Collected Poems of Oscar Wilde

I know, I'm breaking my rules on not writing about poetry because it makes me uncomfortable but those were never explicit rules per se and if you really think I'd pass up an excuse to talk about Oscar Wilde, well, you may want to buy a hat.

Oscar Wilde's poetry is... Well, he's not my favorite. There are a few I think a lovely and beautiful and many that seem hackneyed. Some of it I have trouble focusing on--which may be partially because of the general style of the era, I'm more of a Beat Ferlinghetti-Ginsberg-Corso sort of person. Actually, another reason why I decided to write about this is because this book actually had information regarding Wilde's 'discovery' and charges being brought to him and I wanted an excuse to share it. You see, the story is that he was handed a card by Lord Alfred Douglas's father that read "To Oscar Wilde posing as a sodomite" (only badly spelled, like 'sodumyte' or something equally atrocious)... And then it always skips to the trials, like, oh, suddenly everyone magically knew? Like, Wilde didn't just rip it up or eat it or something? This reveals that he actually attempting to sue for libel, lost the case, and then of course the charges for homosexuality were brought upon him. Talk about a spit in the eye, you know? Anyway, that's the only part of the introduction I really paid attention to, other than a small bit citing the poems written in memoriam of his sister and father.

Oh, and a note on the edition in question: it's Wordsworth, but not the famed 'Second Edition' which apparently is the best version ever. I believe this contains every example of his poetry however, so suck on that second edition users! Plus, instead of the cover being the ocean, it's a close-up version of this picture--the circled is Oscar Wilde: Also, support that site I stole the picture from because they were the only folks around who had a decent picture of it. It's actually kind of strange to see him dressed as a natural man of the era... but I guess, believe it or not, he was human too.






From 'Libertatis Sacra Fames' (The Sacred Hunger for Liberty [French]: "Arts, Culture, Reverence, Honour, all things fade, / Save Treason and the dagger of her trade, / Or Murder with his silent bloody feet." (9). Infamy will always live on longer than... Well, the other things Wilde names.


In his poem 'The Garden of Eros', Wilde lists a good many Norse epic/saga heroes, such as Sigurd and Gudrun and Grettir. He prefaces it with "We know them all" (14). By what 'we' exactly are you referring to? You and JRR Tolkien? You, JRR Tolkien, and my brother? Yeah, that sounds about right. (Thomas is going to be mad that he was lumped into the same group as JRR Tolkien...)


One of my favorite poems, though not my most is 'Requiescat' ('May She Rest' [Latin]). It was written for his sister after her death; Wilde kept a lock of her hair to the end of his days. I've not much to say for it, but might I provide a link to it for you: http://www.poetry-archive.com/w/requiescat.html

A few of his poems beg for the beauty of the ancients of Greece and Rome to return by way of letting "the dull world grow young" (35). At the same time he seems to be aware of the paganism and impurity of that (my example is currently 'The Burden of Itys') as he talks about Ashtaroth (a demon, which apparently... teaches math and science? What?) and how he loves the "morning-star of Tuscany/More than the perfect sun of Raphael" (35). In that case, though, it seems he is unaware as of yet, still intoxicated by the glorious sights he is beholding, or imagining he will be beholding... Well, my point of bringing that second quote up is that perhaps I'm reading too far into it, but remember, Lucifer is the "Morning-star of evil" and Raphael is an archangel... And it appears before the Ashtaroth thing, so... Yeah? Could work?


In the same poem he admits that he wants to remain intoxicated with life and that fantasy and avoid "the Gorgon eyes of Truth" (37) and reality, and begs those fantasies to grow stronger because he still beholds Christ who he has attempted to desert even though he admits he had loved him, held his hands, kissed his lips and that he now is aware of Christ weeping, and he admits that it may be for him, the lost sheep. Again, he attempts to pull away, but through the rest he eventually works his way back to Christ; the conclusion comes with the ringing of the church bell which he goes back to, knowing he "must not wait" (40).


Apparently Keats had a poem entitled 'Endymion', or a poem in which he was the main character (Endymion was beloved of the moon and given eternal sleep and youth for her to view) and Wilde has a poem of the same name. I have never read the first, but Keats was Wilde's hero, so I can only assume that Wilde's was written as a response. Seems logical, no? One thing that bothers me about Wilde's poem is that the second stanza opens with "The turtle now has ceased to call" (46). What? I imagine they make noises, but... what? There were no better animals that could have been used or one that actually comes to mind as a 'calling' animal? The poem itself is kind of sad, for its about Endymion's human lover, who was told but the day before by himself that he loved her... And now she waits for him sad and disheartened, begging the moon to find him and help him find his way--though of course she already has found him; she has just claimed him for her own.


