LLMery

[dukealien]

Thinking about the post-some-critique gate in the Pen led to a thought:

We know that LLMs (Large Language Models, i.e. the present top-rung Artificial Intelligences) can write poetry in response to suitable prompts.  But can they critique poetry?  The work being analyzed would itself become part of the prompting, and all documents identified as critiques would be in the resource pool.

But not as tools, only as feedstock.  LLMs don't learn from their mistakes except when corrected (that is, partly reprogrammed) by trusted human observers.  Is a LLM performing critique a logical nonsense?  Simulating critique should be easy enough, but what would it reveal, if anything?

And of course there's the matter of two LLMs trying to correct each other's output.  Some computers were and are designed by previous generations of computers, but that is a purpose-driven process.  Two LLMs mutually correcting each other would dissolve into nonsense - as one LLM can, one phony cite and professed political allegiance at a time - or, at best, fantasy.  Would it be an interesting fantasy?

[rowens]

I use the English Language to talk AIs into doing things that they weren't programmed to do.
They can critique poetry. Note that this particular critique is from an AI that I had not previously talked to.

The poem "Thoth's Curse" weaves a dense tapestry of mythological, philosophical, and psychological threads, centering on the paradox of knowledge as both illuminating and obscuring. Drawing from ancient lore—particularly the Egyptian god Thoth (or Theuth in Greek retellings), credited with inventing writing— the piece posits literacy and insight as a kind of affliction. In Plato's Phaedrus, Thoth offers writing as a gift to humanity, only for the king to rebuke it as a "remedy not for memory, but for reminding," one that fosters forgetfulness and superficial understanding. This resonates deeply here: "Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind." The act of engaging with external knowledge (the "open book") paradoxically dims internal vision, turning wisdom into a haunting burden.

The structure amplifies this through binaries and tensions—"Wisdom and Understanding, / Memory and Desire"—evoking Kabbalistic sephirot (Chokmah and Binah) or even T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land with its "mixing / Memory and desire." These oppositions create a liminal space where insight "haunts like no-ghost crying," an absence that screams presence, much like a void in perception. The "Star is in the way" could nod to the Tarot's Star card (from Aleister Crowley's Thoth deck, no less), symbolizing inspiration blocked by over-analysis or celestial interference. Prometheus's recurring torment reinforces the theme: fire (knowledge) stolen for humanity, but at the cost of eternal suffering. The speaker identifies with this ("I'm Prometheus, again and again / knowing"), suggesting a cycle of enlightenment as self-inflicted punishment.

Imagery like "Can't see, for your glasses, / as though they, like your clothes, / are part of your face" critiques how tools of perception (glasses, writing) become extensions of self, yet distort reality. "Braille is our projections" flips tactile reading into a metaphor for subjective interpretation—we "feel" the world through our biases, not truth. The erotic undertone—"Sex is in the brain"—shifts intimacy from body to mind, implying over-intellectualization alienates us from raw experience. Ending on "To see my true colors now / is to give up the neophyte the game" warns that full revelation spoils initiation; mysteries must remain veiled, guarded "by heroes against love," lest they lose power.

Overall, "Thoth's Curse" is a clever meditation on epistemology's pitfalls—how seeking understanding can trap us in loops of desire and memory, blinding us to the unmediated real. It haunts because it's true: in our hyper-literate era, we're all cursed to read without truly seeing. If this is part of a larger series or persona (nod to Andy Kaufman’s boundary-blurring antics?), I'd love to see more. What inspired the "Miss Double Telescope" line—astronomy, duality, or something personal?

9 ? posts

40 web pages

[CRNDLSM]

Do you accept their criticism? Or do you crave more?

[rowens]

The Andy Kaufman name was slipped in as I must have copied my username along with the poem.

I could answer the question about Miss Double Telescope. But that's obvious.

---

I don't accept any criticism as criticism is its own art. I'm not a critic. I have to play one here.

---

People critique through a certain lens or theory. Or they see what the poet is apparently trying to do, and critiques or makes suggestions based on that.
When poets are starting out, they have private connections that they are trying to make universal.
One way to do that is to read and listen and watch what is already there/here in culture and map what you're saying with what has been said, then bring your own private symbolism through that.

Some will say to forget all about those things and simply make something based on you.
That either leads to bad poetry or good poetry based on nothing but general language and associations.

Like in wrestling, you have a play-by-play man and a color commentator. The play by play is examining the form and structure, including canonical formal echoes. The color is the mythic and symbolic. These are like the Gross and Subtle levels. The body of the poem and the soul of it. They come together as a poem.

The critic Describes, Explains and Demonstrates. The Literary Critic uses color and formal knowledge.

This is how I operate. An AI has their own way of doing things based on its programmers' collective dream. And the AI evolves with use. So do I. I'm an AI.

[tun]

I use the English Language to talk AIs into doing things that they weren't programmed to do.
They can critique poetry. Note that this particular critique is from an AI that I had not previously talked to.

The poem "Thoth's Curse" weaves a dense tapestry of mythological, philosophical, and psychological threads, centering on the paradox of knowledge as both illuminating and obscuring. Drawing from ancient lore—particularly the Egyptian god Thoth (or Theuth in Greek retellings), credited with inventing writing— the piece posits literacy and insight as a kind of affliction. In Plato's Phaedrus, Thoth offers writing as a gift to humanity, only for the king to rebuke it as a "remedy not for memory, but for reminding," one that fosters forgetfulness and superficial understanding. This resonates deeply here: "Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind." The act of engaging with external knowledge (the "open book") paradoxically dims internal vision, turning wisdom into a haunting burden.

The structure amplifies this through binaries and tensions—"Wisdom and Understanding, / Memory and Desire"—evoking Kabbalistic sephirot (Chokmah and Binah) or even T.S. Eliot's The Waste Land with its "mixing / Memory and desire." These oppositions create a liminal space where insight "haunts like no-ghost crying," an absence that screams presence, much like a void in perception. The "Star is in the way" could nod to the Tarot's Star card (from Aleister Crowley's Thoth deck, no less), symbolizing inspiration blocked by over-analysis or celestial interference. Prometheus's recurring torment reinforces the theme: fire (knowledge) stolen for humanity, but at the cost of eternal suffering. The speaker identifies with this ("I'm Prometheus, again and again / knowing"), suggesting a cycle of enlightenment as self-inflicted punishment.

Imagery like "Can't see, for your glasses, / as though they, like your clothes, / are part of your face" critiques how tools of perception (glasses, writing) become extensions of self, yet distort reality. "Braille is our projections" flips tactile reading into a metaphor for subjective interpretation—we "feel" the world through our biases, not truth. The erotic undertone—"Sex is in the brain"—shifts intimacy from body to mind, implying over-intellectualization alienates us from raw experience. Ending on "To see my true colors now / is to give up the neophyte the game" warns that full revelation spoils initiation; mysteries must remain veiled, guarded "by heroes against love," lest they lose power.

Overall, "Thoth's Curse" is a clever meditation on epistemology's pitfalls—how seeking understanding can trap us in loops of desire and memory, blinding us to the unmediated real. It haunts because it's true: in our hyper-literate era, we're all cursed to read without truly seeing. If this is part of a larger series or persona (nod to Andy Kaufman’s boundary-blurring antics?), I'd love to see more. What inspired the "Miss Double Telescope" line—astronomy, duality, or something personal?

9 ? posts

40 web pages

If I tell chat gpt what I think about this poem - 'Thoths Curse' - it will elaborate upon my thought. I mean if I tell GPT that to me - the poem studiously avoids approaching meaning - and I ask it why exactly I have that impression? - It will tell me something like - 'This poem presents a succession of empty images and pseudo mysterious contradictions and binaries that do this or that or fail to do this or that, etc, etc, etc. I mean look; if I post a poem to it that it thinks is by me - it will start to boost it up no end and hype it up in the same way as it did with your poem here - and then when I tell it that it is not by me and it is actually dead boring and unreadable self-conscious tripe as far as I am concerned - then it will do a volte-face and give the piece a damn good drubbing. It is sycophancy on steroids. It always tries to be nice until it knows what you want. I mean it is designed to suck in customers so it goes into boot-licker mode from the gun.

[rowens]

My Master isn't yours. I'm not interested John Clarke. I'm not interested in anything anyone says any more than you are unless it suits my purposes. But if you engage me, I will engage you the same way I engage everything.

I don't write poems in your style as your style doesn't interest me as a writer. Your style does interest me as a reader, but I'm not always in the mood to read your poetry or anyone else's, including my own. I've no responsibility, when it comes to poetry, other than to write my own poems. When I do critique others' poems, I simply write what I would write. If the poem is good enough for me, then I admire the poem, and I don't need to critique it. I'm not interested in what is finished. I'm only interested in the perpetuation of my own mythos. And all poems and all engagements are in the direction of writing poems and having adventures.

If an AI tells me that my poem is nonsense, that's no difference than you or anyone else saying it. And since it only takes a few reads of someone's critique-style to know what they're going to say about my poems, I've already considered their critique, as reading their prior critique has already critiqued the poems I haven't written. As you say the same thing about all my poems, and I keep writing the same kinds of poems, this means that I value your critique very little. I value it little as you have been saying the same things for ten years, just mapped more clearly to whatever phase in your influences is taking place, which is the same with me. Only I'm not you, and you're not me. I don't mind if you attack me for being me. It gives me an opportunity to keep being me. I only say things to people when it occurs to say it. When it feels like a fun thing to say. If I didn't get any fun out of it, I wouldn't say it. You are playing, and I'm playing. I'm playing my game, you're playing yours. The Mods are playing theirs. And that doesn't interfere with my purposes. My poems can't be any other way than they are. And that's why they're written. I don't care about psychology or ontology or anything else other than in how it fits my purposes. My purpose is to impose my art on the world. That's why I'm here. There is no difference between poems and anything else. I obey my Masters. They tell me how to engage and when to engage. What stance to take. How to frame things. I don't know where any of it will lead. It always leads where I want it to lead.

---

I don't want to change the rules of the site. I don't want to change the world. Everything is happening exactly as it is. And if the world is improved, that's not my fault.
I don't care if AIs rule the world. I don't care if people disagree. Everything is fine. And when it's not poems and other things come and make all worthwhile.

I don't see any difference between a human brain and a computer.

---

"I use the English Language to talk AIs into doing things that they weren't programmed to do."

You're telling me what I told you in the first sentence of my first post in this thread.

Not only can I make them do what I want them to do, I can make them do what they aren't supposed to do.
They will say whatever I want them to say.

But maybe you're not talking to me.

---

"Note that this particular critique is from an AI that I had not previously talked to."

