The Passionate Man

[Erthona]

Actually Tom, and maybe you could help me make this more explicit. The first "god" refers to the passionate man as being like a god due to what he is able to manifest by being a passionate man (being inspired), when the "god" leaves him (the god of inspiration) it is as though he is no longer living, at least compared to how he was. Psychologically, he goes from being full of life to being depressed. He cannot allow himself, self-pity, as he is now just experiencing life as others do. He also understands that what he got was a gift and it would be stupid to instead of being grateful for having the gift, cry like a spoiled child because it has been taken away. It is this interesting idea that once one knows what is paradise is, he can no longer be satisfied with regular life. There are some other things, but that is what should come across at the first level. Oh and, this is actually a new piece, just wrote it a few days ago. I probably should have put this into workshop, but I didn't really think it was worth other people's time. So if you could make recommendations how to make it more explicit.

Thanks,

Dale
Risky, dale, very risky.
For me the hinge was freed by the adoption of "that god" as against "a god" but since you are insistent upon the more life-changing (by progression not inspiration) insinuation I am more inclined to change "that god" to "his God".
Once you introduce the god word into an axiomatic dissertation you will find that locks freeze and pivots seize, depending entirely upon the appreciation of the reader. This can be fucking annoying to the writer who would seek to benignly impose views by words used with intent...only to find that interpretation is independent of erudite writing and more upon dogma.
So, get your  "my god", "my God", " the god", "the God", "a god", "a God", "that god", "that God" sorted out to suit your intent and let the buggers argue with your meaning.
Best,
tectak