poetic freedom, or Idiotmaticus?

[Idiomaticus]

Do not ask me why I need this, but I do need it. This is taken out of a context: instead of Jim is looking at a sun, probably because he has sunglasses, I sad that Jim has a sun. Poets will probably give me a Nobel Prize since they are drowning in poet freedom, but there is a decent freedom as well. You cannot play with others, because you need something to fit your little line, can you? So, is this out of limits, Jim has a sun, and also the moon, and he has stars, and clouds, and thunder, wife too, and everything, and at the same time nothing, because he is stupid, selfish human being.. Or you think one might use the above line, be it poetic or not? Maybe someone here can give me a pointer, or tell me to go to hell.

[MrPedantic]

Hello Idiomaticus

I would probably not say "Jim has a sun", because it suggests the existence of several suns, which doesn't seem appropriate in your context.

"Jim has the sun", on the other hand, might not imply for everyone that Jim was looking at the sun.

There are other options, e.g. "Jim takes the sun"; but again, that doesn't necessarily imply "looking".

Could you reverse it, e.g. "The sun holds Jim"?

MrP

[Idiomaticus]

I have to think about this some more, so let me get back to you. Thanks.