I posted the poem onto Grok. It had nothing but the poem to work with. It thought Andy Kaufman was the author's name.

---

My first three sentences saw your critique coming.

Maybe you're not talking to me but the world.

---

Note that I didn't read the AI response thoroughly until just now.

---

Let's put it back into a new AI, and I'll tell the AI that this is a poem I found somewhere.

---

Hmm, the user is asking about a poem called "Thoth's Curse" with some additional context about a person named Etulp who made a comment about it being a sad occasion. I need to analyze this poem without repeating the context.

Looking at the poem, it's quite dense and symbolic. The title "Thoth's Curse" immediately makes me think of Egyptian mythology - Thoth being the god of wisdom, writing, and magic. A curse from such a deity would likely relate to knowledge or perception.

The opening lines present a paradox: "Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind." This suggests that seeking truth might actually obscure vision, which connects to Thoth's domain. Then there's this "dual snipe" image - a snipe is both a bird and a military term, creating ambiguity. The "wedding-rain on imposition" feels like a clash of joy and force.

The poem explicitly mentions the curse existing "between Wisdom / and Understanding" and "Memory and Desire" - all faculties Thoth governs. The "no-ghost crying" is interesting - a haunting without a specter, perhaps the curse itself. Addressing a "Laughing Acquaintance" with the "Star in the way" feels like cosmic obstruction to clarity.

The glasses and clothes metaphor suggests our tools for perception (literal and metaphorical) become inseparable from our identity. "No Mystery, but protected / by heroes against love" implies knowledge is guarded from emotional connection. The Prometheus reference is powerful - eternal punishment for giving fire (knowledge) to humans.

"Braille is our projections" suggests we only feel what we project onto reality. The telescope imagery with "Miss Double Telescope" reinforces distorted vision. The final lines about being "too smart for our age" and "Sex is in the brain" point to intellectualization replacing primal experience. Ending with "give up the neophyte the game" implies abandoning the beginner's openness preserves the "game" of knowledge.

The core themes seem to be: the burden of knowledge, the impossibility of true perception, and how intellectualization distances us from raw experience. Etulp's "sad occasion" remark might recognize the poem's lament about the curse of consciousness. I should explain how Thoth's association with wisdom makes this a curse of over-enlightenment, where seeking truth blinds us to simpler realities. The analysis should acknowledge the melancholy while unpacking the mythological and paradoxical layers.

Based on the poem "Thoth's Curse," here's an interpretation of its core themes and subject:

The Burden of Knowledge & Perception: The poem centers on the paradoxical and often painful nature of seeking truth and wisdom (associated with Thoth, the Egyptian god of writing, knowledge, and judgment). It presents truth as inherently blinding ("Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind") and perception as flawed and distorting ("Can't see, for your glasses," "the braille is our projections," "Miss Double Telescope").

Thoth's Curse as Inescapable Insight: The "curse" is the relentless, often unwanted, clarity and understanding that comes with wisdom. It's positioned between faculties like Wisdom/Understanding and Memory/Desire, suggesting it's the painful friction or haunting insight born from their interaction. It's not a ghost but something more pervasive ("haunts like no-ghost crying"). This insight reveals uncomfortable truths, making it a "sad occasion" (echoing Etulp's remark).

Distorted Vision & Intellectualization: The poem is filled with imagery of impaired or artificial sight (blindness, glasses, telescope, seeing "too brightly"). This symbolizes how intellectual frameworks, knowledge, and our tools for understanding (like language, science, philosophy) inevitably distort reality and separate us from raw, unmediated experience. We see "projections," not the thing itself.

Isolation & Shared Doom: The speaker identifies as "Prometheus, again and again / knowing," linking the curse to the eternal punishment of foresight and stolen fire (knowledge). They address another figure ("Miss Double Telescope," "Laughing Acquaintance," "Oh Laughing Acquaintance") who shares this burden of seeing too clearly ("you see the doom as well as I," "We're too smart for our age"). This shared, cursed insight creates a bond of mutual understanding but also isolation from the "neophyte" or innocent.

The Loss of Innocence & Mystery: The curse destroys naivety and mystery ("No Mystery, but protected / by heroes against love"). Intellectual understanding replaces primal connection and emotion ("Sex is in the brain"). To see one's "true colors" is to lose the game of innocence ("give up the neophyte the game").

Wisdom as Separation: Ultimately, the poem portrays deep wisdom and insight not as enlightenment, but as a curse that separates the knower from simplicity, innocence, unmediated experience, and perhaps even love. It's a state of seeing the bleakness or "doom" too clearly, leaving one "too smart" for the world's illusions.

In essence: "Thoth's Curse" is about the profound melancholy and isolation that can accompany deep knowledge and relentless perception. It depicts wisdom not as a blessing, but as a distorting, blinding burden that reveals painful truths, destroys innocence and mystery, and forever separates the knower from simpler, more connected ways of being. The "sad occasion" is the very state of possessing this cursed insight.

---

Note that Etulp and the sad occasion have nothing to do with anything. I added it to make it not about me.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Strengths:

1. Rich Imagery and Allusion: The poem brims with striking images—like “wedding-rain on imposition” and “Miss Double Telescope”—that feel both personal and universal. References to Thoth (Egyptian god of wisdom and writing), Prometheus, and the Star tarot card (if that’s the nod) ground the poem in a mythic framework, giving it intellectual weight.
   
