I thought you guys would like this quotation from Brian McLaren's book The Story We Find Ourselves In.
McLaren writes: "Language is the best tool we have, but it keeps getting in the way. So in science, we revert to mathematics. And in theology, we revert to poetry. Mathematics and imagination are two ways of talking about things beyond normal language."
Based on your experiences with poetry in previous years, and in the beginning of our new unit, comment on this excerpt. Here are some questions to get you thinking: Can mathematics and poetry be linked in this way? Why does language get in the way? If it gets in the way, why is the language of poetry more apt to tap into truth than other forms of language (prose, etc.)? Is it possible to "part the veil", to "see beyond" our experience through the medium of words - the words of poems in particular? Is McLaren suggesting the languages of poetry and mathematics are holy in some way?
(By the way, does anyone recognize the interior of the church in this photograph?)
26 comments:
When we think about it, our feeble minds are really not that feeble. In fact, it is just too grand, too intricate, too sophisticated for our human selves to express its thoughts, ideas, and imaginations in any shape or form of communication. Thus, people fall short, so often, when expressing themselves, only creating problems and conflicts with each other. Although there is a plethora of factors involving such fault in human nature, language plays a dominant role. No matter how much we pursue the advancement of communication, language proves itself, over and over, to be quite limited in its way of bringing out what’s truly in our minds. Whatever we are dealing with, language never seems to suffice! Just look at how many conflict arise from the Bible! Because of different translations, interpretations, and so much more! I mean, language creates so many problems because of its limitations. So, in search for a solution, people turn to other ways of communicating. Whether it is a very objective, rigid, and set way of communication such as mathematics, or an imaginative, limitless, and free way of communicating such as, perhaps, poetry. We, as human beings, look to other ways to get across the message we have to the world.
To me personally, imagination will never be fully expressed. Whether it is through a novel, a movie, a song, the audience will never fully understand the intentions of the creator. Surely, the product if imagination will inspire the imaginations of others and produce new imaginations, but the very source of an imaginative product will not be passed onto its audience. As sad as it may sound, that is the reality and it is no different for poetry. Although poetry may provide an alternative to our everyday normal language, it has its own problems that hinder the connection from the creator to his or her audience. Yes, it does provide and provoke something different when compared to language, but it is just as limiting as language. My past experience shows that what I have received from poetry has not been much different from the novels I have read or the conversations I have had. Poets are out to send a message just like authors, and their way of sending their message only differs in the form it takes. I would not say that poetry is a way of talking about things beyond our normal language because poetry itself is a product of language. Thus, the veil that parts us from truth will never be taken off. As much as we hope other forms of communication to be special, they really are not. They do not provide something beyond other form of communication does, they only present things from a different perspective, hence inspiring people to take on a different perspective on the subject of the matter.
What truly interest me though is that McLaren uses the word “revert” when he talks about science and theology using a different mode of communication. Revert means to “to return to a former practice,” and to say that using mathematics or poetry is “reverting” from language makes it seem that the two existed before language! Or at least that’s what McLaren seems to believe. Maybe before the existence of our contemporary language, there existed a better form of communication. Something like mathematics or imagination. It is just tragic that we live in an age of super fact communication. A time when people are demanding faster communication. We are constantly abbreviating, and shortening what we say. Whether it is in an MSN chat or essay, we have to be concise with what we say. Saddens me to think that we are destroying the very purpose of language by taking away the freedom of thoroughly expressing our thoughts. Instead, we look to faster ways to getting our thoughts across. But, as we look for speed, we sacrifice the quality. It is hard enough to really express who we are with the tool of language, but now we’re just taking that language and diminishing its purpose and value.
Now, how sad is that?
Dear Mrs Lavender:
You ask: "why is the language of poetry more apt to tap into truth than other forms of language (prose, etc.)?"
I wonder if poetry may be considered "espresso of language" in that it offers intensity of experience or emotion in a very small sip.
You also ask if it is possible to "see beyond our experience through the medium of words..."
I would make further use of my espresso analogy by suggesting that, just as various coffee beans imported from different regions allow us to partake of exotic varieties beyond the usual brew, poetry may also be "imported". These foreign importations allow us to savour the aroma and flavour of lives other than our own. They shape our tastes and heighten our interest as we pursue the new and the rare.
