/lit/ - Literature

>>12482587
I've never read Rupi Kaur before, but that poem you posted does make sense if you don't read it through a "fuck women" perspective. You missed the point of it because you chose to ignore the poem's meaning and instead forced your own expectations onto it and refused to then see it as anything else. You read her poem through a filter that left you attacking whatever surface-level meaning you could salvage. That is why you find it absurd--you don't think about the poem, you think about how the author must be a bitch, and then do mental gymnastics to twist the poem into whatever validates your perspective on the author.

She ate the flowers so they could become apart of her body and soul. I assume you are familiar with basic biology, so the phrase, "you are what you eat," plays a significant role to understanding this poem. The flowers represent love, and "the last bouquet" suggests a long-lasting relationship that recently ended in seemingly tragedy for either or both partners. She is attached to and misses him, and that's all that matters, regardless of whether he died or left her. "The last bouquet of flowers...now wilting in their vase," represent, in her perspective, the death and decay of the memories and essence of the relationship. If she let the last flowers wilt, she will be left with nothing left from him, and she will disrespect the love they had. So, in order to retain the relationship, and pay tribute to her partner, she consumes the last flowers so that he becomes a part of, and stays with, her forever.

So no, it is not a funny poem like you intemperate it as. If you laugh because she ate flowers, then you are literally a child.