it is never the topic at hand
but always the lurid but buried assumptions.
inaccessible in its pronounced exclaimers.
the topic is just a tongue twister of baffling logic
but the inherent source, so issue-bound
as the trigger that sets off the shotgun of verbiage,
featuring the locational presence of sidedness.
a line in the sand of positionality,
a stance with feelings and fury to back it,
water balloons of pre-conclusions,
readied to launch,
all color coded as to favorites by hand size and fit,
topics are a lot like that in the mind.
it is like periscopes up on subdued submarines,
facing off as if in an ocean of interest.
lord knows what is on deck but submersed below,
tactical and topic loaded, salvos readied to initiate.
the ocean of life plays along.
each to his own capacity, to be a ship of fools.
for topic is the lure, the bait of small mindedness.
hard to grasp the deeper concept at see.
contingencies set aside but ever present,
what is verbally said is always in need of a decode.
the need to know, from where was that internally hurled?
what is the real context of dismay within
that so reaps a stance taken that appears as topic strong?
it is mostly the issue of a tree without regard for the forest.
it is the loss of a grander context for the sake of stance.
controversy is an internal method of fear stimulation
as fear converts into attention grabbed.
attention grabbed is a trait of an audience as consumer.
consumer engenders capitalistic psychology 101.
cash flow follows interest, however it is generated.
topic is only the trigger on the secretion of income.
for those who play the grandest of those games,
national media lobbies and ushers, vexes and torques
towards refinement of this art, controversy as for profit.
for controversy is more the vain of venting frustration
of the school of expectations that did not lead to a degree.
the eventual impotency of verbal spentness
that does not change or transform the course of history
is just crowd appeal in passing and notoriety gone astray.
prominence maintains its status and smolder continues
as controversy never left its small mindedness,
never discovered a deep set of truth that bind or bond,
never left the need for human agreement as solution,
even if the earth itself was at affect in eventual regards.
controversy stands to fight,
where the need is to study the ground so stood upon.
for those buried assumptions, the broad scope of the land,
the embarrassment of human entitlement so insular
is not to discover with reverence
that any one thing is connected to all things.
there is, to the earth, as we also essentially are,
a natural course of action and flow.
humans feature cluelessness in these regards.
where do we start when controversy is the front door?
and we each are but an ode, to the earth itself
as it’s reading . . .