A friendship, when built upon honest first Impressions, sparks a sincere intercourse; Which, neither putting forth a facade's mirth Can be built with true knowledge's comfort.
Category: Creative Writing
The Root of Western Frustration
Narcissism as defined by psychology Is wanting to be loved. Healthy ways of being in psychology Is loving yourself. I understand what a narcissist is. Trust me, I do. But, something about the definition seems stupid. To want people to love you, That is narcissistic. To have the innate desire to love yourself This is not narcissistic. Let me reiterate. It is narcissistic to want love. It is not narcissistic to love yourself. In other words, It's healthier to love yourself Than it is to be loved by others. Let me reiterate: Everyone are narcissists And the ones who want love the most, Those are the ones who everyone say are sick.
Across the Seas I Look, so Forth, To See
Across the seas I look, so forth, to see The rays of dawn's mid morning light; I peer there cross the bays so seen---the sea It calls a melodic light of mulled plight. Is there or is there not a god to love Whose majesty had planed the seas so blue? For daunting feast of mind this task will seem When shown that man his suffered life anew Must live a life of grief upon this earth. Yet, good has failed we men when God's in dearth.
How I Wish it Was Your Shadow Which Touched Mine
How I wish it was your shadow Which touched mine. How I wish in every evening Glow, that you found me And were secretly my shadow. If at one moment, You stood behind, waiting for me. All I had to do was ask for you, And you'd appear. Yet, I have said, "Do not be..." Because I do not want a shadow. For when I ask for you, You do not appear. No... you do not appear. Hope is in every woman With that familiar face. I see you everywhere. In the neighbor At the mall On the computer screen The author of a poem When I am driving through the local towns. There you are, Your face, And I think, "It is her "And all I have to do is reach out for her." Look. It is not you. Your familiar face, If I could just have just one of you. But, it is not the face I want. No. It is you. I find you on several dozen faces, And each of them I want. At the state park, At my desk in school, At the retirement home where I volunteered. Though, it is not you. It never is. I get into a bitter fight today And I lose hope that you exist. Because men complicate simple truths with obfuscated Legalities, and political points And hard to swallow talking points. All I want is you. And yet, when I call, As I always try to call, You are gone. You do not come when I call for you. When I'm at the family picnic I walk down to the wine cellar And I imagine you walking in, And introducing our children; For our love was a secret. Whatever reason. But, I walk upstairs, And you do not come. And I drink my cup And I look into it... I know I'm not supposed to... And I sigh.
The Strongest Case For God
The strongest argument against God Is this: People naturally understand right from wrong. I have a way I want to be treated. And I want to treat others that way. I also, want others to be treated well. Therefore, I know this about myself So I want this to be applied to others. Why it fails, is that there are many masochists. There are many sadists. There are many people who enjoy war; Many people who enjoy pain; Many people who enjoy causing others to suffer. It also fails, because what is true for one man Isn't necessarily true for another. What sexual appetite one person has Might be repugnant to another. What desire one person has Might inflict pain on another By mere economics. One in forty women I meet Would rather date another woman Than me. What's even worse Is that one in two will divorce me If I ever took the risk of marrying them. One in nineteen people I meet Are still a virgin. There is also the subject that A baby can be destroyed in the womb. There is also the subject that Some want drug use to go unregulated. There is also the subject that There are blacks who want to segregate the West. There are women who want every man to be convicted of rape. There are men who want pedophilia to be normalized. There are whites who want to usher in communism. There are educated people who are tearing down monuments. It is because of all of this That I stand firm in my faith.
The Plagiarized Dream
O, I slept light While I saw my succors, My success, Stolen from me in a dream. I had worked hard Yet another had received The profit of my labor: Almost like the Preacher said. I dreamt of it, His riches, His honor, His glory, His might. Yet, it was with my words That he won my Cup. I am as yet still unknown. Does this phantom lurk? Is the doppelganger real? The very man I have dreamt about? Does the phantom truly exist? While he feasts Must I fast? While he enjoys the stolen bread Must I subsist upon only crumbs?
The Strongest Case For God
The strongest argument against God Is this: People naturally understand right from wrong. I have a way I want to be treated. And I want to treat others that way. I also, want others to be treated well. Therefore, I know this about myself So I want this to be applied to others. Why it fails, is that there are many masochists. There are many sadists. There are many people who enjoy war; Many people who enjoy pain; Many people who enjoy causing others to suffer. It also fails, because what is true for one man Isn't necessarily true for another. What sexual appetite one person has Might be repugnant to another. What desire one person has Might inflict pain on another By mere economics. One in forty women I meet Would rather date another woman Than me. What's even worse Is that one in two will divorce me If I ever took the risk of marrying them. One in nineteen people I meet Are still a virgin. There is also the subject that A baby can be destroyed in the womb. There is also the subject that Some want drug use to go unregulated. There is also the subject that There are blacks who want to segregate the West. There are women who want every man to be convicted of rape. There are men who want pedophilia to be normalized. There are whites who want to usher in communism. There are educated people who are tearing down monuments. It is because of all of this That I stand firm in my faith.
Let Kairos Be Damned
"Let Kairos be damned," Said the poet. The Pharisees sat aghast. "He it is who we worship." The poet, stunned at the ignorance, Said, "But do you not see, "That this false god had "Taken you all for fools?" The Pharisees then said, "His name is in our scripture!" To which, the poet said, "You are too wise for me. "For, I had not meant it so." The Pharisees then pointed their fingers, And said, "Die, thou Judas Son of James!" So, Judas Son of James died For the naming of an idol. Let Kairos be damned.
Literary Analysis of Beowulf, Particularly Answering the Question of Whether Beowulf is a Hero.
Literary Analysis of Beowulf, Particularly Answering the Question of Whether Beowulf is a Hero.
Is Beowulf a hero or conceited nobody? One has to understand the time period Beowulf was invented. At that time, heroism was personal glory. That’s the whole sum of pagan culture is that glory is everything. And, Beowulf was not “fighting for his glory”. He was fighting to bring peace between the Danes and the Geats. He extended a hand to the Danes who once were at war with the Geats by slaying Grendel and Grendel’s Mother.
To observe whether he was or was not conceited requires one to observe a motif on the vitality of Youth. Beowulf is expected to be a glory seeker in his youth, but in adulthood, he recognizes he is no longer strong. And, this is foretold throughout the entire poem, with its theme of fate and the overall fate of Beowulf, which is to be killed in battle with the Wyrm. Beowulf knows he’ll be defeated, and in this is a sort of humility.
What could be called conceit, to take on one’s professor at school, or whoever is telling one to make Beowulf a conceited cock, Beowulf fights Grendel with his bare hands, and this is unusual in our culture with our faith in weapons and technology. Why wouldn’t he use a sword? But serendipitous, perhaps even foreknown, to Beowulf—because had he used a sword, weapons couldn’t penetrate Grendel’s flesh; thus, he’d have been defeated—Beowulf won the day simply because he used his bare hands.
We can assume he’s had experience with monsters of this kind. But, he does takes a sword into battle with Grendel’s Mother, but of course it fails him. So, one could call Beowulf’s fighting hand to hand conceit here, but is it really when weapons will fail against these kinds of monsters?
And, to contrast what that culture deemed as “Conceited” we have a perfect example in Unferth’s behavior toward Beowulf, who sits in the Mead-Hall and questions Beowulf’s heroism and tries to tout his (Unferth’s) own abilities. But, Unferth is afraid of Grendel, so here we have true conceit. Unferth is afraid to fight Grendel, but he’s also going to belittle Beowulf to his face to try and diminish his (Beowulf’s) capabilities. And Unferth does this by mentioning a swimming match Beowulf lost. And, of course, from my memory, Beowulf did lose the match, but of course, he took down two dozen sea monsters in the process. And, seeing that Beowulf does slay Grendel and Grendel’s Mother, there is no reason to question in this Universe of Discourse that such a thing is possible.
The idea that Beowulf was conceited is just modern idiocy and English culture bashing. Beowulf’s whole culture would be “Conceited” by our standards, and the fact is that Beowulf was the least “Conceited” of that whole group of people. He risked his life to slay a demon. And, this motif in the story that the demonic is more dangerous than men, proven by the fact that Grendel was a demon that Beowulf slew to make peace, and only Beowulf could slay him, proves that the author is trying to say that winning battles with the Demonic through the strength of Christ is more heroic than battles with men, which are often talked about but not glorified in the text anywhere that I can see. He got gold, yes, but that was not a symbol of conceit; it was a symbol of diplomacy. The gold given to Beowulf was a sign between the Danes and Geats of friendship.
One cannot, in any rational way, call Beowulf conceited. It’s impossible. To do so is to view him from a western standard, and it’s revisionism. In the movie, maybe he’s conceited because movies are banal. But in the book, he’s all hero. He dies serving his people in an epic battle with the Wyrm. That’s Satan, just to let one know what the probable metaphor is there. Beowulf even sheds his pride by going into battle with his servant by his side. If one’s teacher wants one to write an essay on why “Beowulf is conceited” then drop that course, and find a true lover of English literature. That’s simply not true; it’s a flawed analysis and its culturally neglectful.
If Beowulf were conceited, it’s in the fact that he wants to obtain glory for himself, but that’s the pagan culture he grew up in, and the ways he obtained glory were by struggling with the demonic. It’s a motif written by a Christian Monk trying to tell a group of people to stop killing each other and focus on Christ by struggling with the demonic and not fighting amongst each other. That’s hardly conceited, and the most glory comes, according to the crux of Beowulf, from the most triumphant victory over the demonic. And, of course, Beowulf always asks God, Jesus, to help him slay that beast.
And before one thumbs their nose at me for bringing up Christianity, let me point out to one that the book was written by a Christian monk in order to teach people Christian values in a culture that was completely secular. This is not disputed. What is disputed is, of course, whether Beowulf was conceited. And, of course the world wants him to be because we have this incessant need to vilify heroes in modern day. So, keep that in mind.
