Thursday, January 29, 2009
From Mikhail Bakhtin
2. My uniqueness is given but it simultaneously exists only to the degree to which I actualize this uniqueness (in other words, it is in the performed act and deed that has yet to be achieved).
3. Because I am actual and irreplaceable I must actualize my uniqueness.
I wonder if I could compare this to the movement of soul referenced in the post below.
A soul is formed from acts and deeds. The entire soul may or may not be present at the physical end of death. I hate the idea of gnostic spark and it is so easy to go there. Perhaps between aesthetics and ethics, rhetoric and philology I can bargain hunt the sublime.
later
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Horoscope
We each must be and come to be like fallow nets
of us two-folded fisherfolk; nor entertain a sentinal idea
Saturday, January 24, 2009
new poem
Straight ways are walked to launder
me clean. I saint-watch Mary Anne
while pretending dreams sleep in
my chair. When she freshes covers
Her arms rise and fall. As enfleshed
concentration: her breasts risen
and falling as daily bread. Maybe
the still warm parts of her remain.
I dream she is getting ready for
work washing clean bodies for
funeral. And she prays that I can only
trust the dead. The digging of her
gardens reminds me of the sprawl
and tangle. Last night she told our
new priest of observing me smile.
A long time last since Advent.
New poem
When teaching, body minds me to breathe in: breath out.
Eyes do not see shimmers and bold shades wander wicked
and kind within and around the slick and vascular dense
spacelessness of low brain; a locus for haunting by former loves
as if Broca priviledged their campground and ancestral grounding
with a name. When walked and wandered and worked of needs
done is done, body is mostly alone and suprated in front of ugly
cookbooks and bogus textbooks and skanky dictionaries of butchered
saints. Body deigns why are there so few succulent spirits to recall
The taint is only and again so many mistakes and count them as cost
mistakes to pray for and burn. Body will say today that I (body is)
am made of mistakes. mistakes that many lovers of my teachers have
paid as gravedirt price. forgive us all hasty and arrogant performances
of cannot do this: cannot do this and cannot do this again: and finish
with the valued and jettisoned version of the consecrated strain.
So it goes. As if these doe breasted and rutted morphes of menstudents need
help emptying their bodies of meaning. They are feeding me kenosis as
apophatic masters inhabit each of them. Pools of since feeling is first battle
dance within slippery and graceless irregular verbs that rattle the locks of
their spore into particular sleek and styleless notions of defeat.
As if the god's persective never could change. The soul
of body is a movement along the chainbrakes and crack of
desire. Nowhere and elsewhere are holy sparks present
and counted as faith unto righteousness. Maybe the quickening
lust of flesh made heir is more to the point of their working rest.
Friday, January 23, 2009
New poem
can parabola, or splinter of narrative coupling and penetrating
smoke and updraft of stories nee prayer long neglected?
holding Persephone's long wait. How will a wall of block
wait for the chain? The raw stances holding our parts in desire aware?
Moving to host and stem, pared and loosened rindedness of want(ing).
linked top to ground as a question is presented by the nude
Friday, January 02, 2009
good advice for writers
Written at the request of Joshua Marie Wilkinson, who's compiling an anthology of "micro essays about approaches to teaching poetry":
Hoard your time, since you'll need it to be alone to think and to write.
Be frugal, since it'll allow you to work less and have more time to think and to write.
Try, as best you can, to have an overview of what's possible in writing, the various strategies attempted throughout history, throughout the world.
Identify the writers or works you admire the most, and read them very slowly, as many times as necessary.
Have faith that you will get better at thinking and writing, and that people will notice it, even if stingily and reluctantly, since you're not entitled to any attention.
Be prepared to be disappointed over and over.
For the sake of experimentation, it's OK to write badly, even foolishly, but don't try to pass off crap you yourself are disinterested in.
Even if you'll end up a mediocre writer, there's an outside chance you will become an excellent reader, so this pursuit will still be worthwhile, sort of, even as you lie there, unheated, loveless and clutching your last packet of Ramen Pride.
Don't be afraid to be as weird, meaning as PECULIARLY YOU as possible. Try to say it all. Be shameless. Don't hesitate to revisit a piece over and over to follow and capture everything that it really wants to say. Use each draft as a lead and a springboard into revealing something truly astounding, even if the actual changes (a revised noun here, an added adjective there) may be minimal.
Be as crazy and as perverse as possible, be inspired to the point of madness, but don't be glib.
Poetry should astound and frighten, not make you giggle for two seconds.Quote from Dwelling in Possibilities
http://chronicle.com/free/v54/i27/27b00701.htm
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Christmas, Christ Mass, and Incarnation
Sent to you by cloudykid via Google Reader:
This post was brought to you by the insanity that spews from radio stations. I hate Christmas songs. I detest Christmas specials (save for Colbert's Christmas Special). And quite frankly, this "war on Christmas" and "saving Christmas from all those atheists" is a bunch of crap. You're saving Christmas — the capitalist holiday — from any meaningful critique.