Mr Lavender
ps - Please pick up a loaf of bread on the way home.
I think that mathematics and poetry are linked in this way. Both are the unique ways to express one’s thoughts about things. It uses symbols to express one’s thoughts and meanings that cannot be expressed though just using normal languages such as prose or commentaries. The language limits us from expressing our thoughts freely and thus our imagination. It limits us by setting a boundary which is a set of rules such as grammar; almost all the writings have a series of strict rules that we have to follow in order to produce a good writing. This, however, sometimes limits us from expressing our thoughts freely. For example, if I want to describe my emotion right now, I would use poetry to express it rather than a commentary or a prose. Poetry has a bigger boundary than just normal prose or commentaries. It doesn’t have a series of strict rules such as grammar. In prose, one must describe fully with details and excellent word choices, keeping all the rules. On the other hand, poetry can use a simple word to describe one’s emotion. One word may arouse emotion inside the readers’ mind. While a long formal sentence might kill the exciting and realistic imagination inside the readers’ mind, a simple short word may can arouse the particular emotion when the readers are exposed to the word, using ‘raw’, fresh, tasty, and free structure.
If we see this question in a bigger picture, poetry refers to words and mathmatics refers to mathematic symbols. Both are similar in a way that they carry thoughts and conduct those thoughts to the targeted reader. Mathematics and poetry may be linked but the fundamental difference such as their intended purpose and style of communication will make the link difficult to be achieved. How does language get in the way??? I guess it is trying to tell us that there are some things (emotion or feeling) that can't be illustrated thorugh the language we use right now. Poetry is more apt since it carries deeper meaning in-generally-less words.
It may be hard to "see beyond" through the medium of words but it is not totally an impossible thing to be achieved. I don't really think the word "holy" really fits in this context. I don't know why but that's what I think.....
I also feel as if language is a barrier for me because I can never say what I want with the words I have. Even if I know the words, I can never think of it when I want to so to compensate for this gap I like to use a lot of sounds and hand motions. I get a lot of funny looks from other people but that's the only way I know to get something across. Language often times gets in my way when I'm trying to explain or express my thoughts. If there was a tool that could simply move my thoughts for others to see when necessary, life would be so much easier. What I want to say is always inhibited by what I can say. There are also things that I want to express that can't be expressed or explained in words. I have to use an excessive amount of words to try to say what I want but even then I can't say what I want. My wordiness causes the flow of words to be disturbed making it hard for people to understand. For humans, language is essential for communication but there are so many gaps and obstacles that must be overcome first that it soon becomes inefficient. Mathematics is direct, concrete, and there's only a right answer present. There's no way to misinterpret it if the answer's right because it's just there. You can't analyze the answer and interpret it to be 6 when the answer is 4. So I believe in this way math is beneficial in science when trying to explain a concept. Poetry uses a language but it's different because it's more of an emotional sort of writing. With concise words, it presents the emotions and meaning for those who read it. In poetry, a short sentence can contain layers and layers of messages. Language also inhibits poetry because of the many different languages in the world. Translations change the meaning of poetry sometimes and can’t accurately display what poet wants. Language has barriers to it but so does math and poetry. I believe the best way is the raw product that is produced at first, the thoughts/imagination. If this factor can be presented as a raw product rather than a processed product, I believe communication would be taken to the next level. There won’t be any misunderstanding or miscommunication.
I think McLaren based his claim on the fact that language is not fully reliable. Language itself has flaws, as all the other ways of knowing have. Sometimes language gets in the way because a word has multiple meanings. Sometimes language gets in the way because there is no language that can properly describe the situation or emotion, such as “Jung (정)” in Korean culture.
In science, we revert to mathematics when numbers and signs can be more comfortable in representing ideas than using scientific terms or lengthy explanation. Also, theology itself is a complex area of study, so language might not be the best and perfect way of knowing. Complicated language will bother the delivery of theology, while letting people imagine will be helpful to make them understand the study.
Therefore, I agree that mathematics and imagination are ways of talking about things beyond normal language. Sometimes in math class, I think I’m learning stuff that can’t exactly be explained in normal language, but still exists as a concept. Also, the power and vividness of imagination amazes me whenever I imagine things such as the future or different situations. After all, I realize that mathematics and imagination can both be excellent ways of knowing when language is not the best method for learning.
Language of poetry can let us vicariously see and feel a new experience through words. The words of poems create metaphors that convey certain atmosphere and senses. The open-ended meanings of a poetry makes it different from anything else. However, mathematics and poetry can’t be linked. Mathematics or any parts of science, have right or wrong answers. If I interpret and solve a question in my own way, I might end up with answers that are not even close to the “real” answer. On the otherhand, poetry is opened to unlimited interpretation and responses. There is no set boundary which blocks the writer or the reader to freely use their imagination. Some might say that mathematics is also a language in science, but it doesn’t go beyond our normal language. Mathematics can express a thought and information like poems. However, math can’t illustrate imaginative emotion because numbers just mean same symbols to anyone. Therefore, I think poetry is more apt since its content can let the readers to think beyond their minds.
I agree that mathematics and poetry are tools to find the answer in science and theology, but I see them quite different from each other. They speak more than a thousand words can describe in a concise member. They help to describe the indescribable words. Despite the similar usages and purposes, they are two different ideas. Mathematics is a logically and structured methods, while poetry is abstract and with many interpretations. Mathematics has a limited answer; usually there are one or two answers to a question.
However, poetry gives no limitation in interpretation, but only encourages others to see things in different perspective. The interpretations are different to everyone, because it brings the hidden truth that one believes in. It is like a key that opens what we truly believe inside of us. It is always amazing to see the difference in each other’s perspective and it shows a lot about them. Since poetry has no definite answer like mathematics, it helps people to search for different meaning that reveals whom we are.
Language is a best tool for us to communicate. Yet, it also hinders us in many ways. It has created many conflicts so far, creating confusion, frustration, humiliation, and sometimes-indescribable anger. Different languages have different implication that cannot be translated into another language, and those types of problems are extremely complicated and frustrating. However, language facilitated our lives by letting us freely expresses ourselves.
I do not think McLaren is suggesting that languages of poetry and mathematics are holy, but simply suggesting that they answer the questions in life. It is true that mathematics and imaginations are some ways to describe things beyond the normal language. Especially in poetry, there are no limitations until one refuses to see things in different ways.
Is it a church in Canada? :)
I have never really been able to connect the straight-forwardness of mathematics and the flambouyance of poetry. To some extent, poetry does contain mathematic elements as syllable numbers and beats come into play but beyond that I believe the veil between the two is more like a brick wall.
Think about it. If you read a paper by a student who's better in writing then you'll see that they will use big words and their writing will flow from one sentence to the next, but another student who prefers math might have choppier sentences that are more to the point. In this way, yes, language gets in the way and seperates the brains from the..brains. Neither is better than the other, they are just equally right. One chooses to see things as they are and the other just chooses to accept the truth but see another reality as a possibility as well.
McLaren is suggesting that mathematics and poetry are mediums of communication and are expressions beyond the language we speak. Poetry is a medium of communication of abstract concepts in the field of theology. In comparison, mathematics is also the language of science in which enables anyone to comprehend inexplicable theories or principles that compose the field of science. Logic and imagination, thus, takes place in science and theology because our language is limited in expressing fully and clearly. So, does language really get in our way that without other mediums of communication we cannot comprehend science or theology?
I am not sure whether poet can actually enhance the comprehension of abstract concepts in theology, but I am pretty sure mathematics can prove or expand any equations or abstract equations in science. Like I said, mathematics is the language of science and there are limited words to describe a principle or law with our normal language. Thus, similarly, in literary perspective, poetry can list spit out words that has no denotative meanings but words that randomly represent our imagination so that it would be possible to explain or portray what we have in our mind.
Language does indeed get in our way. Language is limited because it is challenging to express one’s thoughts exactly with existing words. Language, which is a means of communication, proves itself limitless in our lives. When we are doing a presentation in class or just giving a feedback to a comment, we can often observe people, even myself, stumbling over my thoughts and pausing to find the right word to express the abstract ideas that I am thinking. Language is a problem everywhere. Even in the quote by McLaren, I am even trying to analyze what ‘normal language’ even is. How do we know poetry and mathematics are beyond normal language if there are no definite truths for what ‘normal’ language is?
Even though language has its limitations, we tend to believe that poetry is more apt to tap into truth because we believe (some people) that poetry is a form of communication that tries to communicate through emotion rather than through the literal words. Through poetry, we can see universal symbols poets use in order to hint at the moral message they are trying to deliver. Even though poetry is a very abstract piece of work that is open to a lot of different interpretation, the essence of the truth is revealed. However I personally believe that there can be different truths that readers will extract from poems. According to reader response, we react and interact with poems differently because of our different experiences and cultures. Therefore, I think that poetry is not that great in tapping into truth, but I will agree that to some extent it is better than prose.
Mathematics is also a way of knowing that I have doubts in. In the culture I am living in, it seems as if it is the society that is creating the image that mathematics is logical and concrete. However, is it really that concrete as it is portrayed? I don’t know the answer, but I feel that math can also be language that is mysterious. How do we know that the answers we arrive at in math are the ultimate truth? Are they just mere numbers or we try to fit together to prove a pattern?
Maybe McLaren is trying to prove that it is holy, but I personally feel that all those ways of knowing are limited to express our thoughts precisely.
My comment; haiku:
to your silly lengthy ones
which make me so tired....
=================================
Things not said are strong;
Poetry: a bridge not said- said.
Think on my haiku.
=================================
My words are few still...
john shows they are too little...
Please shut john up now.
john bang said, some things
blake's comment, in my head rings
let's sleep while john sings
that's my haiku. haha just kidding john. First, I think you misinterpreted the word "revert". If you look at his quote, I think he is referring to the idea that language was added onto mathematics to create science and also to poetry to create theology. This makes sense since science is basically mathematics with language, and theology can be argued to represent "poetry" or "imagination" described through language.
Second, although I agree that imagination will never be fully expressed, poetry definitely allows a more creative way through which individuals can express themselves, kind of like what Mr. Lavender mentioned. The issue is not about the author connecting with the audience; the goal is for the author to express him or herself. This being said, it is not important that readers understand fully what is being implied or even understand at all. It is fine even if the readers come up with a totally different interpretation. This is the beauty of poetry. I mean, look at all the famous writers who received inspiration from other authors. However, it is the sad reality that poetry will never
"part the veil," but it is as close as we can get to uncovering truth.
If I were McLaren, I would add art and music into the realm of holy languages. (The generally accepted definition of art).
That quote is really interesting because I never thought language was something that would get in the way. Language helps us communicate, so to me, it seems like it provides the way. But after reading the quote, it made me ponder on that fact. In some ways, it does get in the way.
Sometimes language can be VERY confusing, just like math. There you go. That's my connection with math and language. Just kidding. I know I should be connecting the two more deeply...but my "connecting" part of the brain is not working. hmmm... let's see, math is "neverending"; there are so many ways to solve math problems and numbers can go on infinitive, just like poetic words - you can analyze and approach them in so many different ways. "Seeing beyond" our experiences through poetry would be really difficult; it's not as "alive".
I guess you can say languages of poetry and math are kind of "holy" and connected to "holiness", since they are like "infinitive", but not really. I don't know...ok, I'm confusing myself. My answer is NO, I don't think McLaren is suggesting that they are holy in some way.
Language is a useful tool for people, but sometimes it may function exactly opposite. I often face difficulties expressing with words. When I am trying to present a grandiose idea and explain to someone else, I am not sure how to explain it with words and a lot of times, I fail to explain them thoroughly enough for people to understand clearly. Also, depending on the tone of my voice or the way I read the sentence, people can misunderstand my intention. Words can be interpreted in many ways thus, sometimes even if I say something with good intentions some people would take it differently.
Poetry is suitable for expressing profound ideas and poetry overturns the weakness of the language into its strength. Sometimes getting in the way means that language can be interpreted into many ways. Though there may be a particular message the poet is trying to convey, I think poetry is not restricted to one particular meaning. I believe there is no fundamental truth and thus, poetry actually helps to ponder about different ideas about truth and helps to acquire a better idea or understanding about truth.
Mathematics and poetry are similar in that they are able to replace normal language to some extent. 1+1 and a sum of all angles of a triangle are things that can be proven and fully understood by using mathematics. Also, metaphors and some literary devices used in poems convey meanings that are beyond the ability of normal language. However, I have to admit that they are also very different from each other. Though there are many methods to answer a math question, there is a right or wrong answer to a math question. However, poetry does not have a right or wrong answer. Even when we discuss poems in a class, people present different ideas about the poem and there is no right or wrong answer to that.
Language is not a language. It is just a tool which is not perfect. Also, it is manmade tool that has limitation. Mathematics and science are the same; it is manmade “tool” that we use. Thus, poetry and mathematics can be linked since both acts in a similar way where words act as a formula for poetry and numbers and symbols acting as a formula in mathematics. However, they differ in some ways, where people can see several interpretations from poetry but there is only one answer (most of the time) to a mathematic question. Therefore, McLaren has a point on reverting science to mathematics and theology to poetry. Because science is based on math and poetry based on theology, McLaren has a point.
On the other hand, let’s look at the bottom line. What is a language, does it have any meaning? Isn’t it just a play of words that humans created? Do we know if language is language? Can you truly define it? Also, is math a math? Isn’t just a theory that mathematician created in a way that people cannot disprove the fact that 1+1=2 and more? WHY AM I ANSWERING THIS BLOG QUESTION, DOES IT MEAN ANYTHING? WHY DO I LIVE?
I think, to some extent, mathematics can be a way to "objectively" communicate with others especially it doesn't rely on written language (of course, if the calculations are not flawed.)Poetry, I think, has a different meaning though. It is a way to deliver an infinite amount of message concise and short that's open to numerous interpretations.
Language gets in the way one of it being ambiguous. As an example, "I drank lots of water." How much water does that mean? It depends on how the individual defines "a lot."
I think language of poetry is more apt to tap into truth because of its openness. Like I've said above, a single piece of poem can be interpreted multiple ways and it can mean different things to different people. This is the beauty of poetry that it can sometimes cover an entire group of people regardless of gender, religion, ethnic background and so on. Perhaps this is why the language of poetry can depict "truth" better.
I think to experience something through the medium of words is somewhat limiting. As an example, I would never be able to fully understand the experiences of a child that's been abused by his/her parents -- even if I read an autobiography. However, I think it is possible to get a glimpse of the experience through words.
I think McLaren is in fact suggesting poetry and mathematics are holy. While it is debatable whether those are perfect languages to mankind, I think it's holy in terms of its unbiased nature.
When we use language we are attempting to put our complex swirling thoughts about an even more complex world into concrete words. The words can never fully explain the multi-dimensions of everything, so they get in our way sometimes.
Science is discovering how things behave and math is the constant that is used to describe the behaviours. Science in the ordinary sense can't tell you what is beyond universe, it only observes and tells you how things behave. Hence people use language to explain the imagination. Poetry is used to explain theology because theology attempts to express the hugely complex ideas of God, truth, morality, etc. As Mr. Lavender said poetry is the “espresso of language” so it easiest to express such complexity with “intensity of experience or emotion in a very small sip” so we don’t get too overwhelmed at once. I don't see mathematics and poetry as being linked because they are used in such different ways, although they are both used to express something.
Language IS the best tool we have, and it DOES get in the way A LOT of times. It's through language that people miscommunicate. Then, after miscommunication people start talking again and then there's more miscommunication and ... see where I'm going? Language is like a circle, it just keeps going round and round. Therefore, it makes sense that we would revert to mathematics in science or poetry in theology, we need to base our ideas on other knowledge areas because sometimes what we want to say through our own words is Never enough.
In my opinion, I believe mathematics and poetry can be linked in numerous ways, one way being that mathematics and poetry have answers and meanings. Literally, math will always have an answer unless it is 'undefined'. In poetry, of course, as Sandra Horn had said, there is always meaning to each poem; in every single word. Moreover, poetry has a way to be logically interpreted. Through examining the poem by tpcastt or other, poetry is allowed to be sliced into pieces and become meaning. However, this is where language gets in the way. Sandra Horn had emphasized the fact that sometimes poems are overly-interpreted, sometimes not at all near to what she had intentionally wrote. In my opinion, this is just sad. It's sad that we as readers are not able to fully grasp the TRUE meaning of what author's WANT us to know, understand, or have an epiphany about. Poetry, however, is more apt to tap into truth than other forms of language because of the very fact that readers are not able to fully grasp the meanings of poems. It's like the Bible. The Bible is my source of truth, identity, realization, you name it. However, it does not just reveal truths with simple words and meanings. The Bible has profound and indepth meanings that a lot of times we cannot understand, yet there is so much truth in the words. In the same way, yes, it is possible to "see beyond" our experience through the medium of words. However, the way we describe things as 'holy' should not be attached to anything. Of course, language and mathematics itself is not Holy (if you know what I mean). However, to which language and mathematics is used for a holy and humble purpose makes them holy (if you also get what I mean).
It's easy to see what's in front of you, but it's not easy to see past it.
I do think mathematics and poetry are linked in such a way. Even though the two are very different types of language we use, both offer something that normal language sometimes fail to offer. Mathematics is a very accurate language. It is based on logic, therefore, it is also very precise. Often times we think of mathematic language to be indisputable (given that the claim is supported by some mathematic evidence). On the contrary, we always somehow manage to find the tiniest loopholes in logic expressed in normal language. Poetry offers imagination. Poetry, by nature, often contains multilayers of interpretation. Because the language of poetry is often very condensed and compact, humans are inclined to use imagination to make connections that are visible beyond the words written in poetry. I think this is why I have such a hard time analyzing poetry. I can "sense" the authors message and his/her intentions for using certain literary/poetic devices, but it is very difficult to find the perfect word or sentence that expresses the connections I have made using my imagination.
I think that leads to the limitation of language. Language often gets in the way because it is often hard to find certain words or phrases that express what I really want to say. Sometimes, there is no word for it.
The language of poetry can be more apt to tap into truth than other forms of language because of the flexibility of language poetry possesses. As I said before, the language of poetry is often multilayered with different connotations and interpretations. It expresses profound messages in such a concise form of language. So, even without using specific and accurate words of phrases, poetry can tap into truth. Even though poetry itself often does not directly state what it really wishes to express, readers can use imagination to understand fully what the poem is saying.
I do think it is possible to "part the veil," and to "see beyond" our experience through the words of poems because that is what poets are doing when writing their poems.
I agree with the statement that language gets in the way because language is limited and I believe that language of poetry is more apt to tap into truth than other forms of language because it leaves more room for imagination and interpretations. I absolutely believe that it is possible to see beyond our experience through the medium of words because although experience would be worth a thousand words, reading prose and poetry takes me to a place where I can never be at physically. Imagination and interpretations give you a unique experience that is more profoud and true to you yourself than anyone else. As I said before, words of poem are usually more concise and subtle than words in prose because poems are shorter and like our speaker last thursday said, every word counts. More meaning is put into the words of poems. Mathematics also require imagination and interpretation because it cannot be really demonstrated through physical materials and it is abstract in some way, although it is very logical. If "holy" means being abstract and leaving room for imagination, I believe that languages of poetry and mathematics are holy in some way, although not necessarily in a similar form. In mathematics, we often use the term "infinity" and I think that is sometimes the case with language of poetry too, and this is what makes the art of language, either in poetry or mathematics, profound and beautiful. Because language itself is can become very vague and everyone's perceptions are different, I feel that the language of poetry is "holy" (but not so much with mathematics :P).
I think mathematics and poetry are linked with language, because it is another tool to express how we feel, think, and see in certain areas of knowledge. Before going further with this idea, I must answer the next question: does language get in the way? The answer is yes! We are all prisoners of language. With language we can communicate our thoughts to certain extent. Only small portion of our thoughts can actually get to other people’s heads. This can be VERY frustrating (especially in English classes: P). Thus we are mentally bound in the limitations of language. Going back to the link of mathematics and poetry, like I said before, these are just another type of language we use to communicate with others. Since it can be extremely lengthy or too boring to convey what you feel/see, we use symbols and numbers in mathematics, metaphors and other literary devices in poetry. In poetry, it has the tendency to tap into the truth than other forms of language, because every individual can interpret it according to their standards of truth. Although, ideally we expect and want one single truth that is universal, unquestionable, it is often that we make our own truth based on what we experienced. Thus, poetry is apt to tap into truth than other forms of language. McLaren is suggesting the languages of poetry and mathematics are holy, because they hold great deal of truth. For poetry, we can extract our own truth based on our own experiences. For mathematics, using symbols, we can universally say what we ant to say in the most objective form of language. Perhaps that's why McLaren is suggesting that these forms of language is so "holy."
When i first read this post, i didn't understand what McLaren was trying to say. When i read it the second time though, i noticed that the quote itself holds such depth that it made me think twice about it. I think that is what poetry is like. It's a free expression of words, thoughts, emotions all organized into any format, structure the author chooses. Because it's such a free outlet for expression, it makes it all the more dense, all the more holy if you will because every word, every punctuation has meaning and thought caressed into the poem. That's what i love about poetry. That it has that "veil" which some people are able to part to see beyond it depending on the poem. I think it all depends on how much we can relate to the poem, depending on the different experiences we all have accountered. The subtleties in poetry, or the rawness in poetry, make it such a beautiful representation of language.
On the other hand, the fact that McLaren linked Poetry to math is just bizarre to me. Personally, although i enjoy poetry i absolutely detest math. just the word math makes me shudder and i can't quite get the linkage between these two. I guess Math is similar to poetry in that it consists of its own language; where instead of using words, letters and punctuation it consists of numbers, signs, and symbols. i have heard that math can be language in itself in that although it doesn't consist of alphabetical words, each symbol and number holds meaning that is almost universal. Everyone knows the + sign means addition and = means equals. in that way, mathematics can be a language that is simple and complex in itself.
and no i don't recogize the interior of the church. haha
sure, poetry and math is related..
they are both condensed language. and sure, poetry and theology is related. is not linguistics itself a religion, something holy and sacred? i mean, to fully understand a single word in its full context would require the supernatural. words, themselves being abstract and fluid- tangibly present but not really of this world. a mere pulse of sound that contains infinity.
so connecting this to poetry:
we throw around these sounds to communicate, yes? we are often excess in our talk, our insignificant implications often degrading language, our intentions and short comings causing us to dance around the awareness of their presence. (this, perhaps may be the language getting in the way- not the language itself but the human implications limiting it)
so when we speak in poetry, the condensed language, we are surely tapping into the infinite truths that each word possesses. the unnecessary jabber is trimmed off, leaving the reader and/or author to soak in the manifested truth.
then why not always speak in stanzas and couplets?
simple:
it would be incredibly mind-boggling, as well as quiet.
Language may be the best communication tool that humans have; however, language creates limitations by itself and misunderstandings among different cultures. On the other hand, mathematics is an universal language that has no limitations to its expressions and hence, creates no "barriers" among different groups of people.
Same with poetry. Although poetry is also written with words that holds limited expressions, it allows the each reader to imagine and interpret according to the individual's creativity and imaginations. Poetry allows the people to "talk about things beyond the normal language."
What is up with all these lengthy comments? Just because you write that much doesn't mean that Mrs. Lavender is going to give you an A. Conciseness is the best.
Mathematics and poetry are similar in some ways. Both are actually quite symbolic and it is through those symbols that meaning is formed. Mathematics is a language because ideas are expressed and have meaning. We can prove things with these symbolic numbers that would be almost impossible to do with normal language. Poetry includes normal language but is much more. With poetry, one can express so much more about a topic than normal language can. Language gets mixed into all of this because in order to actually explain the meaning of the symbols in mathematics or the true meaning of the poem to other people, it needs to be explained through language. This is why language can become problematic. Some things in mathematics or poetry just cannot be explained in our everyday words. I guess poetry is more apt to "tap into truth" than other forms of language because just like truth itself, it is not really confined. In a sense, poetry is deep. We can really express our true emotions and "see beyond." In my opinion, holy is a fairly strong word. So, I am not sure if McLaren is saying that the languages of poetry and mathematics are holy, but I do think he is saying that they are in a totally different field from normal language.
Well, the whole concise thing didn't really work out. Oh well...
Post a Comment