"Regulate" is the euphemism for "profit from" in most cases and it's well under way, John. Internationally too. I can't imagine any place where the law is more addle-brained than here though.

Only one example (as I'm sure you know): Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, where the US Supreme Court decided that the First Amendment prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures by corporations and unions.

And unions are a mere shadow of their former selves, so the most profitable corporations have become major threats to fair elections.

Never mind blogs and the Internet, John. At Hyde Park Corner, you can still say things that, anywhere else, would have you hanged for treason.

At least, you could the last time I took my soap-box there.

Oddly enough, my research has just found the first publication of Betjeman's other bomb poem (In Westminster Abbey) - in New Statesman on 23 September 1939, under the pseudonym Archibald Oldys!
Bill

It can't have been a competition entry though - too long.

At least in that one it's the enemy who are to be bombed, albeit on the plea of a selfish, snobbish 'lady'.

What an entertaining thread. I've just read it all in one go (having been AWOL for some time, for various reasons. Did anyone miss me?)

Frank's entry is excellent, others too.

It's great to be back here. All the "D & A people" in one room would be such a hoot! :D

Jayne

Yes we did miss you Jayne! Welcome back. I hope the renovations went well.

Thanks, Mary. It escalated from just renovations (did I really say just ? ) to a month's illness, plus two family crises...

... but, as my husband likes to remind me: "What can't be cured must be endured."

Notwithstanding everything, I couldn't stay away from my lovely friends, like you, any longer! :)

Jayne

We all missed you, Jayne. Welcome back.

John,
Maybe the trick is to write of an event as if the N was in some distant future age, reflecting on the past; which is the method of many science fiction writers.

For example;

When neutron bombs hit Washington
A public service had been done;
No bureaucrat, not even one
Remained alive.

No pulsing neuron did remain
Of any legislative brain;
And, joining the untimely slain -
Judicial jive.

The White House of the President
Contained no breathing resident.
The city seemed so hesitant,
With no one home.

No longer swaying world events,
Its bronze and marble monuments
Stood as a ruin not equaled since
The fall of Rome.

If the task is "to re-write Slough," does that imply you stick to the AAAB CCCB rhyme?

I've reserved my ire for Killarney but not in that rhyme scheme. Should I re-write?

Peter,

Firstly, a warm welcome to Eratosphere, and especially to D & A.

There are no hard and fast rules, as such, for The Speccie comp (apart from 16 lines max and keeping to the theme), though to "re-write" a poem would seem to indicate that a parody is called for, in my opinion. But you don't necessarily have to keep to the original rhyme scheme!

I would suggest that you submit your Killarney entry as it is; you can always offer Lucy an alternative version as well :)

Good luck.

Jayne

Peter, Multiple submissions are not only in order, they increase your chances of winning. Don't forget to use an alias but alwy give your own name and address.

Based on my own losing and winning experiences in comparable comps, I'd bet that all the prizes will go to poems that replicate Betjeman's meter and rhyme scheme. (If I'm wrong about what the judge is looking for, it won't be the first time. That's why I have losing as well as winning experience to draw on.)

I'm sure you're right, Chris, that a Betjemanesque version is called for here.
"Slough" has such a distinctive metre and rhyme scheme that I can't really see that a re-write could be done in anything other than the same ones.

But you never know...

Nothing in life (or poetry) surprises me any more! :rolleyes:

Jayne

Well, I hope there's a bit of leeway. I stuck to the rhyme-scheme, and to the metre, except that my fourth lines were slightly longer than the original 4-syllable ones ... I used an extra foot, in which I may have shot myself.

(This seems a good opportunity to have another go at my bete noire)

Come, friendly bombs, and fall on Gates,
The man whom every user hates
For putting us in desperate straits -
Admit it, you do!

When Windows hits the “screen of death”,
We grit our teeth and hold our breath,
Or growl some Luddite shibboleth
And turn to voodoo.

A little figure made of wax
Impaled with pins or carpet-tacks;
Yet somehow this solution lacks
A proper blitz.

So tumble, bombs, your goal awaits,
Obliterate his solid states,
And, like his software, let’s see Gates
Reduced to bits.

Brian,
Brilliant! This ought to win first prize.

Yes, nice one, Brian. Love 'Luddite shibboleth'! (Capital L as from name Ludd?)

Slight stumble in Line 4?

D&A is the best board on the Internet. What a collection of witty, lovable, laughable. disrespectful. international TALENT.

Well, of course it is. The trouble is they are all so bloody brilliant I can never get a winner these days. In particular the blessed Algar and his many aliases (mutter, mutter, mutter)

Thanks, Douglas and Jerome.

Capital L duly applied, Jerome. The apparent stumble was a question of emphasis, now made explicit:

Admit it, you do!

Thanks to all for the advice. Maybe I'll leave Killarney for now. Would I get away with the non-rhyming fourth line below, or am I being a bit too smart?

Go, friendly bombs, and rain on Seoul
and everywhere from pole to pole
not under the direct control
of Kim Jong-un.

The world will pay for its aggression
towards our freedom of expression.
There’ll be no mercy or concession
from Kim Jong-un.

Our glorious guns will raze the earth
from north to south and round its girth,
provoking most magnificent mirth
in Kim Jong-un.

Then our benevolent paradigm
will rule unto the end of time.
No mortal word is fit to rhyme
with Kim Jong-un.

Maybe if I submitted under the alias Kim Jong-un?

I like it, Peter! Actually, it's not true to say that the fourth line doesn't rhyme, but rather that it's the same rhyme every time - appropriately enough for a depiction of monomania.

My only quibble is with the metre of this line:

provoking most magnificent mirth

How about this?

provoking most stupendous mirth

("Benevolent" in the last stanza has a similar problem, but in a much milder form - the contraction "benev'lent" is quite common, and to my ear perfectly acceptable.)

Peter,
This is very good. I have a South Korean friend, who watches South Korean TV on Dish Network, and this guy is always made out as a real nutcase ... even more so then in our media.
Perhaps you might consider substituting "my celestial" for "our benevolent", since Mr. Kim seems to think that he is equivalent to some ancient dynastic Chinese emporer.

I second Douglas's suggestion, though I think "our celestial" would be better. And it makes a nice foil to "mortal" in the penultimate line.

Welcome aboard, Peter. Ingenious piece. I think Brian's point about the appropriateness of the identity rhymes is very good.

In any case, you provide a relevant justification in the last stanza.

I would guess that 'rewriting' means produce something that has some recognisable relationship to the original and you've kept the distinctive AAA CCC four foot lines.

You have one set of feminine rhymes, whereas my entry had three. I just don't know whether this departure from Betjeman's exclusively masculine rhyme scheme disqualifies or not, but I wouldn't have thought so, as the other Betjemanian markers are there.

For a fraction of a second I thought you'd added a new twist with 'Seoul' as an anagram of 'Slough'. Nearly - maybe one of the medieval spellings?

Good luck to us all.

Many thanks to all for the welcome and the feedback. You are quite right - both magnificent and benevolent jar.
Our celestial is much better. Thanks!

I don''t se why you haven't got a winner here. At any rate it's in the frame, particularly after Brian's amendments. Make use of your Roget to find the words that scan best.

Yes, nice one, Peter!

Just wondering, though - it seems a tad clichéd to say unto the end of time when the rest of the language is up-to-date; wouldn't "until the end of time" do just as well?

This is so original and unusual that I hope you get a prize for it :)

Jayne

So, summing up the various suggestions you've received, the last two stanzas could be:

Our glorious guns will raze the earth
from north to south and round its girth,
provoking most stupendous mirth
in Kim Jong-un.

Then our celestial paradigm
will rule until the end of time.
No mortal word is fit to rhyme
with Kim Jong-un.

But as John has sometimes remarked, why on earth are we trying to help you to beat us? I can only put it down to the sheer magnanimity of spirit that prevails on this site.

It matters not who won or lost
But how they played the game.

Or however it goes. Why you have not won money in that competition, Brian, I cannot imagine. But then there re those who suppose that X, Y and Z are poets whereas....

Too right, Brian. We are exceedingly generous, helpful, NICE people, here - and if anyone dares to argue with that I'll smash their face in.

Jayne

To say "It matters not who won
Or lost" is, frankly, tosh.
What counts, when all is said and done,
Is: Did you get the dosh?

On does grow tired of being whipped.
My partner "Gerald" has often quipped
that masochists lack all discrimination.
I'l confess: any time, any nation
I'm up for some maso-flagellation.

But now the whole country can scream,
twisting and writhing: an S and M dream!
Just hearing a jet as he soars over head,
I pray he'll drop it right into my bed,
a juicy Brucy to light me bright red!

Here's my last-minute attempt. Since it doesn't abide by the sensible advice earlier in the thread, to stick to Betjeman's stanza-pattern, it's maybe not in with a chance, but I enjoyed writing it anyway.


Come friendly bombs, and fall on Albert Square,
Where life becomes more cheesy than Gruyere
As scripting hacks probe lazily the 'issues'
That get the simple reaching for their tissues.
Fall, bombs, on matriarchs and feckless men,
On Beales and Butchers, Mo and Dot and Den,
For all speak clichés from the cheapest shelf:
'Babe, he ain't worth it,' and 'Don't blame yourself.'
They whinge and weep, and have affairs, and fight,
And (arguments being easiest to write)
Spend half their lives in crass factitious quarrels,
In plotlines patly pointing P.C. morals.
So fall, bombs, fall, till not one single brick
Remains of that unlovely hole, the Vic.
Then, when the devastation is complete,
Head northwards, please, to Coronation Street.

And I enjoyed reading this, George! First class demolition job! It meets Mary Mclean's unease about wishing bombs on real places too. Hope it confounds the cautious 'stick to JB's metre and rhyme-scheme' approach and scores with Lucy as something out of the usual path.

I don't see why it has to stick close to Betjeman. She doesn't say so. You're right about Albert Square, George. Kill them all!

Oh, that's brilliant, George! It echoes my sentiments exactly. Watch Eastenders? I would sooner take out my own appendix with a spoon!

Here's my last-minute entry: I must point out that not a single word of it is true!

Come, friendly bombs, and fall on he
who chose a life of misery,
not for himself, of course, for ME!
His lawful spouse.

At first he seemed the perfect mate
but I did not have long to wait
for love to die. I came to hate
the awful louse.

But he’s in for a mighty shock –
I’ve pulled the plug; no more wedlock
for me. Ha! How his friends will mock.
His wife’s turned gay.

So, hit him with another shell
and send him to his private hell.
I love her, she loves me as well,
OK? Oh, Kay!

I enjoyed your piece, George, although I have to say (and am thankful to be able to do so) that with the exception of Coronation Street, the references are all lost on me. But I got the gist sufficiently to realise that you have selected eminently worthy targets.

I enjoyed yours too, Jayne, and am glad to learn that it is entirely fiction. How fitting, too, that the last two words should be the title of a musical by Gershwin and ... P.G. Wodehouse!