Now enter the Christian calendar and the season of Advent. Often in this time, we talk of the incarnation. On one hand, it is a perfectly legitimate time to do so. On the other hand, we misunderstand the incarnation as simply divine conception. With this problem, we disconnect the incarnation from the entire life of Jesus and therefore, misunderstand much to be seen in the incarnation.
We need to remember that the action of the incarnation made God's story – his mind and heart – known as never before. It showed God's acceptance and rejection; it was the embodiment of the divine yes and no within history, to a greater extent than ever before. While God at the beginning called creation good, God in the incarnation brought creation into herself. At the same time, Johann Metz argues, "God's divinity consists in the fact that he does not remove the difference between himself and what is other, but rather accepts the other precisely as different from himself." In other words, God accepted creation. In point of fact, "[i]n Jesus Christ, man and his world were accepted by the eternal Word, finally and irrevocably…. what is true of this nature that Christ accepted is also fundamentally true of the acceptance of man and his world by God." He did not ontologically destroy or divinize creation; he did not conflate the divine and human narratives, he accepted creation.
God's acceptance of the world and humanity was proclaimed from the beginning: when Gabriel told Mary of what was growing in her and she accepted it with praise, when Joseph accepted the Messiah growing within Mary and Mary's own obedience, when Jesus was born, when the Angels told the shepherds, and when the wise men brought their offerings. God's coming, God's acceptance, was heralded to all. In the proclamations, God did not only affirm creation, but upheld much more about the world. The incarnation was no vague or one-sided acceptance of humanity; the announcements were one of affirmation and salvation. Coming as an infant, from a miraculous birth, the creator of the world grew up; he was formed by the divine promises of the past and looked into the future. Thus "the process of history is 'accepted' in the Christian logos and remains so." However, as scandalous as the idea that the creator grew up, it is inextricably linked to an equally scandalous idea, one of salvation history – one of promise and interruptive action by the creator within history – that makes good on the proclamations from birth. Metz maintains that the otherness, or creation status, of the world is necessary for the world to be, and that "[t]he reality of the world as creation is always mediated through the historical saving reality of the world."
However, Colin Gunton reminds theology and the world, from another approach, that the whole of creation has a telos that speaks of salvation, while affirming the creator/created distinction:
If, then, to be created is to be in indissoluble relation to God through the Son and Spirit, it follows that that shape of being, the dynamic form that it takes in its various space-time configurations, derives from creation's relation to its creator. Incarnation, the involvement of God the Son, on the initiative of the Father and through the enabling of the Spirit, then, is a violation of the being neither of God nor of the world. On the contrary, there is a sense in which it realizes the true being of them both, for it perfects at once the Father's work of creation and creature's determination at the traditional doctrine of the incarnation and its teaching of the coming of the one through whom all things were made into direct and personal relation with the creation.
With the creation act bringing creator and creation into a distinct relationship, the incarnation takes center stage, where "Jesus Christ is the one through whom all things take their shape and to whom the Spirit directs them. The shape is unmistakably full of purpose and eschatological significance: "[w]hen the Spirit shapes him a body from the flesh of Mary, what we see is not just the working out of election—through we do see that—but the renewing of the whole of creation, the redirecting of the world to its end." The incarnation, quite simply, restores "creation's teleology."
It is from this incarnational realigning of creation with its telos that salvation history can be understood, and vice versa: the acceptance of creation-history also meant the salvation of creation-history. While the acceptance of God was extensive – in both time and space, it was not only acceptance. In short, the salvation of creation and history are interlinked. The creator incarnate, more than metaphorically elbow deep in creation and history, would not stand for a broken state – that is, creation-history deviated from its telos. The world, humanity, and history must be reconciled. But what method for reconciliation would God incarnate use? Grace and interruption was and is the method.
Thus, Christ's Mass should never be understood within the context of a jolly, vapid song, or the fight for a Christmas tree in a shopping mall or airport, but within hesed, promise-making, promise-fulfilling, solidarity, divine love, justice, peace, and reconciliation. This is why I detest so much the false Christmas and those who seek to wage, in their estimates, a holy war to save Christmas. We must remember that it is for their bourgeois Christmas, not Christ's Mass of acceptance and reconciliation.
Posted in Colin Gunton, incarnation, Johann Metz, reconcileThings you can do from here:
- Subscribe to flying.farther using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites
Thursday, December 18, 2008
Advent...the Conspiracy
Sent to you by cloudykid via Google Reader:
Our friends at Advent Conspiracy have produced a truly thought provoking video for this season. Is your church participating in this campaign? I'd love to hear about your experiences. If not, how would people react in your church if you showed this video?
Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Out of Ur using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your favorite sites