The Definition of Art !
jonathan
Our thoughts come last,
then nature and it's base.
We see this as a beauty
our grace and primal place.
But no one cares to paint a gas
or explain a sitting rock,
so the fluid forces move us,
and the earnest eddies too.
Thus we are moved to moving
others to feel God's artful meter.
.
Jonathan
s
Daimon
**
**
Hey Jonathon. Some opportunities here, thought I'd comment . . .
**
** Our thoughts come last,
This is a particularly poor and abstract beginning . .
** then nature and it's base.
because you used "it's" you are saying that "nature" is in some way inferior or
ugly (nature is base). Now while I don't think that is what you meant, I think
it would provide a refreshing perspective . . .
** We see this as a beauty
** our grace and primal place.
your pronoun lacks a definitive subject
Try reading this sentence as if you didn't write it and figure out what it
means. Then, think what you want to say, and say it.
** But no one cares to paint a gas
** or explain a sitting rock,
** so the fluid forces move us,
** and the earnest eddies too.
These are all abstract concepts, any one could command a whole poem's worth of
explanation. Combined they form a vague, incomprehensible stew. (am I making
sense?)
** Thus we are moved to moving
** others to feel God's artful meter.
**
I like God's meter here. "artful" is really unnecessary. The line breaks
throughout, but especially here, seem arbitrary.
Hope this helps.
Good Luck!
Daimon
**
**
**
jonathan
"Daimon" <dai...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:965clg$145i$2...@node17.cwnet.frontiernet.net...
> Eventually it had to happen . . .
> **
> **
> Hey Jonathon. Some opportunities here, thought I'd comment . . .
Thank you, I do wish to improve this one. I'd like to see if I can make the
point comprehensible first, then I can move on to making it a poem.
> **
> ** Our thoughts come last,
>
> This is a particularly poor and abstract beginning . .
>
> ** then nature and it's base.
This first line was trying to place beauty in its proper place. That is to say
that first came the universe, then nature and last intelligence.
>
> because you used "it's" you are saying that "nature" is in some way inferior
or
> ugly (nature is base). Now while I don't think that is what you meant, I
think
> it would provide a refreshing perspective . . .
>
I think I have an apostrophe problem, (Julie!) I didn't mean to say 'it is
base'. I meant to say its base is that which nature came from, the universe. I
should stop tying to be as concise as possible and learn apostrophes.
> ** We see this as a beauty
> ** our grace and primal place.
>
> your pronoun lacks a definitive subject
> Try reading this sentence as if you didn't write it and figure out what it
> means. Then, think what you want to say, and say it.
Should I just use an 'and' after beauty, or a comma? I thought a line break
would do.
This was meant to say there is a fourth step after intelligence. That beauty is
an emergent property of intelligence, or that beauty is the way our intelligence
perceives the previous three steps that created us.
>
> ** But no one cares to paint a gas
> ** or explain a sitting rock,
> ** so the fluid forces move us,
> ** and the earnest eddies too.
>
> These are all abstract concepts, any one could command a whole poem's worth of
> explanation. Combined they form a vague, incomprehensible stew. (am I making
> sense?)
Yes, that is a fault of mine to try to boil things down too much. This part was
trying to explain the paradigm of the universe. Let me go on a bit about that
<g>.
All in the universe can be placed in three broad realms.
In science you have the area of few parts, of determinism and Newtonian physics.
The area of exact answers. Which is the first part of the paradigm.
The second is the area of the dynamic, the realm of fluids, life and
intelligence, of galaxy formation, hurricanes and politics.The area of too many
parts for a exact solution but too few for a statistical approach. This middle
fluid state is the broadest and most interesting.
The third part of the paradigm is the statistical realm of atoms and infinite
parts.
In humans the same approach holds. The mind, body and spirit comprise three
parts of the same paradigm of few parts and exact answers, the body. The fluid
middle state of intelligence and perception, or the dynamic middle state. And
the third part of the paradigm of the infinite, or the spirit, religion and
philosophy.
And of course if the universe consists of a three realm paradigm the same must
hold now.
The third part of this paradigm is truth, beauty and love. Where truth is the
search for absolutes and concrete answers. Beauty is the fluid middle state of
art, and the third realm is that of the infinite, the area where one rule
applies to the whole ~ love.
So the above lines in the poem are trying to say the following. Why would anyone
care to apply the aspects of the fluid realm to the other parts of the paradigm
which are the areas of the few or the infinite.
static, dynamic, quantum ~ (science) ~ universe
mind, body, spirit ~ (man) ~ nature
truth, beauty, love ~ (properties) ~ creation
solid, liquid, gas
So the grand paradigm would be;
Universe nature creation.
(base) (evolution) (thoughts)
"Our thoughts come last, then nature and its base."
Does this make any sense?
Perhaps this first line should be a separate poem, or read;
"Our thoughts come last, then nature from its base".
>
> ** Thus we are moved to moving
> ** others to feel God's artful meter.
> **
> I like God's meter here. "artful" is really unnecessary. The line breaks
> throughout, but especially here, seem arbitrary.
The line breaks are mostly arbitrary. I read mostly emily dickinson so I tend to
do as she does. I've always felt the point of the poem outweighs the style. But
I should spend at least some time on the poetry.
'Thus we are moved to moving others to feel God's artful meter'
"Thus we are moved to moving
others to feel God's artful meter."
The line break adds emphasis on "moved to moving". Which I think is a primary
aspect of art. I could find a better word than artful, or just rewrite the line
so nothing between is needed.
>
> Hope this helps.
> Good Luck!
> Daimon
It does, thanks!
Jonathan
ps, I need to study up on apostrophes. I missed that day in English class.
Dear Emily understood the beauty of the fluid realm and how important it is to
view anything as part of the whole, not as reduced parts. I'll put her mind up
against anyone else.
"You've seen balloons set, haven't you?
So stately they ascend
It is as swans discarded you
For duties diamond.
Their liquid feet go softly out
Upon a sea of blond;
They spurn the air as't were to mean
For creatures so renowned.
Their ribbons just beyond the eye,
They struggle some for breath,
And yet the crowd applauds below;
They would not encore death.
The gilded creature strains and spins,
Trips frantic in a tree,
Tears open her imperial veins
And tumbles in the sea.
The crowd retire with an oath
The dust in streets goes down,
And clerks in counting-rooms observe,
"'T was only a balloon."
s
jonathan
This;
static, dynamic, quantum ~ (science) ~ universe
mind, body, spirit ~ (man) ~ nature
truth, beauty, love ~ (properties) ~ creation
Should have read;
static, dynamic, quantum ~ (science) ~ universe
body, mind, spirit ~ (man) ~ nature
truth, beauty, love ~ (properties) ~ creation
Sorry, but it's an important mistake.
Jonathan
s