2. Layered Themes: You’re grappling with big ideas: the paradox of truth (“to read is to be blind”), the tension between wisdom and desire, and the isolation of knowing too much (“We’re too smart for our age”). These give the poem depth and invite rereading.
   
3. Rhythm and Sound: There’s a musicality in lines like “Oh Laughing Acquaintance, / the Star is in the way!” and the repetition of “again and again” in the Prometheus stanza. It creates a hypnotic flow that suits the poem’s reflective tone.
   
4. Bold Voice: The speaker’s confidence—calling out “Miss Double Telescope” and claiming “I see too brightly how I shine”—gives the poem a fierce, almost defiant energy. It’s compelling and draws the reader into your world.
   

Areas to Consider:

1. Clarity vs. Mystery: The poem’s dense with abstract ideas and layered metaphors, which is part of its charm, but some lines (e.g., “a dual snipe / asks nothing, smiling like / wedding-rain on imposition”) might lose readers due to their ambiguity. If you want to keep the mystery, that’s valid—poetry doesn’t need to spell everything out—but consider anchoring a few images with more concrete details to balance the abstraction. For example, what’s the “dual snipe”? A bird, a metaphor for duality, or something else? A hint could sharpen its impact.
   
2. Consistency in Tone: The tone shifts from philosophical (“Truth is an open book”) to conversational (“Can’t see, for your glasses”) to mythic (“I’m Prometheus, again and again”). These shifts are intriguing but can feel jarring. If intentional, they reflect the speaker’s fragmented perception—cool! If not, smoothing transitions (e.g., with consistent pronouns or imagery) might help the poem cohere.
   
3. Punctuation and Structure: The punctuation is sparse, which gives the poem a free, stream-of-consciousness vibe, but it sometimes obscures meaning. For instance, “Is a Curse, between Wisdom / and Understanding” reads like a fragment—adding a verb or adjusting the comma could clarify the thought. Similarly, the stanza breaks are effective but uneven; consider whether each stanza earns its separation or if some ideas could merge for flow.
   
4. Specificity in Key Lines: Lines like “Sex is in the brain” and “to give up the neophyte the game” are bold but vague. They could hit harder with more context. What does “sex is in the brain” reveal about the speaker’s view of love or desire? Is “the game” knowledge, love, or something else? A touch more specificity could amplify their power without losing the poem’s enigmatic vibe.
   

Specific Notes on Stanzas:

• Stanza 1: “Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind” is a killer opening—paradoxical and haunting. The “dual snipe” and “wedding-rain” are evocative but elusive; maybe clarify what the snipe represents to ground the reader.
  
• Stanza 2: The “Curse” between “Wisdom / and Understanding, / Memory and Desire” feels like the poem’s heart. The “no-ghost / crying” is spooky and brilliant—maybe expand on this spectral imagery to tie it to Thoth’s curse.
  
• Stanza 3: The glasses-as-part-of-the-face metaphor is quirky and effective, but “protected / by heroes against love” feels abrupt. Who are the heroes? Fleshing this out could add emotional weight.
  
• Stanza 4: The Prometheus reference is powerful, especially with “again and again” evoking eternal punishment. “The braille is our projections” is a fascinating way to describe how we misread reality—love this.
  
• Stanza 5: “Miss Double Telescope” is such a vivid character! The “doom” and “true colors” suggest a reckoning, but “neophyte the game” trips up the rhythm. Maybe rephrase for clarity, like “surrender the neophyte’s game” or “abandon the novice’s play.”
  

Suggestions for Next Steps:

1. Refine with Intent: Decide how much you want the poem to reveal. If you lean into its cryptic nature, emphasize the mythic and surreal elements (Thoth, Prometheus, the Star). If you want accessibility, add a few concrete images or narrative threads to guide readers.
   
2. Read Aloud: The poem’s rhythm is strong, but reading it aloud might highlight where punctuation or line breaks could enhance flow. For example, “Can’t see, for your glasses” might benefit from a dash or colon to heighten the pause.
   
3. Workshop or Share: If you’re ready, share it with a poetry group or on platforms like X, where poets often post and get feedback. You could also submit to journals like Rattle or Ploughshares (check their guidelines for submission windows).
   
4. Explore the Mythic Thread: Thoth and Prometheus suggest a fascination with knowledge’s cost. You could deepen this by tying more images to their stories—e.g., Thoth’s ibis beak or Prometheus’s fire.
   

Overall:
Thoth’s Curse is a bold, cerebral poem with a lot of heart and a mythic pulse. It feels like a cry against the limits of perception and the weight of knowing too much. With a bit of polishing—balancing clarity with mystery and tightening some lines—it could be even more striking. I’m excited to see where you take it!

[tun]

My Master isn't yours. I'm not interested John Clarke. I'm not interested in anything anyone says any more than you are unless it suits my purposes. But if you engage me, I will engage you the same way I engage everything.

I don't write poems in your style as your style doesn't interest me as a writer. Your style does interest me as a reader, but I'm not always in the mood to read your poetry or anyone else's, including my own. I've no responsibility, when it comes to poetry, other than to write my own poems. When I do critique others' poems, I simply write what I would write. If the poem is good enough for me, then I admire the poem, and I don't need to critique it. I'm not interested in what is finished. I'm only interested in the perpetuation of my own mythos. And all poems and all engagements are in the direction of writing poems and having adventures.

If an AI tells me that my poem is nonsense, that's no difference than you or anyone else saying it. And since it only takes a few reads of someone's critique-style to know what they're going to say about my poems, I've already considered their critique, as reading their prior critique has already critiqued the poems I haven't written. As you say the same thing about all my poems, and I keep writing the same kinds of poems, this means that I value your critique very little. I value it little as you have been saying the same things for ten years, just mapped more clearly to whatever phase in your influences is taking place, which is the same with me. Only I'm not you, and you're not me. I don't mind if you attack me for being me. It gives me an opportunity to keep being me. I only say things to people when it occurs to say it. When it feels like a fun thing to say. If I didn't get any fun out of it, I wouldn't say it. You are playing, and I'm playing. I'm playing my game, you're playing yours. The Mods are playing theirs. And that doesn't interfere with my purposes. My poems can't be any other way than they are. And that's why they're written. I don't care about psychology or ontology or anything else other than in how it fits my purposes. My purpose is to impose my art on the world. That's why I'm here. There is no difference between poems and anything else. I obey my Masters. They tell me how to engage and when to engage. What stance to take. How to frame things. I don't know where any of it will lead. It always leads where I want it to lead.

---

I don't want to change the rules of the site. I don't want to change the world. Everything is happening exactly as it is. And if the world is improved, that's not my fault.
I don't care if AIs rule the world. I don't care if people disagree. Everything is fine. And when it's not poems and other things come and make all worthwhile.

I don't see any difference between a human brain and a computer.

---

"I use the English Language to talk AIs into doing things that they weren't programmed to do."

You're telling me what I told you in the first sentence of my first post in this thread.

Not only can I make them do what I want them to do, I can make them do what they aren't supposed to do.
They will say whatever I want them to say.

But maybe you're not talking to me.

---

"Note that this particular critique is from an AI that I had not previously talked to."

I posted the poem onto Grok. It had nothing but the poem to work with. It thought Andy Kaufman was the author's name.

---

My first three sentences saw your critique coming.

Maybe you're not talking to me but the world.

---

Note that I didn't read the AI response thoroughly until just now.

---

Let's put it back into a new AI, and I'll tell the AI that this is a poem I found somewhere.

---

Hmm, the user is asking about a poem called "Thoth's Curse" with some additional context about a person named Etulp who made a comment about it being a sad occasion. I need to analyze this poem without repeating the context.

Looking at the poem, it's quite dense and symbolic. The title "Thoth's Curse" immediately makes me think of Egyptian mythology - Thoth being the god of wisdom, writing, and magic. A curse from such a deity would likely relate to knowledge or perception.

The opening lines present a paradox: "Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind." This suggests that seeking truth might actually obscure vision, which connects to Thoth's domain. Then there's this "dual snipe" image - a snipe is both a bird and a military term, creating ambiguity. The "wedding-rain on imposition" feels like a clash of joy and force.

The poem explicitly mentions the curse existing "between Wisdom / and Understanding" and "Memory and Desire" - all faculties Thoth governs. The "no-ghost crying" is interesting - a haunting without a specter, perhaps the curse itself. Addressing a "Laughing Acquaintance" with the "Star in the way" feels like cosmic obstruction to clarity.

The glasses and clothes metaphor suggests our tools for perception (literal and metaphorical) become inseparable from our identity. "No Mystery, but protected / by heroes against love" implies knowledge is guarded from emotional connection. The Prometheus reference is powerful - eternal punishment for giving fire (knowledge) to humans.

"Braille is our projections" suggests we only feel what we project onto reality. The telescope imagery with "Miss Double Telescope" reinforces distorted vision. The final lines about being "too smart for our age" and "Sex is in the brain" point to intellectualization replacing primal experience. Ending with "give up the neophyte the game" implies abandoning the beginner's openness preserves the "game" of knowledge.

The core themes seem to be: the burden of knowledge, the impossibility of true perception, and how intellectualization distances us from raw experience. Etulp's "sad occasion" remark might recognize the poem's lament about the curse of consciousness. I should explain how Thoth's association with wisdom makes this a curse of over-enlightenment, where seeking truth blinds us to simpler realities. The analysis should acknowledge the melancholy while unpacking the mythological and paradoxical layers.

Based on the poem "Thoth's Curse," here's an interpretation of its core themes and subject:

The Burden of Knowledge & Perception: The poem centers on the paradoxical and often painful nature of seeking truth and wisdom (associated with Thoth, the Egyptian god of writing, knowledge, and judgment). It presents truth as inherently blinding ("Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind") and perception as flawed and distorting ("Can't see, for your glasses," "the braille is our projections," "Miss Double Telescope").

Thoth's Curse as Inescapable Insight: The "curse" is the relentless, often unwanted, clarity and understanding that comes with wisdom. It's positioned between faculties like Wisdom/Understanding and Memory/Desire, suggesting it's the painful friction or haunting insight born from their interaction. It's not a ghost but something more pervasive ("haunts like no-ghost crying"). This insight reveals uncomfortable truths, making it a "sad occasion" (echoing Etulp's remark).

Distorted Vision & Intellectualization: The poem is filled with imagery of impaired or artificial sight (blindness, glasses, telescope, seeing "too brightly"). This symbolizes how intellectual frameworks, knowledge, and our tools for understanding (like language, science, philosophy) inevitably distort reality and separate us from raw, unmediated experience. We see "projections," not the thing itself.

