Art 101: Hey Sean Penn, Who Wrote This?
by Alvaro Alvillar
Here’s a hint:
Sean Penn and Bono were friends/admirers of this poet and I wonder if they are aware of this very pertinent and timeless poem which reflects today’s “progressive” hypocritical agenda.
I will reveal the rest of the poem and the artist this weekend, a poet I had the great fortune of having met as a very young man in high school at the studio of an artist and friend.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
29 Comments
The best at Socialism/Communism are those who already have THEIR money.
Whoever this 'poet' is, if he's not being ironic, he must be one disturbed individual.
Much like the dictator-loving, America-hating leftists who spout this stuff from pulpits, movies and government.
It's Bukowski…are we supposed to be guessing here?
Correct. "I got mine, but you don't get yours, because wealth is evil."
The lowest circles of Progressive Hell are reserved for hedge fund managers………..unless it's their Lefty hero and sugar daddy, George Soros. He manages a hedge fund which has made him $2.9 billion off the global credit collapse. And he proudly declared "I'm having a very good crisis."
A hefty chunk of his wealth goes to fund communist causes in the US and Europe.
My guess is that Sean P and Co. ARE aware of this poem and even if they weren't, they would say they agree with it. They way that I read that poem read like something a "progressive" would cite as part of an anti religious or Conservative screed. They would say that it is Religion that preaches love but makes war, is intolerant and hateful, etc etc. Since you met this poet, I am guessing that your knowledge of him let's you see this poem in a different light. But when I read it, I would have thought this an example of something that Penn wrote himself!
This is part of the problem with Liberals. This poem obviously has layers of meaning, but the Liberal stays always at the surface never penetrating further than skin deep. Their oversimplification and self righteous maudlinism is at the root of their disastrous policies.
A liberal would read this poem as:
"and the best at murder is those who preach against it" Liberal translation: Christianity is responsible for most of the murders, see what hypocrites they are?" Murder is bad, capital punishment is murder.
"and the best at hate are those who preach love" Liberal translation: "Religionists and conservatives are the REAL haters, see what hypocrites they are? Conservatives are bigots, you should hate religious people and conservatives, they are NOT to be tolerated.
"and the best at war are finally those who preach peace" Liberal translation: Bush is a christian, Bush and right wingers make war on innocents, see what hypocrites they are?" All War is Bad, America is the real terrorists, Jihaadists are only giving us what we deserve, and Islam is being discriminated against.
See, now I bet that any Liberal troll that reads this post will wonder why the Liberal Translations would be considered off the mark!
This poet also avoided service in the military during World War II
those who preach god, need god
those who preach peace do not have peace
those who preach peace do not have love
I'm guessing the message here is beyond Penn.
Whatever the poet's intention, there is truth there, that the worst will always cloak their evil and never admit to it.
Yeah yeah yeah the poet is Charles Bukowski.
This poet, given that Barfly was probably autibiographical, was probably not fit for military service.
there is enough treachery, hatred violence absurdity in the average
human being to supply any given army on any given day
and the best at murder are those who preach against it
and the best at hate are those who preach love
and the best at war finally are those who preach peace
those who preach god, need god
those who preach peace do not have peace
those who preach peace do not have love
beware the preachers
beware the knowers
beware those who are always reading books
beware those who either detest poverty
or are proud of it
beware those quick to praise
for they need praise in return
beware those who are quick to censor
they are afraid of what they do not know
beware those who seek constant crowds for
they are nothing alone
beware the average man the average woman
beware their love, their love is average
seeks average
but there is genius in their hatred
there is enough genius in their hatred to kill you
to kill anybody
not wanting solitude
not understanding solitude
they will attempt to destroy anything
that differs from their own
not being able to create art
they will not understand art
they will consider their failure as creators
only as a failure of the world
not being able to love fully
they will believe your love incomplete
and then they will hate you
and their hatred will be perfect
like a shining diamond
like a knife
like a mountain
like a tiger
like hemlock
their finest art
Yes, it's Charles Bukowski, "The Genius of The Crowd." Takes me back to my college days of working in the bookstore. *sigh* Bukowski was quite a character, to say the least. Does this mean Big Hollywood will now have a poetry corner?? AWESOME!!
Soros is not welcome in France or Thailand. I wonder why?
don't you think that is being taken out of context? seems more like it was meant to be an assault on Christians.
Those who preach peace in our society, the leftists, are not the best at making war, they actually support those who are the best at coercing populations preferably unarmed to do exactly what they want like Chavez, Castro and Ahmadinejad.
Bukowski failed the psych exam and was rendered 4-f.
But he was a damn good writer.
I agree with you, but like a truly good poem, its meaning can be interpreted myriad ways to mesh with the reader's beliefs/impressions. I thought it was very deep when I was 20.
I suppose you could apply the poem to religion – based on the collective aspects inherent within most organized religion – but it was meant as a diatribe against mob mentality in general. Most recently, I choose to apply it to the election of the annointned one, and the lemmings who voted for Obama simply because everybody else "cool" liked him. Jessica Alba said she loves him, and she's freaking hot – so I'm voting for him. Oprah (the other O) told me to. I'm on it! He's black, so we're voting for him. Look how cool we all are!!!
Although, I must say – Jessica Alba is hot, that much is true. I almost voted for him just for her.
That's the stupidest view of poetry I've ever read (not that you're the first to put it forth). Poems are written because their authors have something to say; they are not ambiguous or ambivalent exercises in confirmation bias.
Why is it stupid? My point is there's no guarantee that the person _reading_ the poem will come away with the exact point the writer intended. What one person finds stirring another finds pretentious claptrap. It's in the eye of the beholder/reader. Poetry isn't a math problem with only one right answer.
Haha… to think when I first read the poem excerpt (but before I'd read the comments) I thought that 'best at war' was meant to be a *good* thing.. as in, kicking bad-guy rear end before he kicks some innocent's. Which is, y'know, what war is supposed to be about.
Yeah, I'm going to have to come down on your side here. As a composer who performs a lot of my own music, I'm constantly amazed by what people tell me they "hear" in what I wrote. 99.9% of the time it has NOTHING WHATSOEVER TO DO with what I intended to communicate, but I'm OK with that. In fact, I think it's cool that listeners can create their own little universes of experience in my music. I'm sure Beethoven didn't see that galaxies and constellations that fill my head when I listen to his late string quartets either.
I agree — very perceptive. Unless this is irony, this poet has one sick view of the world.
And it does sound typically leftist. . . if not trollish. Take something someone clearly believes in deeply and accuse them of secretly being the opposite.
UNLESS, there is more context to show that the poet actually means: "those who are evil" cloak themselves "in that which is good." But right now, I don't know that I would read that in what is presented.
Poetry by Sean Penn:
Spit, punch, kick
Kick, kick, kick,
Bleed your blood
Punch, punch, kick
Beg for mercy
I'm giving none
Strangle, spit, punch
Love, forgiveness, peace
Puppies and kittens
You're channeling him! Like, wow, man! Can you channel Hugo?
Does Mr. Alvillar think we can't use google? The rest of the poem is revealed to anyone interested simply by putting the first line into a google search. Yahoo too, I expect.
Also, the poor guy can't even rhyme
. His message may be accurate, but it would be better suited to prose if he's not going to bother to even attempt to rhyme. Geez, he sounds worse than Emily Dickinson does at rhyming, and she would have trouble making a rhyme out of the word 'no' and a prostitute.
not all poetry rhymes
You must be logged in to post a comment.