Wilde, unsurprisingly, also made a visit--although as he would probably be more apt to call it, a pilgrimage--to the grave of Keats. According to this book, he prostrated himself upon the grave... And later wrote a poem about the grave and in honour of Keats. I mention it because it is one of my favorites and for the fact that again, our heroes had heroes too and were, believe it or not, human. (In a later poem Wilde talks of a dream he has or had of meeting Keats.) And, let it be known--I acted similarly on Wilde's grave.

'In the Gold Room: A Harmony' is also a great poem. It is a sort of love poem, but I like the opening lines to each stanza--"Her ivory hands on the ivory keys", "Her gold hair fell on the wall of gold", "And her sweet red lips on these lips of mine" (72)--the best. Each stanza continues to describe whatever has been first touched upon.

In 'Fabien dei Frenchi' Wilde makes a quote which one at first would think a reference to Dracula--in fact, I thought it was until I just looked up the poem's date, which was 1881. Dracula wasn't written until 1897, so no go there. Oh, before I go on I guess I should make you privy to the line in question: "The dead that travel fast" (80). The line in Dracula is "For the dead travel fast" (Chapter one). This however is a reference to a ballad called 'Lenora' (Or 'Lenore') written by Gottfried August Burger in 1773. (The things I know, huh?) Depending on the translation, you actually get that exact line. So... to cut a long story short, Oscar Wilde is referring to a ballad that's largely unknown these days. (I myself have yet to read the whole of it.)


'Panthea' is a great poem of passion and greater passion, of living to the fullest and wildest in such, while ignoring things like philosophy and wisdom for they are "dead" and of "childless heritage" (83) respectively. If I could share a few choice lines with you: "Nay, let us walk from fire unto fire,/From passionate pain to deadlier delight, --/I am too young to live without desire,/Too young art thou to waste this summer night"(83). Wasting it on asking questions that have been asked to the oracles and seers centuries before where no answers had or could be given--because "to feel is better than to know" (83). To love is better to be immersed in the philosophy and too much knowledge.

"Hearken [the gods] now to either good or ill,/But send their rain upon the just and the unjust at will" (83). / "'It rains on the just and unjust alike... Except in California'"--Alan Moore, Watchmen.

"O we are wearied of this guilt,/Wearied of pleasure's paramour despair/Wearied of every temple we have built,/Wearied of every right, unanswered prayer,/For man is weak; God sleeps: and heaven is high:/One fiery-coloured moment: one great love; and lo! we die." (85). "All things live in Death's despite." (86).

"We [lovers] shall be notes in that great Symphony/Whose cadence circles through the rhythmic spheres,/And all the live World's throbbing heart shall be/One with our heart; the stealthy creeping years/Have lost their terrors now, we shall not die,/The Universe itself will be our Immortality." (88). Because he argues that if not for love between people, the rest of nature would not work as it should--the bee would not pollinate, flowers would not bloom, leaves would not bud, and so on.


'Taedium Vitae' ('Weariness of Life [Latin]) interests me in its opening line--"To stab my youth with desperate knives" (95). Though this was written nine years before Dorian Gray would be published (And seven to eight years before it was written/conceived, I assume) I can't help but point out its irony with that book in mind. Dorian of course has his portrait that reflects his true age and true vileness--the climactic scene is when he takes a dagger to it and ends up killing himself. But you see? He took a knife to his aged self. (Though arguably in an attempt to destroy the sins which marred his portrait which were obtained during his elongated youth he could have been doing exactly what the opening line entails anyways...) The knife was desperate either way, I'd say as well. He also talks about meshing his soul "within a woman's hair" (95). This could either refer to the Victorian practice of giving loved ones locks of hair and winding jewelry out of hair and stuff (okay, so not everything about that era was great) in terms of a lover or wife, or referring to his by then deceased sister, a lock of whose hair he had in his personal affects until his own death.

The next poem I believe is called 'Bittersweet Love', though I cannot be sure because Wordsworth decided not to give an official translation and the title is in Greek characters (Which I cannot reproduce here). All I can say is, in this particular edition, it begins on page 109. Its first line is "Sweet, I blame you not, for mine the fault was, had I not been made of common clay" (109), that which instantly attracted me. He is apologizing for a romance that did not work out which would if, well, he had not been made of common clay--which is awesome imagery right there. This is the poem he says his dream of meeting Keats in; the love was so great he felt he had attained what Keats had or wrote of and blessed him (Wilde) with this ecstatic love. Wilde goes on for a while talking about how great it was, and had it worked out they would have been the sort of lovers young lovers would read about for time and time to come--but "the crimson flower of our life is eaten by the cankerworm of truth" (110) and eventually they drift away from each other. He speaks of growing old and losing passion and youth and eventually death knocking at his door--but he never says he regrets loving the female the poem is directed to, nay, he is okay with it because it was of his own choice and that to experience that love was great indeed, even if it eventually led to nothing greater.

