🚀 go-pugleaf

On Saturday, July 30, 2022 at 4:01:37 PM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Monday, July 25, 2022 at 6:05:18 PM UTC-4, George J. Dance wrote: 
> > 
> > > On 2022-07-24 8:26 a.m., HC wrote: 
> > >> On Sunday, July 24, 2022 at 7:37:26 AM UTC-4, Will Dockery wrote: 
> > >>> Another one from Bukowski, "Bluebird": 
> > >>> 
> > >>> https://youtu.be/lyMS4qJ8NXU 
> > >> 
> > >> Blech. 
> > > > 
> > 
> > > Wow! It's a good thing I read "Bluebird" for myself. I might've formed 
> > > the wrong opinion of it.
> > For continuity, the George Dance review of "Bluebird": 
> > 
> > George J. Dance wrote: 
> > > 
> > > > On 2022-07-21 7:00 p.m., NancyGene wrote: 
> > > >> On Thursday, July 21, 2022 at 10:51:22 PM UTC, blackpo...@aol.com wrote: 
> > > > 
> > > >> https://youtu.be/lyMS4qJ8NXU 
> > > 
> > >> It's really just a paragraph or two being read. 
> > > 
> > > No, it's not 'just" a prose paragraph. Just from Bukowski's reading, you 
> > > can tell he's reading a poem: you can hear the line breaks. 
> > > 
> > >> That said, we don't like the last line ("But I don't weep, do you?"). 
> > > 
> > >> It reminds us of a former first lady's coat, which said "I don't really 
> > > care, do you?" although the Bukowski quote predates that. 
> > > 
> > > I don't know, but I'd bet it was her husband who said that. That's 
> > > always a problem in a poem (when a line or phrase unintentionally echoes 
> > > something more familiar, resulting in a mixed image), but it's probably 
> > > one that will go away: the Nixons have been consigned to the dustbin of 
> > > history, where they belong. 
> > > 
> > >> Having the line end with "do you?" is a totally obvious choice and hurts the poem. 
> > > 
> > > It may detract from the poem for some; it turns it from a purely 
> > > introspective piece into a didactic or 'message' poem. But there's 
> > > nothing wrong with didacticism per se. And I admire Bukowski for going there. 
> > > 
> > > I think "Bluebird" was written as a spoken piece (from all that 
> > > repetition); that Bukowski was considering his audience, whom he was 
> > > writing for; and that his audience -- tough guys, hard workers and hard 
> > > drinkers, rebels without a cause -- are the men most likely to have 
> > > their own bluebird problem,
> Like I said, Charles Bukowski was a poet of the people, similarly to Carl Sandburg before him.
> > and (for the same reason) most likely to 
> > > suppress that knowledge. He cannot count on that sort of man (he knows, 
> > > since he's been one himself) to just suddenly think, "Gee, he's not only 
> > > talking about himself -- he's talking about a general truth about man, 
> > > which might be true of me as well." Especially in a spoken reading, 
> > > where he and his audience will have passed on to another poem a few 
> > > moments later. For the poem to be most effective, he has to give his 
> > > audience that thought explicitly. 
> > 
> > Like I wrote earlier, good to see Charles Bukowski finally got a fair shake here.
> ...

Shouldn’t that read ‘similar to’, rather than ‘similarly to’?