This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Comments by Ilovelucy

Go to: My usually atheist poetry homepage

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 31 by Ilovelucy

Comment 30 by Ailis R :

Second, I disagree with whoever said to start charging for your work. News flash: poetry is dead/dying in the U.S. because vanity press knockoffs like anthologies corner the market. No one reads them. On the internet, your only pay may be snide remarks at first, but you have access to an authentic audience. Use it.

I didn't say start charging for your work, I suggested that he not put all his stuff out on his website because publishers and anthologists like to get the scoop. There are plenty of good journals and zines out there, they don't always pay money but they don't take any either. Finding somewhere to get your work published alongside poets you have a lot in common with, seeing your work in the context of others can have a far greater effect on you and others than just creating in a vacuum and posting on the internet. My experience is that people that like poetry read the journals and anthologies, nobody reads someone's work on the internet apart from their mates and family. The vanity presses can be spotted a mile off, they're all over the internet, probably the first to start business there.

And poetry isn't dying, not in the US, the UK or anywhere else, this is just a melodramatic meme that the press like to hike out every few years. As long as human brains are hard wired for language, there will always be the curious linguistic misfire that we call poetry. It ain't going nowhere.

One more piece of advice for Gareth, get yourself out to an open mic some time. There's usually one in a certain town of each county and plenty in the cities. This is where you can meet lots of other poets and find inspiration and support. If you find yourself at a dull, cronyish open mic, try another, the good ones are out there. If you're close enough to London then I suggest you check out the Poetry Library at the Royal Festival Hall. It's free to join. They have a massive collection of poetry books, but they also have a comprehensive stock of magazines. A good browse of these may reveal who you would like to submit to as well as a ton of living breathing poets that you might have something in common with.

Mon, 31 May 2010 09:32:47 UTC | #475022

Go to: My usually atheist poetry homepage

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 29 by Ilovelucy

Gareth, I quite like your style, and I don't think it would help you to read a bunch of dead formalist poets, well apart from for enjoyment. Dead poets such as Bukowski, Stevens and Cummings seem to be much more up your street anyway. Anyone serious about poetry needs to get into contemporary work, I suggest Bloodaxe's Identity Parade anthology as a barometer of contemporary British poetry.

If anything, I would like to see you stretch out with your content. Atheism just isn't that interesting a subject for poetry because it's an opinion rather than an experience and experience is so much better for poetry. Poetry needs to bring up something visceral or pungent, "show don't tell" is a workshop cliche but still a useful one, one worth learning how and when to disobey. I like the informality and spare use of language but the subject matter needs to be something that people can feel, touch, see, taste and smell. Feel free to express opinion in the midst of it, but without experience there's nothing for us to hook onto: the poems will lack humanity and will only connect with readers in the same way as an editorial or opinion piece. They'll nod their head in agreement, or the opposite, but they will not be moved.

Another piece of advice would be that if you plan on being published in future you need to stop putting the work out for free. Editors of journals and anthologies like to get the scoop as far as new poetry is concerned.

Hope some of this helps, good luck with the words, :)

Sun, 30 May 2010 20:42:36 UTC | #474903

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 81 by Ilovelucy

Oh joy, yet another thread to be dominated by endless whining. For all the good it will do. Some people should learn to let things go.


You know, when you're not posting to register your excitement about the new changes, you're also technically whining. Doesn't appear to be a lot of that though, does there?

If it's any consolation, we'll probably stop once the new site is up, it's just that the final moments of the old rd.net seems like an apt time to look over the promises that were made and the kerfuffle that followed. Chances are, the chorus of whining when the new site goes live will be from newly disaffected front pagers, whether they're a small group or a big one remains to be seen.

Mon, 03 May 2010 19:20:00 UTC | #465421

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 66 by Ilovelucy

The "whineing" you're not taking seriously, that whining?

PS. Well done for sorting out your spelling of whining on your fourth edit.

PPS. More than a minor victory. I know it made you cry. So, are you actually doing something interesting or still editing in the replies?

Mon, 03 May 2010 14:35:00 UTC | #465314

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 61 by Ilovelucy

I don't care how about the light I'm painting the membership in, it's not so much an advert to convert but more a beacon for anyone wondering where the old forum membership have gone. Those people are still washing up occasionally, wondering what happened. It is in no way an attempt to steer people away from RD.net, not for me. I mean, it's not like I'd get my avatar tattooed on my arse, or, I don't know, chosen for the lofty honour of being my Gravatar!!!

Actually, come to think of it, it does look unnervingly similar to the Conservative Party logo... better change that then...if I can be arsed...

Mon, 03 May 2010 14:06:00 UTC | #465304

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 57 by Ilovelucy

I'm being thoroughly emotional rather than being rational, and also being a bit of a dick, sure. The new site might indeed be a success, though I doubt I'll post on it, not even to snark about things. I think this wee thread might be the last assault by many of us because it marks the end of the episode, or a suitable crossroads. The pussies? Well, the video I linked to mentions assholes as well, so the remainder could be both.