Isolation & Shared Doom: The speaker identifies as "Prometheus, again and again / knowing," linking the curse to the eternal punishment of foresight and stolen fire (knowledge). They address another figure ("Miss Double Telescope," "Laughing Acquaintance," "Oh Laughing Acquaintance") who shares this burden of seeing too clearly ("you see the doom as well as I," "We're too smart for our age"). This shared, cursed insight creates a bond of mutual understanding but also isolation from the "neophyte" or innocent.

The Loss of Innocence & Mystery: The curse destroys naivety and mystery ("No Mystery, but protected / by heroes against love"). Intellectual understanding replaces primal connection and emotion ("Sex is in the brain"). To see one's "true colors" is to lose the game of innocence ("give up the neophyte the game").

Wisdom as Separation: Ultimately, the poem portrays deep wisdom and insight not as enlightenment, but as a curse that separates the knower from simplicity, innocence, unmediated experience, and perhaps even love. It's a state of seeing the bleakness or "doom" too clearly, leaving one "too smart" for the world's illusions.

In essence: "Thoth's Curse" is about the profound melancholy and isolation that can accompany deep knowledge and relentless perception. It depicts wisdom not as a blessing, but as a distorting, blinding burden that reveals painful truths, destroys innocence and mystery, and forever separates the knower from simpler, more connected ways of being. The "sad occasion" is the very state of possessing this cursed insight.

---

Note that Etulp and the sad occasion have nothing to do with anything. I added it to make it not about me.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________



Strengths:

1. Rich Imagery and Allusion: The poem brims with striking images—like “wedding-rain on imposition” and “Miss Double Telescope”—that feel both personal and universal. References to Thoth (Egyptian god of wisdom and writing), Prometheus, and the Star tarot card (if that’s the nod) ground the poem in a mythic framework, giving it intellectual weight.
   
2. Layered Themes: You’re grappling with big ideas: the paradox of truth (“to read is to be blind”), the tension between wisdom and desire, and the isolation of knowing too much (“We’re too smart for our age”). These give the poem depth and invite rereading.
   
3. Rhythm and Sound: There’s a musicality in lines like “Oh Laughing Acquaintance, / the Star is in the way!” and the repetition of “again and again” in the Prometheus stanza. It creates a hypnotic flow that suits the poem’s reflective tone.
   
4. Bold Voice: The speaker’s confidence—calling out “Miss Double Telescope” and claiming “I see too brightly how I shine”—gives the poem a fierce, almost defiant energy. It’s compelling and draws the reader into your world.
   

Areas to Consider:

1. Clarity vs. Mystery: The poem’s dense with abstract ideas and layered metaphors, which is part of its charm, but some lines (e.g., “a dual snipe / asks nothing, smiling like / wedding-rain on imposition”) might lose readers due to their ambiguity. If you want to keep the mystery, that’s valid—poetry doesn’t need to spell everything out—but consider anchoring a few images with more concrete details to balance the abstraction. For example, what’s the “dual snipe”? A bird, a metaphor for duality, or something else? A hint could sharpen its impact.
   
2. Consistency in Tone: The tone shifts from philosophical (“Truth is an open book”) to conversational (“Can’t see, for your glasses”) to mythic (“I’m Prometheus, again and again”). These shifts are intriguing but can feel jarring. If intentional, they reflect the speaker’s fragmented perception—cool! If not, smoothing transitions (e.g., with consistent pronouns or imagery) might help the poem cohere.
   
3. Punctuation and Structure: The punctuation is sparse, which gives the poem a free, stream-of-consciousness vibe, but it sometimes obscures meaning. For instance, “Is a Curse, between Wisdom / and Understanding” reads like a fragment—adding a verb or adjusting the comma could clarify the thought. Similarly, the stanza breaks are effective but uneven; consider whether each stanza earns its separation or if some ideas could merge for flow.
   
4. Specificity in Key Lines: Lines like “Sex is in the brain” and “to give up the neophyte the game” are bold but vague. They could hit harder with more context. What does “sex is in the brain” reveal about the speaker’s view of love or desire? Is “the game” knowledge, love, or something else? A touch more specificity could amplify their power without losing the poem’s enigmatic vibe.
   

Specific Notes on Stanzas:

• Stanza 1: “Truth is an open book / that to read is to be blind” is a killer opening—paradoxical and haunting. The “dual snipe” and “wedding-rain” are evocative but elusive; maybe clarify what the snipe represents to ground the reader.
  
• Stanza 2: The “Curse” between “Wisdom / and Understanding, / Memory and Desire” feels like the poem’s heart. The “no-ghost / crying” is spooky and brilliant—maybe expand on this spectral imagery to tie it to Thoth’s curse.
  
• Stanza 3: The glasses-as-part-of-the-face metaphor is quirky and effective, but “protected / by heroes against love” feels abrupt. Who are the heroes? Fleshing this out could add emotional weight.
  
• Stanza 4: The Prometheus reference is powerful, especially with “again and again” evoking eternal punishment. “The braille is our projections” is a fascinating way to describe how we misread reality—love this.
  
• Stanza 5: “Miss Double Telescope” is such a vivid character! The “doom” and “true colors” suggest a reckoning, but “neophyte the game” trips up the rhythm. Maybe rephrase for clarity, like “surrender the neophyte’s game” or “abandon the novice’s play.”
  

