Go to The Daily Sonnet
- Add a comment
- Go to Sonnet 34
Hi Tony
The secrets of the Gods poetized well, amazing imagery, minds seeking knowledge, and good verse will feed, till full on this excellent poem.. Well wrote. Mike
posted by
lionladroar
on October 10, 2006 at 12:14 PM
| link to this | reply
Well it's good to have a shared discussion about these things, isn't it?
I'll struggle to write one today that provokes so many comments. Thanks!
posted by
Antonionioni
on October 9, 2006 at 10:22 AM
| link to this | reply
Ha ha Dave..
and Tony, before going into the comments I was thinking that this uncannily coincides with a conversation I had today, about the way humans and animals share so much dna, the general consensus being that we all came out of the slime from a common source. I don't want to get into the debate about intelligent design versus evolution, but I did wonder (as you do) if there was a point, eons ago, if plant and animal life shared the same genes - or indeed atoms, as your sonnet seems to say (so does Marie-Claire). So this one spoke to me quite forcefully, today. Nice.
posted by
mneme
on October 9, 2006 at 5:30 AM
| link to this | reply
Great work!
posted by
_Symphony_
on October 9, 2006 at 2:54 AM
| link to this | reply
Tony
You truly tease. But I have tremendously enjoyed this theory of relativity. Firstly, as you say all is all but it also nothingness, and nothingness too is all. Just as Quantum theorists say, that nothing in manifestation can come out of nothing, but yet it the very truth, because nothingness is not empty or void, but it is simply no-thingness. As light is the manifestation of electricity in bulbs, in itself, electricity occupies no existent space. Only through its manifestation can the without be perceived to exist. So also for absolute in the positive sense and nothingness in the negative sense. Absolutism of Bradley from the West and Shankara from the East come to the same conclusion. But Buddha's Shoonya or void is closer to science of quantum physics.
Now about perception: It is a question of relativity again; far and near. The perceptions can be so totally deceptive as to negate perception and reality. This brings us to Cain who, as a slayer, when asked by God, replies, "Am I the keeper of my brother?" Similarly convoluted as a doer in non-doing from his view of right or wrong. A great concept! We are not the keeper of these atoms.
posted by
Bhaskar.ing
on October 9, 2006 at 2:33 AM
| link to this | reply
Very philosophical today, Tony. Trees offer a new branch of thinking.
posted by
_dave_says_ack_
on October 9, 2006 at 1:59 AM
| link to this | reply
very nice
posted by
star4sky5
on October 8, 2006 at 7:40 PM
| link to this | reply
It'll keep, Tony, good night.
posted by
Blanche.
on October 8, 2006 at 4:49 PM
| link to this | reply
Thanks Blanche. And MC..
I see you commented again. By all means make any more comments, I didn't mean by I'm going to bed, to say don't say anything else! But I can't answer you until tomorrow. Hasta manana...
posted by
Antonionioni
on October 8, 2006 at 4:47 PM
| link to this | reply
don't lose sleep over this...good night.
Hope you don't get nightmares... about trees chasing you with me behind them saying BOOO! NITE..
posted by
marieclaire66
on October 8, 2006 at 4:46 PM
| link to this | reply
Hi MC
I'm glad I checked one last time, i was about to go to bed. Now you are stopping me, you naughty person! I totally respect the points you make; they are well-observed re. my poem, and interesting in themselves. I'm not trying to make a daft philosophical point or advance a weird theory - although it might seem weird if people have never considered this kind of thing in their lives, but that probably wouldn't apply to most here, especially on the Poetry section. An important disclaimer in the poem is where I say I'm only teasing, near the end. I'm not saying that a tree doesn't exist. The inspiration for this was yesterday, and a conversation I was having driving south from manchester to Bristol, seeing trees by the side of the motorway. My son was telling me about his philosophy course he's just started at school. My point to him was that trees simultaneously exist and do not exist, and so does everything if viewed in isolation. I see this sonnet as an introductory part to my larger view of the universe, which i perhaps touched on a couple of weeks ago when I wrote about time. I don't want to cover it all now, but essentially there is, in my view, only one ,mega-reality, consisting of everything, which includes past, present and future. Each tree is part of this, and exists, yes, but then again doesn't exist as a unified thing in isolation if you breal it into its component parts - which if you think about what a tree is more deeply than outward appearances allow, you would have to do. The same is true of you and I. We are a composite of lots of life forms all working and living together in a colony, one called Tony, and one called Marie-Claire. Hope I'm not putting you off your tea! The earth as a planet is a composite of trees and rock and mammals and water and everything else that is in or on it. This in turn is a tiny part of our galaxy. Now I'm pretty much echoing your ripples analogy, which I agree with. All I'm saying is each 'thing' whether tiny or large, is not really the simple thing we conceive it to be. We label it when we first see it and recognise its apparent difference to something else. But if we viewed these different things from other viewpoints we might see that there is less difference than there appears to be to us. An example - the genetic similarity between humans and most animals. Or the fact that living things and dead things are both made up of (what we think of, rightly or wrongly, as) dead particles whirling round at high speeds. Actually, i've explained this all badly, I'll start again. No I won't, i'll go to bed. Good night!!
