Slow internet: everyone loses

This is the final post of the five promised winter break posts. You don't get to read the fourth one because stupid blogger saved it as just a title and deleted all the words, and it was long and I'm not going to retype it because school starts in less than 12 hours and I couldn't remember it all anyway. You can blame Nicole because she was slowing down the internet until it was practically stopped by watching Doctor Who and that's probably why blogger couldn't/didn't save it. If it ever magically pops up I'll post it because it was really good. The end.

Seafoam

Fifty white horses, all
rearing and plunging, are
galloping on where they
break as they fall.

Lightly they fade away
Borne on the wind and stars
Scattering, sighing, like
moonbeams at day.

After these, fifty more
Year after year they'll be
galloping onward to
crash on the shore.

Stingless

Merry Christmas! You get a poem. A poem that's not about Christmas. You're welcome. 


What do you think of a stingless bee?
It's still creepy. Too many legs and
those scary eyes and jaws and
it still looks the same. You definitely
don't want it crawling on you, or even
near you. It just gives you the creeps,
sting or no.
It still makes honey, though
- a sweet service -
and its wings, when you look closer,
are actually kind of beautiful.



Do you think all my poems are the same? It feels like they're all the same. Well???

On the Physicality of Emotions

Wow, I am truly terrible at this "writing-every-week" thing. I apologize sincerely, but I know that is not enough! After all, I did promise. To make up for it, you shall receive at least five posts within the next two weeks, plus guaranteed once-a-week posting for the next year! Even if it is nothing more than a haiku at 11:59 on Sunday, I will write something every single week. Promise.

       Now, my main topic is something I've been thinking about for a while. Several weeks ago, my human development professor brought up a topic that I found very intriguing. He proposed that emotions are wholly the product of a physical body. Supporting this is the fact that nowhere in scripture does it mention any spirits feeling emotion, except in Job, which might possibly be a fictionalization. He also drew on his many years of work in the fields of psychology and behavioral science, noting how much of our emotions are physiological responses to stimuli - fear and its associates, for example, being a product of the sympathetic nervous system, which controls the fight or flight response.

       I had to think about this idea for a pretty long time before I had any idea whether or not I agreed with it. It is true, in my own personal experience, that I am rarely happy when sick or in pain, and rarely sad when physically comfortable. But it is also hard to believe that all joy, grief, and awe depend on my body alone. In the end, I decided I don't believe that is the case. My professor, to illustrate his point, challenged anyone in the class to describe "happiness" without using any reference to their body or physical sensations, as if they were explaining it to a robot. No one raised a hand, of course, but I could have. I would have said that happiness is the state of wanting something to continue, based on love. (It would be extremely hard to argue, in my opinion, that love is a physical phenomenon.) Sadness is wishing something could be different than it is. These are simplified definitions, sure, but that's really only because I'm not so good at describing things. I would be just as bad if I could use the physical aspects.

       However, thinking about the idea has changed my mind a bit. Definitely, bodiless emotions would be different, something I'd never really considered before. Fear, I believe, is a purely physical feeling. It is mostly an instinct to get the physical body out of danger; it really serves no spiritual purpose. However, there might be a cousin to fear that is spiritual, you could call it awe or dread or something like that. But it would be different from what we normally think of as fear. Furthermore, emotions are classified into two types: primary and secondary. Primary, or basic, emotions are those present in very young children, and easily expressed on the face: happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust, etc. Secondary emotions are those such as shame, loneliness, friendliness, satisfaction and other feelings that are "learned" from interactions with other humans. The primary emotions are probably more linked to the body and its processes. How different they might be without it I have no idea (obviously). But it is something interesting to think about.


PS. If there is anyone reading this who doesn't take the existence of spirits or souls as a given (unlikely, considering I'm pretty sure my readership is confined to my immediate family), this post was probably pretty nonsensical. I apologize. Just think of it as a thought exercise.

On Friendship

        What is friendship, anyway? What makes a friend? I started thinking about this question when I read the "Friendship" chapter in C.S. Lewis' The Four Loves, a couple months ago. I was pretty sure his definition was wrong, but I realized that I wasn't quite sure what I thought friendship was. I think I've got it now.
         Of course, I can only speak for my friendships, not having great experience with anybody else's. So if this doesn't fit you, I'm sorry write your own definition. Lewis said his definition was only about male friendship (the whole chapter is actually pretty sexist, even for 1960), so maybe mine is for female friendship. And of course it is possible that I am, once again, writing about things I am unqualified to explain.

        Lewis asserts that true friendship occurs only when two people discover something they are both passionate about, and that all real friendship must therefore be "about" something. I was slightly offended; by this definition all my dearest friends to whom I am not actually related are demoted to mere "companions," a lesser relationship than real "friends." My closest friend and I have nothing in common. We are complete opposites: she is popular, outgoing, athletic, on the good side of crazy and loves to party and date. I am none of those things, loving instead books, poetry, and solitude. We do have some things in common - we both like learning, boys, the gospel and chocolate - but we also have them in common with about 95% of the female population at BYU. According to Lewis, such different people can't be friends, and yet we are. His definition must be at least incomplete.

        So what else is there - what is friendship? It's a choice. My friend is my friend because I love her. Why do I love her? Because she's my friend. Circular, yes, but so is friendship. When people choose to love each other, to watch out for and care about and cry with each other, they become friends. Nothing else is necessary, only love.

Simile #1 in POS Major

Note: not its actual title, but I kind of had to, didn't I? Also, more posts on the way soon, because I feel bad about disappearing for so long and not fulfilling my moral obligation.



Like waterfalls
rushing, pouring, giving
watering living
laughing, dancing, surging
flowing
continuing

Like trumpets
bold and brassy
clarion clear
harmonic, lovely, sweet
exhilarating
annunciatory

Like wings
flight
heaven
joy

Per

Hi. Here's your story. Sorry it's so late, I expected to be done with it a week ago. So you better like it because it was hard. And you're not getting another one until at least Christmas. Despite all the work it took, I'm not sure if I like it or not. I suspect this happens because I will insist on writing about things I know almost nothing about. And in ways I'm not very good at. Thoughts?

This was inspired in part by a story by Katherine Mansfield, The Garden Party. And in part by a poem by Susan Elizabeth Howe. But it's not really like either of those.

Per is a Latin word meaning through. I'm not sure why it's the title of this story. It just is.

 __________