Indiscriminate Button Pressing

I am posting the link to this review one more time, because the reviewer has edited a bit from last night.

This looks less to me, now, than someone who simply didn't like the plot and got a little carried away in demonstrating as much, and more like someone who really has some deep seated issues. Not saying that as a bad thing, not saying she's wrong in her stance on violence, because in my not so humble opinion, she's not.

Once, when I was in college, I wrote a poem. It was called "Eating a Cockroach." It was about my turtle, Squirt, eating a bug. I wrote it, brought it into the workshop, and read it out loud. You wouldn't believe the meaning that poem took on to each student. It was a metaphor for life, for death, for love, for sex.

But sometimes a poem about a turtle eating a cockroach is just a poem about a turtle eating a cockroach.

Aurora Borealis was meant to disturb. It was not meant to educate. It was meant to entertain. For those looking for deep meaning: seriously, go read Crime and Punishment. At one point in the review I was delivering a "significant message".

But sometimes a poem about a turtle eating a cockroach is just a poem about a turtle eating a cockroach.

I like to write with elbow room for the reader. I like the reader to be able to internalize, relate to, and squirm a little with what I write. I sometimes write ambiguously, because I enjoy the "Rorschach Effect". I like that a bunch of different readers get a bunch of different interpretations of things.

I certainly pressed a button here. Especially because Aurora Borealis had, to me, no significant message. To me, it's not really about the murder, it's about all the stuff that happens up to it. It is more about the ride than the destination. She didn't like the ride, and that's fine. Her Rorschach test was a little different than mine.

I guess I sort of resent the whole public service announcement, though.

Syndicate content