Hey! It looks like you're new here. You might want to check out the introduction.
Show rules for this event
Quiet but Effective
How sad the trees
How sad the flowers
They cannot see their own beauty
—Raymond Smullyan
But so little of their beauty is meant for us to see,
The flowers dazzle in with designs in ultraviolet,
Cast meaning to the wind, utter sonnets in perfume,
And even tickle quiet air with electrical potential,
All done to coax the butterflies and bees
(Which have their silent codes, instructive dance in darkened hives
To point each other to the finest blooms.)
Below the earth, deep roots touch, trade nutrients,
And fungi form their networks to report on forest news.
Understated? Rather, just stated enough.
How sad the flowers
They cannot see their own beauty
—Raymond Smullyan
But so little of their beauty is meant for us to see,
The flowers dazzle in with designs in ultraviolet,
Cast meaning to the wind, utter sonnets in perfume,
And even tickle quiet air with electrical potential,
All done to coax the butterflies and bees
(Which have their silent codes, instructive dance in darkened hives
To point each other to the finest blooms.)
Below the earth, deep roots touch, trade nutrients,
And fungi form their networks to report on forest news.
Understated? Rather, just stated enough.
Hm, it's an interesting point that insofar as flowers would care about beauty, they do see it: its purpose is simply to attract animals, and they experience the success of that, so maybe they can "see" their own beauty. Simple idea here, but it's very atmospheric and pleasant to read. Maybe feels a tad explain-y and less artistic in a couple small places. Nice to see in contrast to the negative connotations of the other two entries that this one takes a positive mood.
This entry takes a risk by acting as a commentary on another passage--now there are two domains of meaning which must be considered, and that is a lot of complexity!
Can the poet, like a steely closing pitcher in baseball, bring the game to a satisfying conclusion?
Most interesting for me is that the contributed part takes us into a world of verbs--dazzling, casting, uttering, tickling--and asks us to look at the life of a flower as something active.
Can the poet, like a steely closing pitcher in baseball, bring the game to a satisfying conclusion?
Most interesting for me is that the contributed part takes us into a world of verbs--dazzling, casting, uttering, tickling--and asks us to look at the life of a flower as something active.
