I wonder, Marcus, if poets should make resolutions. Look at this one, he wants to write a poem that will change someone’s life.
Is it the ability you mock, to be the creator of someone’s life altering event or the sheer vanity of that presumption?
Reality. With ever expanding content clamouring for ever narrowing attention spans, what are the chances someone is going to read your poem and then read it again and then read it well enough to let it seep through the viscous dark?
The only ‘someone’ you can write for is you. The only life that it needs to change is yours. You create your own epiphany. You colour your own darkness. That can’t be a bad resolution.
moulting-
I grow a new coat
to cover my scars
Phantom Road 
writers / poets can’t but write, they have to otherwise the words fermenting within would drive them crazy….giving joy / inspiration etc. comes as a by product may be…happy new year Rajani 🙂
love the spontaneity of the thoughts, a wonderful flow…
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thanks so much Sumana 🙂
LikeLike
Marx put it well: “Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.” The current refrain – and it goes all the way to Rumi, so not really modern – is that it is better to change yourself than the world. But if we allow mathematics to weigh in, we know that larger problems are easier – at any rate more fun – to solve than smaller ones: the special cases can and do get in the way of insightful breakthroughs, where each insight solves a hitherto unsolvable class of problems. And what are each of us but hitherto unsolvable problems – ‘hitherto’ being the operative word here) 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ah my friend, now the complexity sets in…does change equal solution? Us hitherto unsolveables may just don a new avatar and remain as elusive! And then you add context- the world. Now poetry carries a larger burden and trembles, scattering its metre and rhyme!!
LikeLiked by 1 person
If we simplify things (as mathematicians like to do; mathematics being poetry by other means), yes indeed change equals solution. But all solutions by their nature are contingent, temporary, subject to relentless improvement: for every new mask, there is an unmasking and the play goes on. As poets, we are privy to the workings of maya, have observed her at work, and hence our words have cause enough to tremble. Mathematicians, forbidden by their presumptions to allow this keen bit of insight to inform their work, go mad toward the end. Trembling is better, no?
LikeLiked by 1 person
That iterative development model for solving human problems is problematic at best! But yes, the trembling is because we too want one beautiful equation -to produce the ultimate question and its ultimate solution and hand it to us, scratched on a table napkin in 140chars or less!
LikeLiked by 1 person
I will slightly rephrase your statement: take out ‘development’ and replace ‘at’ with ‘hence’: the iterative model for solving human problems is problematic, hence best 🙂
LikeLike
Also, it’s all we have 🙂
LikeLiked by 1 person