Mon, 03 May 2010 13:55:00 UTC | #465300

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 55 by Ilovelucy

If the dicks went to ratskep, where did that leave the pussies?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zcAaertdaQk

But otherwise, I agree, you don't know the story.

Mon, 03 May 2010 13:30:00 UTC | #465289

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 49 by Ilovelucy

Give me Gravatars or give me death!

Mon, 03 May 2010 12:53:00 UTC | #465275

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 33 by Ilovelucy

You've got to be grava-tarded if you aint very excited with the changes!

Sun, 02 May 2010 20:29:00 UTC | #465070

Go to: New RDFRS website info

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 13 by Ilovelucy

We are very excited.

Sun, 02 May 2010 12:46:00 UTC | #464932

Go to: An Apology

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 326 by Ilovelucy

Yorker, the fact that you are anonymously abusing other people on the internet and telling them to be real men, in response to people that Richard has castigated for being anonymously abusive on the interwebz, has given me a wonderful chuckling fit. Keep up the good work.

Niall O'Sullivan (find details of who I am and forthcoming public appearances through my web link)

Mon, 01 Mar 2010 12:04:00 UTC | #445307

Go to: An Apology

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by Ilovelucy

Zamboro, what you see as throwing a fit and damaging the cause, was actually an effort by many to counter a tide of misinformation and blame that went as far as the national press. I only hope that the same journalists will read this note and correct themselves. For many of us, this is what we wanted, to have the truth of the matter acknowledged and to prevent the forum from being deleted. We're not out for blood or the public humiliation of others.

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:40:00 UTC | #444943

Go to: An Apology

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 15 by Ilovelucy

Richard,

Thanks for the apology. I'm still unsure as to whether I will ever regain the faith and confidence I have lost in the last few days, but I can follow your example and apologise for any heated and unreasonable comments that I have made elsewhere (not as bad as the ones referred to previously, but still not very nice either). I do appreciate this post though and the acknowledgement of the hard work that the forum moderators and admins put in.

Niall

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 20:33:00 UTC | #444928

Go to: Hannity falsely claims Obama admin. gives special treatment to atheists

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 103 by Ilovelucy

Hacking? Help! We're under attack! Don't panic!!!

Sun, 28 Feb 2010 19:29:00 UTC | #444902

Go to: The godless guru

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 1777 by Ilovelucy

The comments deleted from here were very similar in tone to the thread that got deleted when the forum was locked down. That thread was angry but civlised and nothing like the foul mouthed raving that Dawkins and the media are reporting. The comments repeated by Dawkins in the "outrage" post, also repeated by the mass media, were made on another forum a day later. That's all I want people to know.

Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:36:00 UTC | #444364

Go to: The God Delusion - back on the Times extended list at #24

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 16 by Ilovelucy

Just across the page, three titles in a row:

4.EAT, PRAY, LOVE
5.ARE YOU THERE, VODKA? IT’S ME, CHELSEA
6.I HOPE THEY SERVE BEER IN HELL

Thu, 28 Jan 2010 08:36:00 UTC | #436221

Go to: [UPDATE 21-Jan - Video Added] Richard Live on 'The Daily Politics' Today

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 30 by Ilovelucy

Tebbit seems to have forgotten the fact that he was the one that brought in regulations in the early eighties that stopped granting automatic British citizenship to children born in Britain to non British parents. Hence why I have a British passport but my sister who was born in 84 has an Irish one.

His point was bollocks anyway, so I guess this is a minor quibble.

Wed, 20 Jan 2010 14:14:00 UTC | #433422

Go to: Symphony of Science - 'The Unbroken Thread' (ft. Attenborough, Goodall, Sagan)

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 6 by Ilovelucy

I have to admit that there is a part of me that thinks "blasphemy!" when I hear Attenborough's altered voice; and there's another part of me that thinks "Kermit the Frog!" whenever I hear the altered voice of Sagan ( from about 1.10).

Wed, 06 Jan 2010 23:57:00 UTC | #429511

Go to: The Richard Dawkins - Thunderf00t discussion

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 13 by Ilovelucy

Enjoying this so far, Richard's natural public speaking voice is still nicely audible despite the tech problems. I am, however, far more perturbed by TF's seating posture.

Sat, 02 Jan 2010 17:45:00 UTC | #427714

Go to: Does Morality Need God?

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 36 by Ilovelucy

Whole discussion here:

http://fora.tv/2009/12/07/The_Great_Issues_Forum_Varieties_of_Nonbelief

What I like about McGinn is that he's a fine philosopher and many people are unaware of the many philosophical arguments against god, many of which have been around for thousands of years. Philosophy is the preferred escape route that the like of William Craig Lane and Dinesh D'Souza chose to scurry down when faced with arguments from science and history, and I think that McGinn would take them to the cleaners ( more so than Dennett) if they tried the same with him.