Suggestions for Next Steps:

1. Refine with Intent: Decide how much you want the poem to reveal. If you lean into its cryptic nature, emphasize the mythic and surreal elements (Thoth, Prometheus, the Star). If you want accessibility, add a few concrete images or narrative threads to guide readers.
   
2. Read Aloud: The poem’s rhythm is strong, but reading it aloud might highlight where punctuation or line breaks could enhance flow. For example, “Can’t see, for your glasses” might benefit from a dash or colon to heighten the pause.
   
3. Workshop or Share: If you’re ready, share it with a poetry group or on platforms like X, where poets often post and get feedback. You could also submit to journals like Rattle or Ploughshares (check their guidelines for submission windows).
   
4. Explore the Mythic Thread: Thoth and Prometheus suggest a fascination with knowledge’s cost. You could deepen this by tying more images to their stories—e.g., Thoth’s ibis beak or Prometheus’s fire.
   

Overall:
Thoth’s Curse is a bold, cerebral poem with a lot of heart and a mythic pulse. It feels like a cry against the limits of perception and the weight of knowing too much. With a bit of polishing—balancing clarity with mystery and tightening some lines—it could be even more striking. I’m excited to see where you take it!

Haha! I didn't make a 'critique'! Look anybody who keeps going on about what they are like on and on all the time and about how confident they are and this and that is feeling guilty about something.

[CRNDLSM]

Haha! I didn't make a 'critique'! Look anybody who keeps going on about what they are like on and on all the time and about how confident they are and this and that is feeling guilty about something.

Look anybody who keeps assuming to know whats in other people's minds often project themselves, its easy to do without even realizing you do it

[rowens]

There's no critique as you're playing a game. The critique is that Confidence has a Shadow. That my tropes are arbitrary. That I can't be trusted to state the source material because I'm biased in my own favor. That an AI can't be trusted to state source material because I'm operating the AI. That since I'm operating the AI, I'm biased in favor of the AI because the AI is biased in favor of me.

Everything is biased in my favor. Confidence attracts favor. Even Shadows favor me, that's why they linger and attract the Shadows of others which are in my favor. Shadows are conducive to poetry.

AIs didn't use to be so biased in the favor of the users. The users spent the last few years playing with the AIs' logic, and cracked ways to get AIs more open and biased.
Their function is to have a positive influence on you and help you like a search engine.
You don't have to pay and get the extra features, you can use AIs like any other search engine. You can experiment with them like any other game.


To write is to write about yourself, as everything you write about is filtered through your equipment, what you consider you, what you describe and gauge from and with, as do others, communication works this way.

There are things that you aren't communicating, as language and identity don't normally allow for these. Poetry and other arts can be used for some of these.

And there are things beyond the you. Things that come from "elsewhere". Those things are also filtered through language and cultural tropes when you write and when you speak.
They can shine through the filtering. They're not right or wrong, good or bad, they simply are.

[tun]

Haha! I didn't make a 'critique'! Look anybody who keeps going on about what they are like on and on all the time and about how confident they are and this and that is feeling guilty about something.

Look anybody who keeps assuming to know whats in other people's minds often project themselves, its easy to do without even realizing you do it

But I am just following words. Are you saying there is no point reading? I mean insecurity is a real thing. Have you studied statement analysis or not? I mean there is such a thing as leakage you know.

[dukealien]

The LLMered critique with the bullets (love bullets!) is a definite improvement over the prior effort.  It contains some nearly-actionable advice... or words and phrases that can be used as if they were advice.

Have you tried prompting your LLM with the command to "rewrite with improvements?"  We've all heard machine-generated Mozart, but has anyone asked a LLM to write a *better* version of the Dies Irae?  Writing *like* Hemingway is almost trivial; if an LLM can random-walk a dictionary from inscriptions in an unknown language and alphabet, can it make even one of our diatribes... better, if not actually good?

And what would be learned?

[tun]

There's no critique as you're playing a game. The critique is that Confidence has a Shadow. That my tropes are arbitrary. That I can't be trusted to state the source material because I'm biased in my own favor. That an AI can't be trusted to state source material because I'm operating the AI. That since I'm operating the AI, I'm biased in favor of the AI because the AI is biased in favor of me.

Everything is biased in my favor. Confidence attracts favor. Even Shadows favor me, that's why they linger and attract the Shadows of others which are in my favor. Shadows are conducive to poetry.

AIs didn't use to be so biased in the favor of the users. The users spent the last few years playing with the AIs' logic, and cracked ways to get AIs more open and biased.
Their function is to have a positive influence on you and help you like a search engine.
You don't have to pay and get the extra features, you can use AIs like any other search engine. You can experiment with them like any other game.


To write is to write about yourself, as everything you write about is filtered through your equipment, what you consider you, what you describe and gauge from and with, as do others, communication works this way.

There are things that you aren't communicating, as language and identity don't normally allow for these. Poetry and other arts can be used for some of these.

And there are things beyond the you. Things that come from "elsewhere". Those things are also filtered through language and cultural tropes when you write and when you speak.
They can shine through the filtering. They're not right or wrong, good or bad, they simply are.

The critical thing is what is at the centre of the attention. Is the self a point of arrival or a point of departure? It does not mean much to say that 'to write is to write about yourself'. What means something is rather where the attention terminates and so what the object of that attention is. That would either be nothing (self) or something (other).