Going to Keats once more is Wilde's poem 'On Sale by Auction of Keat's Love Letters'. The poem is told in woe because the notes are being bargained and fought for, priced by a merchant and not for what they contain, their true beauty hardly even mentioned or known--the men understand not what they do, treating it as practically a trifle. In the second stanza he compares this act of theirs to the Roman soldiers who played dice for the clothes taken off of Jesus just before his crucifixion.

I've not much to say for 'To L. L', other than provide a link to it--though honestly you can find any of these by googling them. I'd say it's one of the most perfect of the bunch, and if asked I'd be willing to say it's in the top five, if not my absolute favorite of Wilde's poetry (discounting 'The Ballad of Reading Gaol'). The only stanza I really feel the need to draw particular attention to (for the rest is far too much to quote) is the final one: "But strange that I was not told/That the brain can hold/In a tiny ivory cell/God's heaven and hell" (124). / "The mind is its own place, and in itself, can make a Heaven of Hell, a Hell of Heaven"--John Milton, Paradise Lost (Book one). This quote refers to Satan's mind and twisted logic (in Paradise Lost) and there's very little doubt that that quote is the one that inspired Oscar Wilde for this stanza, for surely being an educated man he would have read it (no doubt it was required at Oxford). As for if that would be meant to have bearing on Wilde's character at that point in the poem--I cannot say.

And one last note, that pertains to 'The Sphinx'--Wilde writes again of great gods and mythical beasts past--the speaker of the poem is urging the monster to return to her land and her previous lovers and consorts, arguing that those like Thoth and Ashtaroth never died--Jesus is the only god of those named who had in his--for lack of a better word that is in no means meant to offend--legendarium allowed himself to be killed. In the end, as in 'The Burden of Itys', he rejects the Sphinx and what fantasies arise around her and tells her to "leave me to my crucifix" (135) and his God.

So, there you go. I've already done 'The Ballad of Reading Gaol' down in The Collected Oscar Wilde post if you're still interested in his poetry, especially what is probably his most famous. (I don't think I really went over his other poems in that collection...) And checking that post, I can now say with certainty that Barnes & Noble does not give you his complete poetry in that collection. Well, like I said, he's not my favorite poet, but he's certainly no Robert Frost. Ever. Those with a fondness for Victorian poetry will probably enjoy this more than I did; like I said, I prefer those of the Beat poets.



Answer to last post's cryptic song lyrics for Emma: Walk Away by Franz Ferdinand

This post's cryptic song lyrics for Emma: The lovers who have tainted you, they pulled you into the night--They touched your skin with velvet gloves and made you feel alive

I'd walk through hell for you, let it burn right through my shoes, these soles are useless without you

Hey, look! Here I am, writing. What book did I finish... The Four Loves by CS Lewis! What books am I still reading? (That doesn't sound grammatically correct...) Cosmos by Carl Sagan and 1984 by George Orwell! Guess what I'm putting off! Correct! My application to Fordham! Yeaaaaaaah. Look. This time it's not my fault. My parents are both asleep (yes, at 8:30 p.m.) and I haven't exactly memorized my social security number. So. Come on, mom. But I did finally edit my college essay and do a million pages of homework for Marky Mark because he's obviously trying to kill me slowly.




So, I was going to pretend I remembered things from Language & Composition last year and treat The Four Loves like an EPL assignment because it's a nonfiction essay (cough, book, cough) and actually pick out the different EPL things but I can only remember Ethos and part of Logos and good news, that notebook is lost in the dark recesses of my closet. Under my astronomy binder, actually. But trying to get it would be painful and would most likely make me cry, or something. But! I can do Ethos: Extrinsic: CS Lewis? Are you kidding me? Maybe you've heard of something called.... The Chronicles of Narnia? AKA, amazing children's fantasy book series that wipes the floors with Harry Potter? Don't get me wrong, I like Harry Potter, but really, it's no contest. Oh, and if you've only seen the movie version of The Lion the Witch and The Wardrobe and Prince Caspian you are missing out so incredibly much. (Again, I think I just killed the English language). Seriously. Those books are soooo much better! I love them! Except for A Horse and His Boy. And the end of The Last Battle is a little disheartening, but... Look, that's beside the point. But I love CS Lewis.
Intrinsic: He really wants to share his view on what he believes the four loves are?

So, yeah, that's basically it. Being nonfiction, I don't really feel comfortable saying it was 'good' or not, nonfiction seems to me to be either interesting or not. This was interesting.