posted by
Antonionioni
on October 8, 2006 at 4:41 PM
| link to this | reply
reality ( continued)
In order to perceive reality, you need an intelligence behind it. It is impossible or difficult to perceive something you cannot understand. A baby perceives the world according to its limited non-verbal view, it only perceives, sounds, later some colours, and textures and sensations related feelings. A fish does not know about the existence of the tree. Reality is tied up with awareness of the creature perceiving it, but the tree remains a tree. To got back to humans, our perception of reality expands as we start making sense of the world. The way we interpret the world is very much tied up with our ability to think and make sense of it. This is done through language, at one point a child learns to name things, then learns about concepts, feelings etc, and thus the development of language enhances reality and in a way creates or is an essential ingredient in the perception and interpretation of reality. Language is intrisincally linked with our perception of reality. If you try and draw a tree upside down, without recognizing the shape of the tree, so you cannot name it, you will be able to perceive the tree as it really is, a random combination of lines. If you draw the tree right side up, you will be able to give it a name and the brain starts drawing the concept of a tree, a simplified version of what a tree should look like. If you want to see things as they really are, it is a paradox to say that you will have to shut off the "memory/rational") side of the brain. The human eye does not see a full view of what is, there is a blind spot right in the center of the picture that you see, some experiments have been done which show, that people can completely miss vital details. The human body has a limited perception of reality, other creature see infrared, or have an acute sense of smell. Our perception is limited and defined by the mechanical and physical ability of the human body. It varies from individual to individual.
Reality just is, and is bigger than our perception of the thing we perceive. There is also a reality beyond our senses that we only have a glimpse of. Our perception of reality is only one aspect of reality itself and not reality itself, it is just a glimpse.
I wonder if one day, there will a be a universal perception shared by all creatures, maybe it is like that in heaven... who knows?
posted by
marieclaire66
on October 8, 2006 at 4:38 PM
| link to this | reply
Tony, atoms and trees, what's the difference? It's a matter of degree.
Once someone gets that, the rest is self-evident. Good poem.
posted by
Blanche.
on October 8, 2006 at 4:27 PM
| link to this | reply
we are their kin...
in a way, we are made up of the same physical and chemical components as the tree, (carbon, oxygene, chlorophyll, etc) but what sets the human race apart from the rest of creation is conscientiouness. We can destroy the tree by an act of will, which is something that a tree of course cannot do. We are part of the ecosystem, and we should remember our connection to the planet and life on it. It would be ridiculous to say we are all one, we are separate but again look at the ripple analogy. We are part of creation, as one big entity but with separate things put in it....Phew. Did that enlighten you or what ???? It was fun writing this.
posted by
marieclaire66
on October 8, 2006 at 4:14 PM
| link to this | reply
you got me foxed on this one.
