sentences shouldn't appease
but rigor the reader's mind.
reading shouldn't be
the advance of audience spectatorship.
understanding has short lived benefits.
the read should invite in-depth cognition.
read should evoke more than retention's claim.
read should open the creative wonderment of inquiry.
reading posing as passivity
is a kill of time.
the read should be more like
the hunt for and of the mind.
meaning is just footprints
in the tracking down.
side deductions always mentioned
in staying the course.
I wouldn't write to tell
but to expose along the way.
eventually I would expect
off the page to be the worth,
where the churn becomes self creative of mind-fullness.
maybe read is from childhood,
read to, into dreamland.
I didn't want read to be
a stumbling block to imagining.
I would listen to inner dialogue
rather than being read to.
self-inquiry is more potent
than listening-to could offer.
read should be a trampoline
rather than jumping rope.
a mind airborne is more expansive
than one well grounded.
yes, I'm not one good
for fully reading the instructions.
if I read, I am looking for left turns
or leaps off the page.
in a read, logical does not attract me
but quizzical does.
sometimes I get more clout
out of a run-on sentence.
if I ever fully read a book,
I should get an eagle-scout badge.
if reading a book is a train ride from A to B,
I got off before B.
I have a distrust for words
that have crowd appeal,
at least definitions are ever migrating
in the minds of users.
meaning is like taking a shower
yet we only agree to clean,
as if meaning could bypass the mind
and go directly to feel.
I am not good at standing in the mind line
when feel is play.
for reading is a lot like money
spent on leisure's ploy.
I'd rather think into thoughts
as mind's rightful occupancy.
for me, reading is a starter kit
than mind-play takes over.
maybe the issue is my mind runs faster
than read can take me.
I'm sorry,
what was that that you were reading to me? . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment