[Rose Kelleher]

Finale

How you'd begin would never be the same;
at times you'd even face me for a while.
But always, in that drive before you came,
you'd flip me over, finish doggy-style.
Another funny thing: you'd never try
to steal a peek at me when I undressed.
I wondered if you'd rather have a guy,
if that was why you covered up my breasts.
Or maybe I was wrong, and you were straight,
but ex or mama used to yak, yak, yak;
you'd shove my mouth into the pillowcase
to face an uncommunicative back.
I haven't met her yet, your newest friend,
and yet I'd bet my butt about the end.

blank
blank
blank

This one makes me smile, and not just because it's so matter-of-fact about a sexual topic, or because the diction is so down-to-earth. I love the pillowcase/face rhyme, that just-right word "uncommunicative," met/yet/friend in L13 (lots of assonance here – coincidence, or brilliant matching of sound with sense?), that string of t's in L14 – yet/bet/butt/about – and the fact that the last two words are "the end," which not only wraps things up nicely, but ties in with the title. Oh, and the turn is perfect: "Or maybe I was wrong..."

Now that it's late and I'm tired and grouchy, though, I find I do have a couple of reservations. First, it's yet another bawdy-humor sonnet. An excellent specimen, but what I really admire, and rarely encounter, is a sex sonnet that's actually sexy. Robert Crawford's French Braids , for example (his poem, that is, not his hairdo): it's not explicit, it's all done with suggestion. Maz has a wonderful sonnet I'd have loved to link to, "Hippolyta on a Field of Linen," but now she's tweaking it again. Of course it's unfair to complain that a poem of Type X is not a poem of Type Y.

I also wonder if that faintly judgmental aroma I'm now picking up is just my imagination. Probably. Nevermind. Ignore me.

[Tim Murphy]

I really admire this author, but not this sonnet. I really enjoy anal intercourse (Eat kitty litter and die, straight boy!), but I don't enjoy writing or reading about it. Sorry. Rose justly compares it unfavorably to French Braids, and I have no problem making unfavorable comparisons of our efforts to well-known poems, whether on this board or the Deep End, where I have just very favorably compared David Rosenthal to Dick Davis, causing Maz to take umbrage. Bob Crawford and Kate Light are the two sexiest poets of my acquaintance writing, and this, alas, is clever, not sexy.

[Janet Kenny]

Ah, I don't think this is meant to be a sexy poem. It's a very clever human poem and very true to the experiences of many women. The last line is very funny and ties up the thoughts in the poem. It's not judgemental but addresses the deep incompatibility found in some sexual encounters. I think it's a classic.
Janet

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Huh. I didn't even think anal sex when I read this....doggy-style and anal are different - aren't they?

I agree with Janet.....it's that "shut-up and service me" attitude that kills women who've hooked up with men who just maybe don't have that high of an opinion of the "fairer sex" and look on them more as objects than people. By turning them over on their backs, they deny them their person-hood and turn them into non-entities. All backs tend to look alike, by refusing to look at your partner (most especially when it's consistant behaviour as this poem clearly states) you're demonstrating that you're capable of focusing only on the sex and not on the person you're having sex with - a small nuance, but an important one to a woman who fancies herself to be in love.

Besides when you're the one buried face down in a pillow you can't watch the television.

Lo



[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited May 07, 2008).]

[Roger Slater]

That's right, Lo. You can't watch TV or eat a pastrami sandwich. It's really unfair.

Though I don't think that doggie style invariably denies a woman her personhood, I'll avoid a nuanced discussion of sexual etiquette by pointing out that the speaker of this poem certainly thinks so, or at least, now that the relationship is over, is formulating a bitter complaint to that effect. And she might have a point since he would "flip her over" and force her mouth against the pillow case. It's the force and the disregard of her wishes that makes him a pig.

I'm with the camp that likes this poem. It's really not the least bit sexy or prurient, but more like an Alanis Morrisette rant.

PS-- Like Lo, I didn't think "anal" at all and wondered at first what Tim was talking about. But then I reconsidered the last line and I have to admit there's at least a hint to be found there.

