Posts: 18
Threads: 5
Joined: Apr 2014
Held in this prison cell
Existence,
We are blind;
We sit, alone, in an interrogation room,
Waiting for the interrogator to come,
Expecting Him to be watching from
Behind the one-way glass.
Its reflection, at first, shows
The room to be bigger than it really is.
A barrage of cross-examination
Renders this assumption an illusion.
Probably.
Faith, however, has presumed
Diplomatic immunity from this questioning.
Blind Faith that there is something
Behind this mirror, and somebody:
A benevolent Light beyond the glass
We try to see through, darkly.
All assumptions have imploded now.
He has won,
And lost:
That prosecutor, that interrogator,
Who was in my room all along.
My four cell walls
Are all made of this one-way glass,
Completed by a one-way glass floor
And a one-way glass ceiling too.
This jail has always been
A reflection of my Self,
And will always be.
Posts: 1,827
Threads: 305
Joined: Dec 2016
We see through a mirror darkly? Although a bit Sartre-like, as in "No Exit" it lacks anything that the reader can attach to, in order to become involved or care about what is happening. Emotionally it is very sterile.
Just for consistencies sake, not because it would correct the problems stated above, I would use "I" instead of "we", as it is jut the speaker who is in this room. It is one of the core existential maxims/problems you restate here, but one that has no solution, or as Sartre would say "No Exist".
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
Posts: 48
Threads: 1
Joined: Mar 2014
Hello AIAP. I have no inclination to keep trying to figure out what is going on. Why?
because I know that there will be no reward for my brain.
There is nothing within the poem to stimulate my senses.
What is a "benevolent light"?
Who has "won" and "lost" is it god? or maybe your conscience?
I am not sure if "presumed" Line 1 verse 3 makes sense in the context it is used here. It struck me as odd anyway.
Welcome. JG.
Posts: 18
Threads: 5
Joined: Apr 2014
"See through, darkly" is an allusion to St Paul's musings on humanity's inability to see the world and heaven as they really are, because of our limited nature. 1 Corinthians 13:12 - "For now we see through a glass, darkly."
Dale, the "we" changes to "my" after the "Blind Faith" in anything beyond that glass disappears and all "assumptions have imploded". That change was supposed to be symbolic, but is obviously confusing - I'll find a way of making it more obvious, or scrap it.
John, the person who has "won" and "lost" is "That prosecutor, that interrogator", symbolic of my Cartesian doubt, but I'll edit that to make it clearer too. Benevolent Light is playing on religious ideas, maybe God, maybe simply the existence of anything beyond the glass.
Thanks for your feedback guys, always appreciated. I agree that it must be very sterile for anybody not in the thralls of existential angst, and probably quite sterile even for those who are.
Posts: 1,827
Threads: 305
Joined: Dec 2016
"See through, darkly" is an allusion to St Paul's musings on humanity's inability to see the world and heaven as they really are, because of our limited nature. 1 Corinthians 13:12 - "For now we see through a glass, darkly."
"Behind this mirror, and somebody:
A benevolent Light beyond the glass
We try to see through, darkly"
That's why I wrote "We see through a mirror darkly?" I am aware of the quote from 1 Corinthians. I was wondering why you misappropriated it as a dark glass conveys the effect of not being able to see the truth clearly (but something can be seen and it is not yourself), whereas a mirror shows only oneself. I understand this is suppose to be a struggle with yourself, but it is an inaccurate use of the allusion. That is why I asked the question.
Dale
How long after picking up the brush, the first masterpiece?
The goal is not to obfuscate that which is clear, but make clear that which isn't.
Posts: 18
Threads: 5
Joined: Apr 2014
At that point in the poem, the idea is that my narrative voice still believes that the mirror is also a glass that you can see through to some factual referent, even if what he sees is an inaccurate depiction of the external world. This optimism falters in the end (much like the "we" / "I" confusion).
It seems, from the apt critiques both of you have offered, that my difficulty in accurately expressing my meaning prevents effects that sound clever to me from being anything other than confusing and inaccurate images.
Thanks for pointing out my clumsiness guys, constructive criticism is why I'm here