As one brought up some interesting points after reading this essay, and perhaps one can benefit from this:
There are three main devices I usually see. There’s the battles, which are the main device, of course. There’s the retelling of battles which shouldn’t be confused with the boasts; then there’s sharing gold. Two secondary devices are the retelling of history and then one has the three boasts.
The main device is of course the battles, which are there to reinforce the motif of diplomacy, struggling against the demonic, and this reinforces the gold sharing as something more than just sharing gold. It’s a diplomatic action and symbolizes the new bond between the Geats and the Danes. The retelling of battles is just what people do in the Mead-hall. It’s historically always been that way, and if one goes to a bar today, things aren’t much different. There’s the Beowulf, telling his mighty deeds, and then there’s the Unferth, that annoying guy trying to discredit Beowulf. People like to tell their exploits. Everyone has their stories of heroism, and Beowulf of course has his, and rightly so.
Then we get to the other two devices. The retelling of history is normally where we find the poem’s disdain for human violence. We see battles, kings being killed in battle, a lot of inglorious things happen in these historical events. And, the tone takes a rather disapproving gesture toward these wars with men, and it kind of hints at saying “Why aren’t we fighting against the Grendel of the world, but are still fighting men? There is no glory in killing men because men are weak, they are easy and they are inglorious to kill.” Then we have the boasts. And, somehow people get here and say, “Aha! Beowulf is awful, and conceited, and he has all of these great things to say about himself.” I say one does that same thing when one creates a job resume. Beowulf’s boasts are his proof to Hrothgar that he can get the job done. It’s not this conceited thing; it’s Beowulf simply trying to get the opportunity to fight against a strong foe.
Some themes are of course Glory and Honor, but these are put toward diplomacy, struggling against the demonic through Christ, being faithful, being a righteous leader… the glory is never, once, directed at secular things. It’s always there to elevate some form of idea relating to Christian morality. Justice, Peace, Friendship, Bravery in the face of wickedness (Which is very Christian).
And, that’s what I have to say. Also, Beowulf’s confidence was “Conviction” not “Convention” or “Conceit.” Beowulf believed he could fight this battle, and Beowulf won because of his great faith.
Analysis of “Am I Insane” by Guy Maupassant
“Am I Insane?” An Analysis of Maupassant
It seems like anything I’d say about this work would ruin the beauty of it. However, some mental notes were that the woman’s revived desire was renewed by the horse, but the jealousy of the man led him to murder.
I suppose the work is meant to capture an image of the passion called love; but also, I’d argue, it hints at an ideal. The woman loved her horse, and the man felt jealous of that love. Should he have loved the woman, I suppose the poem forces you to consider whether he would have been happy for her revived desire, since the root of the problem wasn’t an affair.
His description of the woman made her very relatable. Very desirable, however, the poem seems to try and insinuate the revived desire is with a man, until the end when the notion is dismissed with totality. When, it turns out to be a horse who has revived her desire.
The thought that ran through my mind was this: that if the woman were truly loved, this interest, this passion, would be shared. It wouldn’t be something to incite jealousy.
The woman was martyred for having a renewed passion.
The tendency is in men to do this. The internal narrative of the story is the strained relationship between a man and his partner. The jealousy aroused is a passion of dominance; to be her waking passion morn and eve.
When he’s not her object of total adoration, he goes crazy. So, the poem describes the feeling of a strained relationship, how it seems to make one crazy. Yet this work is supremely beautiful for its rendition, with moral shades to the text: that if he actually loved the woman, perhaps he would have taken another course of action. Seeing the renewed sense of life would have made him joyous and not callous. That was the sensation I received from the prose, was a moral bearing the insanity of a man who wishes to dominate his partner in everything. So, the wife’s joys are sucked from her. It is a relevant discourse, as true love would create a response of affection for any renewed interest because true love wishes to see its beloved happy.
Some notes about Maupassant, I think his naturalist persona was a cover for success. The poems, although usually very cruel, do have a moral shade to them, despite the so called “Pessimism.” This piece affirms the female Libido, and the revival of passion through a healthy cathexis. It then turns to a moral rebuke of the man, by having him internally monologue, “Am I insane?”, insinuating to the reader that he is not insane, maybe, but that maybe he is bitter with jealousy, an emotion we all have felt. The relatability of this passion, for anyone who’s had a partner who showed considerable disinterest in them, is perhaps what shades the text with its insidious interpretation. Perhaps the reader draws too much sympathy to the narrator.
However, there is a moral to draw for someone feeling similar emotions. There is a brightness in the female character. A trueness. A revival of the female libido, which, ought to be shared by the husband/boyfriend, because true love would share its joy with the beloved. So, perhaps the poem scathes the jealousy, which is murderous. An emotion many have felt, if they’re honest. An emotion many have been troubled with, if they’re honest. Because I don’t believe the moral tone could do anything more than offer a remedy to the jealousy. It seems to reaffirm love, by showing love’s complete opposite. As, I tend to empathize with the woman and not the man.
I will not recant my analysis, as I find it is a good analysis.
Maupassant, Guy. The Tales of Maupassant. Illustrated by Gunter Böhmer. The 100 Greatest Books Ever Written Collector’s Edition Bound in Genuine Leather. Easton Press, 1977. Text.