"We may give our human loves the unconditional allegiance which we owe only to God. Then they become Gods: then they become demons." This I thought was interesting. CS Lewis's Christianity is pretty well known, especially through the obvious parallels between religion and various bits in The Chronicles of Narnia, cough cough, ASLAN. Other parts too, but if you don't get Aslan is supposed to be Jesus, come on guys. But yeah. It's pretty well-documented. Anyway, he was a born-again (kind of) so I was worried he'd be a little... intense. However, when I saw this I got excited. Very few people are willing, or do realize that God, angels, demons, are all the same thing, really. Actually, I first read the idea in an early chapter of Berserk by Kentaro Miura and it knocked me off my feet. ("'But if you look at it a different way, it might be proof that there's something beyond human understanding in this world. For instance, what're called gods... or something...' 'Don'tcha mean devils?' '...Who knows? Aren't they the same thing?'") Since I've literally seen the idea in only one other place, I was incredibly excited to see this. A bad mark on my part, but I was scared he'd be a crazy zealot. But to see that kind of gives a strange air of... level-headedness? Admitting that nothing perfect? Abraxes, Abraxes. I don't know.

(Leading off of the above quote--) "Then they will destroy us, and also destroy themselves. For natural loves that are allowed to become gods do not remain loves. They are still called so, but can become in fact complicated forms of hatred." I was actually going to talk (again) about how love and hate are basically the same exact things only in different minor classifications, but I'll actually just name-drop Berserk again, how about that? Griffith from the series led a band of mercenaries called the Hawks and besides looking literally of unearthly beauty, especially in the manga. Most of these people he led were really kids--orphans found on the battlefield, children who escaped from slavery and so on. They had no one but him and the worshiped him. He was given that God-love. High of power and by his own ambition, he goes a little bit crazy, sacrifices basically all of his followers and his humanity to literally become a member of the Godhand, a demigod, acting out God's Will. (There's an interesting theory on God, but I won't get into that now...) Sooo. Yeahhh. Shout-outs to Miura...

"The human mind is generally far more eager to praise and dispraise than to describe and define." Yeah, I've noticed. We are more likely to make it necessary to call a logical fallacy on ourselves than not. I'm calling logical fallacies, too. With my ninja stars of correct rhetoric.

"There may come an occasion for renouncing this love; pluck out your right eye. But you need to have a right eye first." If you're not familiar with what CS Lewis is referring to: "If thine right eye offends thee, pluck it out." From page who even knows in the Bible. Basically, God I love you so much that if you didn't like my right eye (a metaphor, I'm thinking) I would be totally cool with you just taking that eye right out of my head. That... that's a little intense. But I thought it was interesting because it says... well, I think it's saying... you can reject matronly and natural affections, but there has to have been love there in the first place. I took it to mean love of God (in any form), actually. You can reject this religious being, any religious being, but only if there had been something in the first place. If you've never bothered to understand or take some research in the matter, you can't really say "I reject you", because you don't know exactly what you're rejecting. Does that... does that make sense? Well, if it does, then it applies to other things as well: any idea, really.

"The last thing we would want is to make everything else just like our own home. It would not be home unless it were different." What is it... the saying... "Absence makes the heart grow fonder"? If everything's like home... I'd imagine it would feel fairly oppressive.

OH, and CS Lewis complains about patriotism in a zealous form. Yeah? It's because... IT'S A LOGICAL FALLACY, BABYYYY. 'FLAG-WAVING'.

"Affection has its own criteria. Its objects have to be familiar. We can sometimes point to the very day and hour when we fell in love or began a new friendship, I doubt if we ever catch Affection beginning. To become aware of it is to become aware that it has already been going on for some time." / "Elizabeth's spirits soon rising to playfulness again, she wanted Mr Darcy to account for his ever having fallen in love with her. 'How could you begin?' said she. 'I can comprehend your going on charmingly, when you had made a beginning; but what set you off in the first place?' 'I cannot fix on the hour, or the spot, or the look, or the words, which laid the foundation. It is too long ago. I was in the middle before I knew that I had begun.'" (Jane Austen, Pride and Prejudice, of course. )

"We hear a great deal about the rudeness of the rising generation. I am an oldster myself and might be expected to take the oldsters' side, but in fact I have been far more impressed by the bad manners of parents to children than by those of children to parents." One, oh my God, did he for real just say 'oldster'? Love you! Two, he goes on to say that the way parents more often than not treat their children would be enough to completely sever a relationship with anyone else and it's unfair to assume the younger generation doesn't know anything, because they understand more than the 'oldsters' give them credit for. Then, after all this nastiness and domineering attitudes, adults tend to get agitated at the fact that their children are always out and prefer to be out, especially in other homes. His response to them: "Who does not prefer civility to barbarism?" Being a youngster, I am obviously more inclined to agree with him. It is unfair, and anyone knows their parents can be nasty or whatever. And yeah, at someone else's house, whose parents are going to scream and be nasty to you? Zerooo. So. That's cool. CS Lewis, adopt me? Uh, oh. wait. Damn! (Bring me a gramme!)

"How if the deserter has really entered a new world which the rest of us never suspected? But if so, how unfair! Why us? Why was it never opened to us?" The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe, Peter and Edmund (Edmond? Can you just be Ed?)? Hm? But the main point he's trying to prove is when people grow up and change we get jealous and reject the new thing, but at the same we sometimes get jealous that they've changed and the change hasn't come into our life.

An interesting bit was when CS Lewis talks about man's need for animals--not only does, say, a dog make you feel like you have family and a loved one, it also gives you a sort of sense of power. This creature is entirely reliant on you because you've babied it. He's not saying beat your animal and starve it, but people make pets (namely dogs) into things unrecognizable from their roots completely. By keeping it from its true potential and 'wild side' (I don't know of a better way to put it) you're kind of "spoiling" its life. I don't know, I just thought it was an interesting albeit unexpected point.

"Two friends delight to be joined by a third, and three by the fourth, if only the newcomer is qualified to become a real friend." I think this is more of a perfect world deal. It's much more likely jealousy will ensue, and so will the feelings of an unfortunate one quick becoming a third wheel. Very rarely will this situation actually arise and exist for any extended period of time. For example, the only friendship in my own life where three isn't a crowd is probably when I hang out with Robby D JR and Emma. There's equality and I don't feel like the third wheel. In pretty much any friendship situation, no matter how good friends I am with one or both, I'm basically always the odd man out. Then again, CS Lewis says "True friendship is the least jealous of loves." Note the true. Feeling the love, Emma? I think it means jealousy in between, though. Not towards the people themselves, just the attention paid, if that makes sense...

"But if Friendship were used for this purpose we might mistake the symbol for the thing symbolized." There's nothing much to say except I wanted to bring up the fact that, while this isn't a deadly sin, it's a dangerous problem (mixing the symbol and thing symbolized). John Milton makes it quite clear in Paradise Lost that Satan cannot tell the difference and often confuses the two, hence why he starts his 'backward' campaign and hence why, or part of the reason why, he is a pitiable character, at least in that context.

"Love you? I am you"--Charles Williams. I liked that quote. It was in a really weird context, though. He was thinking about what it means when lovers say they... 'eat'... each other... Which was just weird. He meant that the intensity of their feelings completely enveloped each other in a roaring, almost violent way, but still. I was like... CS Lewis... you're making me a little uncomfortable. I know the slang has probably changed a little but yeah, I'm just gonna skip a few paragraphs...

"William Morris wrote a poem called 'Love Is Enough' and someone is said to have reviewed it briefly in the words 'It isn't'."

"To love at all is to be vulnerable. Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly be broken. If you want to be sure of keeping it intact, you must give your heart to no one, not even to an animal." And he goes on to say that basically a life denying love completely and wholly (which I believe is completely impossible, even, say, for sociopath) you're basically in hell. Like, you don't automatically get damned (gramme?) but you literally live in hell while alive. You dig? I mean... you're basically isolated of your own decision. Actually, it's kind of funny because of that saying, you know, "hell is other people." Ironic, maybe. Irony!

"Neither of you now plays conkers." What... what the hell is 'conkers'? They most definitely didn't have N64's of Xboxes back then, so there's no way bad fur days could be involved. Anybody... Anybody laughing? Oh okay, cool.

"To know that one is dreaming is to be no longer perfectly asleep." Yeah, but it's nice when your dream is about an English teacher who has trained dinosaurs to kill you for a chance at a million dollars. Yes, it was Big Mikey. What a weird dream. But in all seriousness, yeah, it's true. But when you're having a nightmare--it helps.

In other news, Cronkilicious lost a book of mine and offered to buy me a new copy... I feel really bad... but I can't remember the title, so maybe I don't have to worry. If he buys me a book in return I'm going to feel like a jerk... I AM A TERRIBLE PERSON!

And Robby D finished Survivor... Yeah, he said the near-the-end scene in the porn landfill was a little strange. Totally forgot about that. Completely. Uh... maybe I shouldn't lend you his other books, because it only gets more awkward from here in.

And even though the date is whatever, we dressed up for Halloween... best outfit, aside from the Pacman group and Quailman? Marky Mark was Montressor. (From 'The Cask of Amontillado'.) As in, "For the love of God, Marky Mark!" "Yes, for the love of God!" Remind me not mess with him. Robby D shaved his beard and left the 'stache for Halloween... Oh God, I don't even want to talk about it. You know how I feel about moustaches. UGH. I don't even like thinking about the... HE LOOKED LIKE BURT FREAKING REYNOLDS. GAHHH. Man, you know who has a really gross moustache? Bob Dylan. This isn't the worst, but I'm taking pity on your virgin eyes. I HATE EVEN THINKING ABOUT MOUSTACHES. It just makes me want to wipe my upper lip. JMHFFLTYDSNJRSZJMFH.

Anyways... As for me? Well, I've written a few plays... and a book or two... perhaps you've heard of me... Oscar Wilde.


(And regarding the title... CS Lewis actually mocks that dramatic love... like... of intense self-sacrifice and all that. But it felt appropriate, you know...)

We live on front porches and swing life away

I'm about 5/7ths through War and Peace! I doubt I'll finish it as soon as I expected, being that it's already Thursday, but it's really picking up now so maybe I will somehow finish it by (when am I working next?) next Thursday. Maybe even sooner. I just thought I'd mention--before reading this book, you may want to brush up on your history. The war in question is Napoleon's (ooh, spoilers!) failed Russian campaign. I sort of remembered it--well, I remembered that he got his butt whupped. Fun fact, so did Hitler. Anyways, about 250 pages ago (I read a lot today!) I had to go back to my world history notebook from freshman year. Just for quick refreshing--I also grabbed a Horrible Histories book for supplementary use as well. Anyways, that's beside the point. The point is, this whole book I've been seeing quotes I sort of like, but since this copy is so gorgeous, I've been not too keen on marking it up, you know? So I've been resisting sticking my little stubs of paper in the book and hoping WikiQuote can cover for me--but today, I had to. I found a section which--well, it may mean nothing to you. Sometimes that's the way. Actually, mostly always. But I have to inscribe it even though it will take 40 years because I love you oh so much:
"A king is history's slave."
Okay, I forgot about the short one--but here's the long one:
"When an apple ripens and falls, why does it fall? Because of the attraction the earth, because its stalk withers, because it is dried by the sun, because it grows heavier, because the wind shakes it, or because the boy standing below wants to eat it? Nothing is the cause. All this only the coincidence of conditions in which all vital organic and elemental events occur. And the botanist who finds that the apple falls because the cellular tissues decay and so forth, is equally right with the child who stands under the tree and says the apple fell because he wanted to eat it and prayed for it."
Tolstoy was using this all to prove a point about Napoleon--but it's a tasty little morsel in any case. Who's to say who's right and wrong? Both can be right. What's the difference between science and godliness? Really, depending on who it's affecting, they're interchangeable. The man splicing genes to create a new line of rodents is god to those mice. Et cetera. But, aren't they the same? Or aren't they not? It's really a matter of your own opinion. Anyways. The quote itself makes me think of The Martian Chronicles by Ray Bradbury. When the men are studying martian history--I kind of want to say it's the exploration with Spender. (Or was his name Spencer? I can't remember exactly now.) But I'm pretty sure it happened when the Captain confronted Spender/Spencer. Spender/Spencer is telling the Captain about the Martian culture--how their religion and science intertwined, so they could peacefully coexist--so they were really one and the same. In this case, it's kind of like that--the biologist may say what he believes, and the boy may say what he believes--there is equal proof for both. Perhaps the tissues just did die and so it fell. Perhaps because the boy prayed they rotted and God had it fall. Perhaps I'm just throwing my weight around here. Either way, it struck a chord and I did mark the page--with a bit of plastic bag, no less. Look, I was at work! What else was I gonna use, a zucchini!?

And, remember when I was talking about Job? Well, I was cleaning out my closet and I came across a book this girl Mary I used to be friends with gave to me a million years ago for my birthday. It's an illustrated bible, not quite for children, but not nearly of the Bible's actual reading level. And I was kind of like huh... this is sort of stupid. But for whatever reason, I decided to open it, and I happened to open upon the story of Job. Turns out, he was a rich man, and Satan (somehow) got into conversation with God (I wish they had more details on this part. It's not like they had AIM back then) and accused Job of only loving God because Job was rich. So God worked his ways and made Job poor. And he still loved God. So this turned into Satan being like "Oh yeah, well I bet he won't love you if you make him sick." So God covers the poor guy with welts or leprosy, or something nasty like that. But Job still loves him, and Satan's pissed because he's been proven wrong twice. And I didn't really read the end, to be honest, because I was impressed with Job. I would be boiling mad. Like, what the hell, man!? Well, maybe the not being rich thing not so much--but being covered in nasty diseases? After all those sacrifices? I see how it is. Then, of course for turning my back on God, I would be smote like hell, but at that point I'd probably welcome it, being covered in all sorts of terrible things I don't like thinking about.

