
i gave to ground
& scrimshawed
all my bone
called to north of
badb, my stone
etched of heart song
to feather dance
in spun spiral &
rhythm slow
stone alone
at nightmoons
here comes her
snow

i gave to ground
& scrimshawed
all my bone
called to north of
badb, my stone
etched of heart song
to feather dance
in spun spiral &
rhythm slow
stone alone
at nightmoons
here comes her
snow
To like/comment:

from her source
the first kiss of winter
to her river flows
taking up blackthorn
i seek to pathfind
her snows
Another rune poem of mine, where the rune is selected at random.
Today’s rune is laguz, which has a core meaning of “lake” and, by extension, may be interpreted as “river”, “ocean”, “sea”, “waterfall” or a general body of water. Some alternative interpretations define as “leek”. Following the more commonly accepted meaning, bodies of water were considered liminal spaces, a place between life and death or the threshold space between which spirit and substance resides.
To like/comment:

crack hands old oak
wrapped around my love
i hollow the heartwood
until she slips inside
she comes the winter
she comes the night
she comes the winternight
pinpricks my body torn
needles dance my arms
we sickle under midmoon
white kissed before we're born
she comes the winter
she comes the night
she comes winternight
To like/comment:

I have problems with the logic behind the pithy advice that in order to be a great writer, you must read. Voraciously. I know Stephen King has been credited with saying something along those lines, and I’m pretty certain he isn’t the first author to give such advice. [Oh no! Nobody Author dares counter the prevailing wisdom of the Almighty Stephen King! Heresy!]
I mean, I think that might be partially true if you are looking to emulate a style, a genre or an author. I will submit that you should be well-read in order to know how others write — as long as when you have done so, you read or have read with a critical eye. Reading only eye-candy and consuming to consume will not make anyone a great writer. But I question the concept that the reading requirement is a persistent prerequisite for writing great things.
It is probably a good thing that I have no ambitions for greatness. I’m quite alright just writing and enjoying the act of writing. Happy about it, even. So there’s little risk of greatness coming from my little corner of the world. I honestly should let those striving towards greatness deal with this question and not worry my pretty little head about the matter.
But I’m not convinced being a constant reader necessarily is a requirement towards being a great writer. Especially if you want to be a writer that wants to be the pathfinder type. To boldly go where no one has gone before, or some such thing. Or the subversive, where you need to have enough freedom apart from classic tropes to break them while still remaining familiar with them. I can see several other types of writers who could benefit from not “reading when they aren’t writing.”
When wisdom seems to not stand up to scrutiny, I get all nervy and bothered and I end up saying something.
Am I off the mark? Probably. But I remain unconvinced that the wisdom that a writer must read as part of their formula for greatness always holds true.
I know… I’m all duck and cover after this post. Especially after invoking and questioning the King of Horror’s holy gospel.
Your thoughts?
Be gentle as you tear me a new hole. I break easy.
tagged:
filed under:
To like/comment:

barbed the wires crossed
and i... and i...
shut up the inside, waiting
for the winter door
to swing wide open
so i fly
night against white
and stop making sense
to all who might listen
barbed the wires crossed
lacking transmission
wind strumming over snow
to bring out the singing
humming across the moors
building up the drifts
to blanket the whole
To like/comment: