With Regards to My August 25th Post

On Wednesday the 25th of August I posted a poem that I promised to elaborate on; a poem that was intentionally structured to be as ambiguous as I could make it. Here’s that poem:

On the Brink

He clamped that heavy weapon tight
And aimed that steel that seemed a ton
And just before a life was done
A humming bird was in his sight

“Draw down son, and be at peace”
It said in syllables divine
“Don’t you know that this is mine”
To which his hand gave quick release



Of the Poem (An Explanation)

As I mentioned when I first posted this, one of the primary things I wanted to do with this poem was to make it as ambiguous as possible.

From one perspective the poem may seem to speak of a suicidally minded person who, consumed perhaps by an indelible depression, wants to end his life (hence the weapon, the gun). Fortunately, something intervenes and thwarts this attempt, and he drops the weapon … or so one would think.

It seems obvious enough, right: he grabs a weapon (line 1) and aims it, perhaps at his head (line 2), and just before he pulls the trigger (line 3) something intervenes (lines 4 through 7) and causes him to drop (release, line 8) the gun.

But there’s too many assumptions being made to render this conclusion. First of all it says he “aimed that steel that seemed a ton” … nothing suggests that he aimed it at himself. Rather than speaking of a suicidally minded person, perhaps it speaks of one plotting the death of another? So the former conclusion would just have to be altered so that it’s no longer dealing with one wishing to end his life, but rather the life of another (but this, as was said, is merely a possible interpretation, an assumption).

We’ll come back to the representation of the humming bird in just a moment; but before we do, let’s take a brief look at the concluding line of the poem.

Assuming that there was an intervening element that hoped to prevent the discharge of that weapon, it’s not quite clear whether the man fired it off or tossed it away, for it is only said that, in response to the intervening factor, that “his hand gave quick release.” One assumes he discards the weapon, but this can easily be interpreted as his releasing a bullet from the chamber (perhaps in defiance of the intervening voice).

As was said above, all this ambiguity was intentional. It was hard to figure out how to approach it, but I think I achieved it, for (as I see it) there are at minimal four possible interpretations:

1: A man picks up a weapon intending to end his life, but something intervenes and causes him to drop the weapon.

2: A man picks up a weapon intending to end someone’s life, but something intervenes and causes him to drop the weapon.

3: A man picks up a weapon intending to end his life, but something intervenes and, despite that intervention, he obstinately discharges the weapon.

4: A man picks up a weapon intending to end someone’s life, but something intervenes and, despite that intervention, he obstinately discharges the weapon.

There were a few excellent interpretations that were left in the comments area of that post. The comment left by Obiterspeak, for example, was very similar to the scenario explained in the first interpretation above, and the one that more readily pops into my mind when I read it.

devangini's “humble attempt” at an interpretation was in my view utterly incredible, a view shared by my neighbor: that is, that the poem spoke of a hunter ravaging nature with his weapons of destruction until nature, in the form of a hummingbird, rebukes his activities. Awesome stuff.

Da other Part of 'Zo gave two great perspectives. The one, again like Obiterspeak’s rendering, is very similar to the example explained in the first interpretation above. The other, well, is really deep; check it out:

This piece could symbolize the end of a certain characteristic or way of life a person has been living. They are contemplating if they want to continue in that current lifestyle and refer to their religious/spiritual beliefs or affliations for guidance. In the end, they choose to give it up.

Tell me that’s not cool.

Inasmuch as the symbol of the hummingbird is concerned, well, it’s less than ambiguous. As mentioned above, it’s obvious that it’s an intervening aspect. The truth is that as I was scripting the poem out the idea of an angelic presence was persistent in my mind. There are some hints to this if you read close; the main ones being lines 5 through 7.

Take line 6 as an example. It says that this hummingbird spoke in syllables divine.

Syllables are an obvious reference to the poem in general, but more specifically it refers to the poem's meter. The entire poem essentially consists of 8 syllables per line- that is, until one reads lines 5 and 7 … those lines have a seven syllable count. Why seven?- because the symbolic representation of the number seven carries with it a sacred connotation. It is the intervening voice of an angel (or the Lord) speaking from an aspect that is heavenly and pure, sacred and holy.

Finally we have the single most symbolic and ambiguous word of the entire poem:

Don’t you know that this is mine

What is the reference here? What is this this? This was intentional, and- hopefully not to your grief- I’ve chosen to let its mystery persist without explanation. What do you think it is?

Anyhow, there you have it. All apologies for the delay in response. Thanks for stopping by- and thanks for those awesome comments!

The Lilies

What marvelous symbols there be
Of heaven and its Highest Jewel-
A living ode to Yahweh's rule
Inscribed on every thing we see.

See, Nature's but a shadow cast-
A cloak, a shroud, a second light-
A medium for inner sight
That speaks of all His kingdom vast.

Her objects to His realm are wed,
And we can see her nuptial band:
That signature upon her hand
That speaks to every vow He said.

So stroll, dear poet, cheerfully
Amidst the lilies of the field,
And where He shows His symbols yield,
And contemplate them carefully.

-jwm

Said the Crow

My curses gazed upon the foe
Who perched on wires by the tree:
"Just who is it you seek, Old Crow,
The neighbor boy, or is it me?"

Said the Crow:

"I seek for water and for bread,
And seek for murders in the sky-
But never for a neighbor dead,
Or that a neighbor's neighbor die."

Of the Poem:

Sometimes a crow's a crow, as sometimes a cigar's a cigar.

The poem above came from an experience I had earlier this week. I accompanied two friends for a walk across the street when suddenly there was dark black crow directly before us plucking at a puddle of water. An onslaught of superstitious images filled my head to the point that an eeriness sat on the entire scene (my friends felt it too).

Now I hardly consider myself a superstitious person, but truth be told, I've always perceived the presence or suggestion of Death where these birds would rove. Moreover, and on account of this, I've caught myself shunning them, shooing them, cursing them, staring swords at them ... I think I even tried to throw something at one of them once!

Superstitious? I wouldn't go that far, but I will acknowledge that like most of us I've grown up in a culture riddled with superstitious ideologies, and that these have become so interwoven into our social awareness that it's almost impossible to come out unscathed by it (e.g. my examples above).

Notwithstanding, the above poem is essentially a reminder to myself that this is so, that that bird we saw plodding about the water wasn't the embodiment of Death or Destruction or Bad Omen, but was rather ... well ... a bird.

Now we may attach symbols to these creatures that represent otherworldly aspects, and even mythologize or poeticize about them, but the truth is we ought to be focused on the meaning behind the symbol rather than the subject through whom that meaning seemingly symbolically manifests.


Side Note:

In the second line of the second stanza the phrase "murders in the sky" appears. This sounds exceedingly dark, and was intended to. But the truth is it's not dark at all. The word 'murder' is a collective noun that basically means the same thing as 'flock' (hence the phrase murder of crows). When in line two of stanza two the crow says he seeks "murders in the sky" he's essentially saying he seeks the company of other crows- a social inclination.

copyright © 2010