Aaaand at work I was thinking--I know--the notion that Eve bit the apple desperate for change or to purposefully destroy paradise is a popular one. And by popular, I've maybe read it four or fives times but quiet the adults are talking sweetie. But maybe that's the only way we can think of it--that eternal happiness and leisure (I always had the assumption that Adam had to care for the animals at least partially, but I guess not) as being boring because of the fall. In Paradise Lost it's often alluded to that people can only perceive some things a certain way after the fall, and the same goes for before (but that's because Adam and Eve had yet to partake in the forbidden fruit). But it's a key point that the forbidden fruit completely wrecks how people can perceive things--senses are deadened, God can no longer be viewed directly, Satan's tongue is that much sweeter, etc. So maybe our views--and my agreement to that view ("Maybe eternal happiness was so boring that Eve biting the apple was justified"--Paraphrased off of Chuck Palahniuk)--is limited because of the Fall, whether it happened or not. Man, forget English teacher--philosophy is fun! (Is this considered philosophy?) Too bad that's not really considered a job anymore and I can't even go back in time for it cause women weren't exactly loved then... I'll just have to find Epicurus! Well, Epicurus the Sage does look like it would be fun... Which I just discovered is just the one volume. Dammit! Really!? It's such a cool comic. That is, if you're a fan of those Greeks... Emma.

And today at work a guy who looked like Kurt Vonnegut bought tomatoes. Awesome.

Last year's wishes are this year's apologies

So.. I got all embarrassed that CJ and Jackii would be reading that mis-mosh of a last post... so I felt the need to do a mini follow-up and kind of draw more on the Satan/Tyler Durden thing.
Well, any leader of a rebellion could be put as similar to Satan, really. It's just, Tyler's the first one to come to mind. But really:
First: Tyler started the Fight Club. This attracted those people who were fed up with... dare i say it? 'the man', for lack of a better way, and who needed release, who needed to 'wreck' themselves--sort of lone wolves. Kind of.
I doubt Satan started his own Angel Fight Club (that would do hell on wings, no? Eek.) but somehow, he managed to sniff out angels who were equally as fed up as their version of 'the man'--God. Tired of living under government and law and order and such. Err, god. Law and order and such. Those whom he could attract with his sweet tongue (he's known for being 'the great seducer') became interested and intrigued--enough to follow him back home. Kind of like with Angel face? This sounded better in my head.
They were both commanders of great charisma--which is an important point... Griffith. (Berserk, for those of you who don't get it. Griffith is basically Satan with an angel's face and charisma, slowly leading the medieval world to ruin... picking up the lost and beaten who are desperate for a leader... of course.)
So Tyler Durden is just a convenient, easy comparison--really, any charismatic whomever who led a (successful) rebellion (there is no doubt in my mind that after the book, the Flight Club was able to exist on its own, eventually Tyler came out, and all hell broke lose). But, in that case, Tyler being banished into the recesses of Jack's brain for X amount of time, to start something new X amount of years later... sounds familiar, huh? I'm sure Palahniuk didn't plan that, though. Maybe. Anyways. Take this as you will, as I suck at explaining.

Yesterday I was feverish, so I started Post Office by Bukowski, so in case if I threw up I wouldn't be throwing up on one of Meg's books. I finished it at work today (I was feeling well enough to go in, rest assured!)... I don't think it was as... idk, meaty as Factotum. (Is that even the right word?) but it was by far funnier. One of my favorite scenes was the scene where Chinaski cooks lots of sea food in celebration--and he cooks some snails up in "golden butter" as part of the meal. He's loving it, as he should be, but his then-girl, Joyce, won't eat them. Why? Because "'They all have tiny little assholes!'" HAHAHA! I just about died when I read that. I'm not entirely sure why it struck me as so funny, or why it still does, but whatever the reason, all in all, it cracks me up. Funny book.
After I finished it, I spent maybe twenty minutes staring at its publishing company's logo trying to figure out what other book I owned by 'ecco'. Factotum. Duh.

Let's see, I finished Jane Eyre too. Ehh.... I thought it was quite mediocre. The whole of it rather bored me, the interlude when she discovers her cousin was hardly necessary, and it appears she marries at the end out of pity. Perhaps I missed the point, which is possible, because the whole damned thing was like slogging through mud, but really. If the Bronte sisters found this acceptable for print, I'm scared to read Wuthering Heights.

...Which, in any case, won't be for a while. I decided to bite the bullet and read War and Peace. I'd much rather enjoy the beautiful quality of the copy of it I own... It's bound in real leather... has gold-tinted protection to prevent page-ripping and fraying... and it's bound so it looks like it was printed in the '30's or '40's, even though at anything more than a cursory glance you can tell it hasn't been... but still...

You can stop the truth from leaking if you never stop believing...

I finished Damian today. I liked it more than Journey to the East, though both endings left me equally as cold. I mean, they're like... they don't really leave loose ends... but they do. They don't seem... conclusive enough. I mean, (spoilers!) it was obvious Damian had died, and they were almost the same... alpha and omega, yin and yang--they were two people that were really the same person, kind of. But I just... didn't like the ending. But I don't know how Hermann could have improved or changed it or anything, so I guess I can't complain. But I still think the ending was 'ehh...'
But, yeah, I think the point was--like Abraxas, the two of them sort of... became one, at the end, after Damian had died, but was still alive, or had become a part of Emil. But I guess that's not completely true, because Emil had gone down to the lowest pit--so they both had the capability for Abraxas. But upon meeting (and falling in love with) Damian's mother Emil kind of found his muse, his redemption, his holy muse, and saw light again. But Damian was never really evil--he just saw things differently. He was just a little different. He had the mark of Cain, as he said, though I think he meant it quite literally by the end--not just referring to the vibes he gave off, but a literal mark, somehow, passed on...
And Damian's mother, the Muse, an angel in her own right. "some hybrid mother slash lover/ she’d soothe and heal his wounds / And kiss those dying ears so softly that the reaper stops to swoon" Well, that's what I got of her, and the description of her... well, undoubtedly it makes her appear like a goddess or angel. The both of them, mother and son, appeared to have the divine and all. (and while we're thinking of yellow cat/red cat, I'm starting to feel like the lonely goat who feeds 'him' quotes...)
And, there's one section where Emil speaks with a school mate about resisting sexual contact or temptation... and by doing so, the longer you can resist it or live without it or whatever, the 'purer' you become. And it made me think of a bit in Paradise Lost (which I completely forgot about finishing... aw, crud...) where... Well, I can't remember the exact line, but the line is translated at the bottom of the page (this is the B&N edition) to its basic meaning. Basically, the line is saying that the angels have sex (I think what it actually said was 'sensual love', but, really...) all the time. Which befuddles me. How come it's okay for them to constantly be fooling around, but humankind is punished for it? John Milton doesn't bother explaining or dwelling on the subject, and he appears to be the only writer who has that thought... I mean, I'm not saying, go whore around! St Peter won't mind! Tell him John Milton made you do it! (That'd make an awesome shirt...) But I just don't get it. Then again, in Murder Mysteries (a comic book spearheaded by Neil Gaiman) the two angels who are first to love and have sex (well, they have more 'sensual love' than anything else--the angels in the book were simply eunuchs, so they couldn't really 'have sex') are eventually both killed. With love and sex comes jealousy, hatred and murder? Well, I'm not surprised.
Anyways. I sure don't get it. It's kind of unfair with that double standard. Now, keep in mind, Paradise Lost is sympathetic towards Satan... but... supposedly the reason he became disgusted and left... well, I've heard several different stories... one of which was that Satan was not allowed to 'touch' (ie, be near or be in the presence of him) the deity Job, which I don't understand. Job is a human in the bible, so unless we're going by a Vonnegut-ish sense of time, that just doesn't work. Maybe. In Murder Mysteries, he left God because he could not see what was 'just' in the killing of a fellow angel. He was the first to cry, so Vengeance said. Of course, that's sympathetic for him too. But really? I think he is a character who needs sympathy, which sounds weird, I know. No matter what, I have the feeling that what bugged him, was maybe the sort of inconsistencies he saw. Not the sex thing, either. Maybe the hierarchies, in the case of Job. He was jealous, alright, but if God's playing favorites... He didn't want to be a nothing, one of the multitude, a faceless angel in a flock of angels. Let me paraphrase Chuck Palahniuk for the ninety thousandth time in my life: What would rather be, God's worst enemy or nothing at all? Who doesn't want to be noticed, who doesn't want to be remembered? Their fifteen minutes of fame? Satan is more human than you'd think. Is that want to be something evil? Let me paraphrase you-guess-who again... How your dream will drive you insane and then kill you. That is, he became consumed with that want--it didn't kill him, but let's say he's humankind's prolonged martyr. Heaven's Tyler Durden.
Holy God.
I never realized that before. Huh. Damn. Well.
I believe I've shocked myself.
But there are so many similarities! (Minus, the idea of the Fight Club, but Tyler himself...)
...
I don't think Palahniuk meant it that way, but...
Woah.
I... I was going to continue... but...
Oh hell, I might as well. Going back to Murder Mysteries, it's also possible something shattered his loyalty. And he wanted to create something better, or he just "wanted something better" in general. And again, he's a human. "If being born makes your parents God, then puberty makes you Satan for wanting something better"--Guess Who. I've only name-dropped him like five times. He's too human not sympathize with, really. I reject what he has been bastardized into. Maybe it happened that way because us humans were scared to recognize, after all stories had been told and such (did the base story for Paradise Lost exist before Milton wrote it?) it was feared to be like... well, that kind of explains those strict puritanical rules and such. The expulsion of all similarities, mayhaps? Well, I dunno. It's late, okay? I guess in this case, there's really no backbone text like the Bible you can sort of rely on. Well, you know. Anyways, I think I'm gonna head off.
....
I better do a dissertation or something on this in college.