[Tim Murphy]

A HINT???

Expensive and exquisite boy,
I have no gold, no jeweled rings,
but can't a poet share the joy
you sell to Generals and Kings?

Swords and sovereigns swiftly pass,
but lease those amber buns to me,
and I'll promise your peerless ass
nine inches of immortality.

--anon

[Anne Bryant-Hamon]

There are hints throughout the poem that the guy would prefer to be having anal intercourse (it seems), since the N. even speculates about it, wondering aloud if he'd rather be with a guy, noticing that he is not interested in watching her undress and also the mention of the covering of the breasts.
The poem definitely (for me) has an air of misogyny about it.
I think it's a pretty good poem if this was what the author was trying to convey. Surely a man who respects and loves a woman would not always prefer doggie-style intercourse and would ask her before flipping her over if she wanted to do it that way. Also, I don't think this is about actual anal intercourse, but the N. wondering if the guy 'he' would prefer that it was.

Anne

[This message has been edited by Anne Bryant-Hamon (edited May 07, 2008).]

[Laura Heidy-Halberstein]

Originally posted by Roger Slater:


Though I don't think that doggie style invariably denies a woman her personhood, I'll avoid a nuanced discussion of sexual etiquette by pointing out that the speaker of this poem certainly thinks so, or at least, now that the relationship is over, is formulating a bitter complaint to that effect.

I think it's the inevitability of the "turning over" that the speaker mentions here

But always, in that drive before you came,
you'd flip me over, finish doggy-style.

that takes a wheeeee-fun positional variation and turns it into a oh, oh there's something very wrong here weird personality defect.

So, yes, I agree with you, Roger, that it doesn't invariably deny a woman anything - but if it's consistant and if it's necessary to the man's functionability (is that a word?) to cross the finish line, then I do think there's more going on then purely physical positioning.

And just for the record, I still don't read anal sex into this. Not that it matters. It's just an interesting foray into the "what did the author really mean" realm. And wondering if it matters.

Lo


edited to add Cross-posted with Ann...and yeah, I can see a pondering on the possible desire for anal intercourse - but not the act itself having been committed.


[This message has been edited by Laura Heidy-Halberstein (edited May 07, 2008).]

[Rose Kelleher]

Surely a man who respects and loves a woman would not always prefer doggie-style intercourse

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

See, that's the judgmental thing I was talking about last night. Sexual preferences are not about morality or political correctness. They just are. Some people are just wired one way or another; this makes the light go on, that does not, it's just a physiological reality.

Roger's comment makes sense to me, though -- if he (the character, not Roger) was thoughtlessly ignoring her stated preferences, then yes, he's a pig. But really, we don't even know that for sure.

When I first read this sonnet, I laughed out loud, and I still think it's very good, it's just that the more I thought about it, the more I had doubts. It could be argued that this sonnet is not meant to be thought about quite so much.




[This message has been edited by Rose Kelleher (edited May 07, 2008).]

[Anne Bryant-Hamon]

I haven't met her yet, your newest friend,

I think the poem would be more effectively elusive if the line above had not included the gender specific "her" since all the lines that come before seem to be spelling out that the male in this poem has a problem specifically with women in general. But, it remains to be implied that the guy, even though he dislikes women for various possible reasons will continue to plow through more and more failed relationships with them. I like this poem because it speaks to a very prominent problem. There are and there has always been a great number of men in the world who, even though they like having sex with women, don't much like women in general. I think women have a similar/opposite struggle with hatred of men for their resistence to submitting to equality with women. The division of the human race into male and female IS the "curse" (IMO). Somehow there was enmity sown between the sexes from the beginning of Adam's race. Division always causes war, but apparently it was necessary. This poem has taken me into some profound thoughts on the human condition that I'd never considered in this particular light until now. That makes it a great poem for me. I've begun to wonder if homosexuality in both men and women springs more from a desire to be understood and respected as an equal than any other reason. I think it very well may be so.

A-