Thu, 31 Dec 2009 12:15:00 UTC | #427137

Go to: RDF TV - The Unconsidered Life

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 25 by Ilovelucy

"Socrates said 'The unexamined life is not worth living.' How did he know?"

Simon Munnery

Tue, 15 Dec 2009 13:54:00 UTC | #423572

Go to: Debate - Hitchens, Harris, Dennett vs Boteach, D'Souza, Wright

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 83 by Ilovelucy

Kenny Everett never died, he simply changed his name and became a Rabbi.

Tue, 17 Nov 2009 13:21:00 UTC | #414068

Go to: Nofaithnoworship - epetition response

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 27 by Ilovelucy

The number 10 petition initiative is useless. It is just another Blairite platitude, a sop to make voters feel that they did something pro-active towards a certain issue.

Have any of these petitions ever had an effect on anything since they were introduced? All they seem to generate is a vapid response from a put upon civil servant, looking up the official policy and then parroting it back to us with a general opening statement to imply that they have read it.

I've seen a more pro-active response from supermarket complaint departments, but I suppose that's because they stand an actual risk of losing your money.

I repeat, the number ten petition site is there for their convenience and not ours. It's a nice little tactic for delaying and dissuading real affirmative action.

Mon, 26 Oct 2009 10:45:00 UTC | #408542

Go to: Bill O'Reilly vs. Atheist Richard Dawkins

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 11 by Ilovelucy

Comment #422847 by godless_hoor on October 10, 2009 at 2:59 pm

If being Irish means being like O'Reilly I'm changing my nationality. That cretin makes my blood boil.


Well, most Irish Americans are only Irish in a purely homeopathic sense anyway!

Sat, 10 Oct 2009 14:13:00 UTC | #404629

Go to: Kirk Cameron has gone too far! But we can stop him.

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 16 by Ilovelucy

Actually, I think that removing the introduction will probably result n the following.

1: Make the physical hardback book itself structurally weak and probably not worth giving out.

2. The missing pages will simply create an impression of censorship and with that a desire to read the original introduction, but will also add grist to the fallacious ideas of Ben Stein that creationists are being censored.

So, in short, I think the proposal above concerning removing the introduction is a bad idea.

Thu, 17 Sep 2009 13:28:00 UTC | #398109

Go to: Charles Darwin film 'too controversial for religious America'

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 94 by Ilovelucy

Maybe it's because there are subliminal references about socialised medicine?

Sun, 13 Sep 2009 11:24:00 UTC | #396520

Go to: Inside Nature's Giants: The Giraffe

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 4 by Ilovelucy

[joyless pedantry] The show was on Channel 4 not BBC 4[/joyless pedantry]

This series was one of the best science documentaries in years. Once you get over the squeamish aspect, not much of a problem for me, the anatomies of these animals and the passion of those explaining it are spellbinding. The Giraffe episode is particularly special because of Dawkins' obvious glee at finally getting to see a Giraffe's laryngeal nerve for real.

Sat, 12 Sep 2009 12:06:00 UTC | #396258

Go to: A skull that rewrites the history of man

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 20 by Ilovelucy

mordacious1

yep, I bought the paper out of sheer excitement this morning and felt a bit miffed about 5 minutes later.

Good old lousy science journalism! Just when all my friends stop asking me how I feel about the "new missing link" rubbish from a few months back, now I'm going to have to do the same with Lordkipanidze's unsubstantiated claims about Europe being the cradle of human evolution. :(

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 18:18:00 UTC | #395605

Go to: A skull that rewrites the history of man

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 17 by Ilovelucy

No new skulls have actually been found, it's the same fossils that were actually found from 1991 onwards. This article is inspired by a recent speech from the founder doing what founders normally do: exaggerating the importance of his finds. Sloppy science journalism basically. Must have been a slow news day for the Indie.

Wed, 09 Sep 2009 17:59:00 UTC | #395598

Go to: Elaine Morgan says we evolved from aquatic apes

Ilovelucy's Avatar Jump to comment 60 by Ilovelucy

While I don't yet buy this theory, it's thrilling to see it still has legs after all these years, especially with the finds of earlier forest dwelling bipeds such as Sahelanthropus tchadensis coming to light and making the savannah theory look very shaky indeed. Thing is that there are many alternatives to the Savannah theory to investigate before we accept the equatic ape hypothesis. It is by no means a dichotomy. Paleaoanthropology is currently a highly speculative science and I think we have a lot more shocks in store as more finds surface. I've found that while following it, it's wise not to get too attached to any particular theory.

Sun, 02 Aug 2009 06:47:00 UTC | #384175