Comments on: Thursday short poem: Olds’ Sex Without Love

By: Maria

Maria — Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:54:04 +0000

I have recently read this poem and had to compare it with another poem entilted “The Passionate Shepherd to His Love” by Christopher Marlowe. I had to find a common theme found in both and elavorate on how the authors presents it in each poem. The common theme I found in both was the need for companionship. Both characters are willing to give something of themselfs like their time, body and material things for a little companionship. Tell me what do you think of this?

By: Jessica

Jessica — Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:32:16 +0000

Real love is never ambivalent, whether it be the act of being in-love or love-making. People have opions over everything they just don’t always feel obligated to share them.

By: Hugo

Hugo — Wed, 17 Nov 2004 13:31:48 +0000

But sir, you are the one having intercourse with Billy, as your name makes clear!

By: BuckWildFuckingBilly

BuckWildFuckingBilly — Wed, 17 Nov 2004 02:18:19 +0000

I think all of you are fucking faggots

By: Amanda

Amanda — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 14:08:54 +0000

I’m kind of disagreeing with his interpretation, too, though. Again, I do find the admiration in the poem to have a genuine side to it.

By: Lynn Gazis-Sax

Lynn Gazis-Sax — Mon, 25 Oct 2004 02:42:39 +0000

Most of us have more mixed feelings when it comes to the pure physicality of love-making than we’d like to admit to. Meaning from both sides of the “I can/can’t have sex without love” fence, right? I remember, in college, on the one hand having very negative feelings toward casual sex for myself, and on the other hand – there was this one woman, who seemed to be able to do it, and I wanted to believe that, after all, for her it worked. That somewhere there was someone who could actually enjoy sex without entanglement.

On the other hand, I’ve long suspected that at least some people (maybe especially men, who are expected to be horny at the drop of a hat) who claim to be thoroughly able to divorce sex from love (and really do talk as if they mean no real connection at all) may be more ambivalent, from their side, than they want to let on.

By: mythago

mythago — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 22:31:39 +0000

Or, I could be seeing this through my own biased glasses!

Well, yes. Since you’re treating the lack of love as equal to no real connection.

Amanda, I agree with you about poetry in general, but it really sounds like what you’re saying is that if one disagrees with Hugo’s interpretation, it’s because one is defensively overreacting.

By: Ruth

Ruth — Sun, 24 Oct 2004 21:33:32 +0000

I absolutely love Olds’ Sex Without Love! I first read it during my Junior year in college. It touches my heart every time I read it. Thanks for posting it.

By: Hugo

Hugo — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 01:09:33 +0000

Never, Amanda, have I agreed with you more.

By: Amanda

Amanda — Tue, 12 Oct 2004 00:59:55 +0000

Now see we are treading on dangerous territory here–these are exactly the ambiguities that poetry can tease out of us. Most of us have more mixed feelings when it comes to the pure physicality of love-making than we’d like to admit to. More than anything, I think that Olds messes with that part of our minds.

Good poets don’t have clean messages. Good poets extract discomfort out of us and make us question ourselves.