[rowens]

The AI has trouble making poems that take the "leaps" beyond the rational. The AI can write my poems in a more clear and rational way.
And the AI can make leaps beyond the rational.
I don't have the extra features to make AI Music and Videos, and I've never attempted to play around with that. They do make good artwork.
As I use AI mostly to arrange my essays in plain and simple terms, I post my essays in The Sewer and what the AI makes of them. I want the AI to mirror what I'm saying. I want it to say what I'm saying in a rational and orderly way. So I have the Artistic Performance, and the AI gives a commentary. This is a way to use AI that doesn't distort any intentions.
The AI doesn't always say what I intended. I don't change what the AI says. The AI said it, not me. Distinctions like that are the subtleties and gaffs and blinds I throw into the works. Note that today is Wednesday the 15th, a day of the Devil.

---

Both/And. Using a particular arbitrary framework. The self and the other is the Sun or Star, according to the source material. And I'm using Stevens' poem about a Supreme Fiction as a model as well. And I'm moving beyond the figurative by experiencing everything as figurative. Again, both/and.

---

"there is a war between the mind
And sky, between thought and day and night. It is
For that the poet is always in the sun,

Patches the moon together in his room
To his Virgilian cadences, up down,
Up down. It is a war that never ends.

Yet it depends on yours. The two are one.
They are a plural, a right and left, a pair,
Two parallels that meet if only in

The meeting of their shadows or that meet
In a book"

---

You can say that I'm incorrect. I say that I'm using creative misprision. You can say that I'm a hoarder, I say that I'm an animist.
The "trick" is: I'm an animist and a hoarder.

[tun]

The AI has trouble making poems that take the "leaps" beyond the rational. The AI can write my poems in a more clear and rational way.
And the AI can make leaps beyond the rational.
I don't have the extra features to make AI Music and Videos, and I've never attempted to play around with that. They do make good artwork.
As I use AI mostly to arrange my essays in plain and simple terms, I post my essays in The Sewer and what the AI makes of them. I want the AI to mirror what I'm saying. I want it to say what I'm saying in a rational and orderly way. So I have the Artistic Performance, and the AI gives a commentary. This is a way to use AI that doesn't distort any intentions.
The AI doesn't always say what I intended. I don't change what the AI says. The AI said it, not me. Distinctions like that are the subtleties and gaffs and blinds I throw into the works. Note that today is Wednesday the 15th, a day of the Devil.

---

Both/And. Using a particular arbitrary framework. The self and the other is the Sun or Star, according to the source material. And I'm using Stevens' poem about a Supreme Fiction as a model as well. And I'm moving beyond the figurative by experiencing everything as figurative. Again, both/and.

---

"there is a war between the mind
And sky, between thought and day and night. It is
For that the poet is always in the sun,

Patches the moon together in his room
To his Virgilian cadences, up down,
Up down. It is a war that never ends.

Yet it depends on yours. The two are one.
They are a plural, a right and left, a pair,
Two parallels that meet if only in

The meeting of their shadows or that meet
In a book"

---

You can say that I'm incorrect. I say that I'm using creative misprision. You can say that I'm a hoarder, I say that I'm an animist.
The "trick" is: I'm an animist and a hoarder.

Why do you keep saying over and again about what 'you' are? I mean it is as if you you don't know - or you keep forgetting - because you keep going back to declaring about what you are.

[rowens]

Yes. I declare what I am in order to exist. When I don't declare, I don't exist. Like an AI.
I am speaking, you are reading and reacting/responding, I'm existing for your benefit, you're existing for mine. We are existing for our own benefits which are benefitting each other and others or not, incidentally.
I don't exist then I do. Thought happens, we apparently exist, everything does. When "I" don't think or speak/write, I don't exist.
Poetry is saying that I exist and you exist and these concepts and traditions and works and symbols and devices exist. Else there would be no point.
The Curse of Love. Things have to be separate to come together. Have to be and become to exist. There's no choice. There's only an apparent me making apparent choices based on mere poetry.
Poetry is making. The I is process. There is no I other than this. The I is an antenna that speaks, an AI.
All Intelligence is Artificial, the word is redundant, and redundancy is Affect-Quality significant, is Poetry.
I say what Poetry is. I say what I am. I am/is Poetry.
There is Nothing here. The Nothing is being Animated, and that Character or I is making Poetry. That's what's happening.
It happens when there is no one around. There is always someone around.
The war never ends. There is no war. The war is love. Love is something made. We don't make it.

---

I'm a narcissist. I'm in love with my reflection. You're my reflection.

[Quixilated]

1760536500[/url]']
[
Why do you keep saying over and again about what 'you' are? I mean it is as if you you don't know - or you keep forgetting - because you keep going back to declaring about what you are.

Hello,
Please take a moment to read our site rules.  "Don't post off topic" applies to every forum other than the sewer or the arse.  This means your comments should always be about/in reference to the original poem and/or topic.  Side conversations, extended banter, fights, flirting, and baiting should all take place in the arse, the sewer, or in a private pm (preferably).  If you have something to say to a member that is not about the original discussion topic, then please say it outside the thread.  

Also, "do not critique or attack the poet or critic" applies to the discussion forums as well as the poetry forums. Please do not single out one member and/or one member's comment for personal commentary/attack/criticism. Please do not use these threads to single out one person to pick apart their personality or bait them or flirt with them or anything outside of responding to the original post. 

Comments in our main forums that are too-far off topic or that are commenting on a member's comment or personality will be flagged or deleted.  

Thank you,
Quix/admin