each creature and plant has its own blueprint and is separate I think, otherwise we would be swimming in one big soup...Natural laws operate and keep the universe in place. Separation is a necessity and part of a bigger entities, a world within a world, like our earth within a galaxy, until you emcompass the whole universe which is infinite. Think of the world as ripples, but each circle is separate bigger than the previous one, but all part of one single orginal ripple, so it is one and yet separate... that is my theory anyway, I don't read philosophy, because it clouds my thinking. I draw from what I already know or feel. I think it is important to think and reflect on things, as long as it helps humanity. I do not subscribe to idle discussions that lead nowhere. I wonder where this is leading, did I miss your point here? Reality is, regardless of how we perceive it. We all have our common view point through our senses. If you change the vantage point, reality looks different, and yet a tree remains a tree. The only difference is that you see how it fits in with the rest of the eco-system and the planet, universe etc... Reality is also interpreted differently according to our make-up, personality, values culture. We perceive reality through our past, our emotions and apply our stamp on this reality. If you were to paint those trees, each painting would be represented differently according to the artistic ability of the painter, etc... If you were to take a photograph of the tree, again you would still get different view points. Only God could perceive all aspects of the reality of the tree all at once... Once upon a time, germs did not exist because we could not see them. Technology has altered our perception of reality of course. So we still have a limited view of reality as scientific knowledge progresses, such is a view is constantly being reviewed and expanded. The world, the universe is made of atoms, etc swimming around in different combination. You cannot see the tree if you look close, into say a microscope, once you step back, you get the bigger picture. It is like you cannot see the tree for the forest (excuse the pun), if you have the tree right in front of your nose, but it does not mean that the forest does not exist. You must not look at reality in terms of what you can see in front of you as an immediate perception, but rather how it fits into a whole, with a universal perspective. Only God has this universal perspective, being the Creator, he should know! He reveals his view to us, and we will only ever have a partial view of such reality. I am still not sure what it has to do with your sonnet, but it got me thinking in any case...
posted by
marieclaire66
on October 8, 2006 at 4:09 PM
| link to this | reply
Let's hope we still have time to make up for our greed and lack of care!
Also for our blindness (or not even wanting to look!)
posted by
nonconformist
on October 8, 2006 at 3:13 PM
| link to this | reply
I was and I wasn't, Tonyzonit. I was being facetious and serious at the
same time. I just sat down and am catching my breath. I'll have to re-read your comment more carefully as I just skimmed it for a second.
posted by
Blanche.
on October 8, 2006 at 2:56 PM
| link to this | reply
But Blanche
...if you are simply asking for clarification, then what i mean is that, after comparing and contrasting the very distant and very close-up views of a tree (which could have been any object), I then try to answer the obvious objection that people might give - that we can see them very clearly and trees are not invisible at all - by saying that the reason we can see them is because we (humans) are of a similar size to trees, rather than to atoms or to planets. I compare relative sizes, then realise that our kinship in size terms with trees (or anything we can see with our eyes) means we share our plane of existence with them and should take care of them (or anything we are naturally aware of). But we don't, is my final point. Whether we are keepers of atoms is a more difficult point. At present, most of us can't really assume that responsibility, as it is such a radically different dimension in size. We live, at the human level of consciousness, without the aid of fancy technology, between the atoms and the planets, using our naturally given senses. It is at that level that we can be said to be failing to care for our kin. Phew! Ignore all this if you weren't actually asking for an explanation...!!
posted by
Antonionioni
on October 8, 2006 at 2:45 PM
| link to this | reply
Thanks for your kind comments all!
But Blanche, what is this you have quoted? Have i duplicated what you or someone else has written? I hope not. If so, it was pure coincidence - but they are so similar that no-one would believe it!!
posted by
Antonionioni
on October 8, 2006 at 2:33 PM
| link to this | reply
posted by
michael_pilarte
on October 8, 2006 at 2:00 PM
| link to this | reply
Cool couplet Tony
posted by
Mavro
on October 8, 2006 at 1:50 PM
| link to this | reply
Tonyzonit, if we are Cain, then we must be kin
to the trees, the air, and atoms.
See closer and the shapes disappear
Yet though Cain his brother slew
in envy incur'd God's wrath
when asked he answer'd
"Am I my brother's keeper?"
Are we not the keeper of these atoms?
posted by
Blanche.
on October 8, 2006 at 1:02 PM
| link to this | reply
I HAVE SOME THING TO SAY 
MY WORD IS SHARPER THAN THE SWORD AND IF THE ALL RUNING ON MY ROAD I WLL BE CARRIED BY THE LORD,,,
,,najwa
posted by
NAJWA
on October 8, 2006 at 12:46 PM
| link to this | reply
THIS IS BEAUTIFUL AND TRUE FROM THE HEART AND THE SOUL HAS DEEP MEANING BETWEEN THE LINES
najwa
posted by
NAJWA
on October 8, 2006 at 12:40 PM
| link to this | reply