like you tried to justify many things at once, as if you were trying to just get it out there.

The tone is fine, but the ending of your artwork contradicts with the word “dialetic”.

Ask one of your friends to read it outloud, if they like it well then, I have no intentions to offend you in any way,  I feel creativity rushed to conclude the poem.

If you’re still mad at me, My apologies I don’t want you upset at me, Maybe if you review “I’m More Confused” it will help explain what I’m trying to say without offending in any way.

Go ahead destroy “I’m More Confused” I’d like to know how to make it better.

Oh, I wasn’t offended. Sorry if my response appeared that way. Yeah, I actually mispelled the word dialectic when I originally wrote the poem long ago (I wrote this when I was 16) but the point of the poem is an inner dialogue.
It is my observation of phenomena (both real- the spider, and imagined- the dragon) and then my deduction at the time of what has stunted human understanding and breadth. It’s more a promotion of existentialism and an embrace of imagination than anything else.
You are free to your own opinion, and don’t worry, one review isn’t going to make me angry. I just like responding to what people write about my work.    

thanks.

Maybe one day. I wrote this about two years ago, but i’ll certainly consider it.

Well…think of the spider as a metaphor for entrapment- cliche as it may be, and the last stanza as a stream of thoughts flashing by, based on such grand concepts as those 4.
It is meant not to have the same tone, glad you caught that =)

sorry, second to last, not last.

Thanks.
Oh, the last stanza is meant as a non-sequiter of sorts so I suppose it served its purpose in regards to how you reacted =)
Seeing as there is an intrinsic link between anxiety and fear, and only the fearful (those who possess fear of something) have fears, it stands to reason that anxiety is in part the consequence of fear. What it means is that those who are fearful of too much become anxious, and in their anxiety the over-anxious limit human progress. I would call it a call for existentialism rather than fatalism, because fatalistic thinking only leads to regress and I prefer responsible progress to anxious regress of civilization.

Thank you, that does very well explain it.

More of a rhetorical question but who prefers regress instead of progress?

I’ll let you do the research on that yourself.
However, be aware that the term progress I’m using refers to the advancement of science and human knowledge, and therefore in the context I’m using regress means trying to impose a willful ignorance on others in terms of limiting or abolishing alogether their reason in regards to certain areas of the scientific field- evolution, anthropology, etc.

Thanks.

Thanksm that is part of what I aimed for in writing it =)