Other Side

[barrie]

God's ghost
walks through the wall
enclosing his infinity.

Now free from the manglue,
shoe by soft shoe,
he shuffles
on cobbles,
dances in puddles,
as the rain
curls his beard.

[twoleftfeet]

Barrie,

I hesitated to post in case I got it wrong : let's face it - any poem that begins with God "dying" ain't going to be
straightforward!

I can only guess at the nature of that death, of course : the gradual decline of religion, but the idea
of passing beyond the bounds of infinity, as if through a wall like a conventional (?) ghost, is a novel idea.

We then get (I hope) a description of God celebrating his new found freedom, no longer held back by the
expectations of humanity, by doing his impression of Gene Kelly in "Singing in the Rain".

Is there baptismal significance in the rain, I wonder - is God "born again" ?

A thought provoking piece that makes me think I've been listening to Einstein discussing religion with Spike Milligan.

Geoff

[Elphin]

barrie

God has been killed by man's expectations and definitions - freed from those he is a fun loving soul. A lot of thought for me to get to that point so the poem works. Very neatly expressed - like the play on soft shoe shuffle, made me think that actually the fun loving side may just be an act. Am I reading too deeply?

Nits - do there have to be nits? Let me call them thoughts - manglue i am not so keen on, it springs thoughts of "manboobs" and other such combo words.

Is omnipotence the same idea as infinity?

Nice one

elphin

[oranggunung]

Barrie

Is this the story of heaven and earth in reverse?

God’s afterlife brings him to the terrestrial realm, where He (following your lead on this one) can cast away his cares and play. An interesting idea.

Like Elphin, I wasn’t sold on the manglue. This smacks of parental responsibility and delves deep into the realms of theology and the arguments of an interventionist versus a non-interventionist deity. Still, that’s good going for an essay of 31 words!


og

[David]

I like this. Another playful disquisition on God (or no God). I quite like manglue - makes humanity seem like something that's been cramping his (His?) style. Now he's retired, he can forget about all that, concentrate on his roses and keeping his garden tidy. Maybe get a bus pass.

Good stuff.

Cheers

David

[barrie]

Thanks Geoff - I suppose God's death comes when no-one believes anymore and I liked the idea of a ghost. Gene Kelly's bang on. Is God born again born again, you wonder - That's a question for St Tony of Blair.

Thanks Elph. Manglue - I just thought it was appropriate. Humanity 'discovered' God(s) and stuck to him like glue, finally he unsticks himself. Still, if you don't like it ....

Is omnipotence the same idea as infinity?

- Well it means 'all powerful', so I suppose it's one up from infinity - having power over it. But my idea was that God's 'other side' is not infinity, just somewhere where he could live and not just exist.

Thanks og -

Is this the story of heaven and earth in reverse?

- More or less.
You mention parental responsibility - Isn't that something we stuck God(s) with generations ago? God the father: Father Zeus: All-father (Odin) etc. Nearly all religions have a sky father and earth mother, or did have at some point. I don't think man liked growing up and being without the protective aegis of what he was used to - parents. So we had 'pretend' ones. Someone to help us (good harvests, hunting), someone to punish us (bad harvests, hunting, earthquakes etc). Someone in charge of this big 'house' we all live in (on). God has always been a good power broker too.

Glad you dug deep.

Thanks David - Yes, God's in his heaven all's right with his world. Just a little paradox here though - Who created the world that God's ghost walks? Maybe God's a Russian Doll - an infinite one, of course.

Cheers all

Barrie

[Pomme de Terre]

If it is true, as some Marxist or another once said, that things are always repeated, first as tragedy and then as comedy, it would certainly seem that this poem is the comedic antidote to Nietzsche's well-known madman pronouncing "God is dead".

Do I detect a hint of irreverance in thus treating God's death? I would hate for this discussion to derail into a discussion on the political correctness of the artistic treatment of religious themes, but nevertheless the 'Other Side' displays a very mature and unpolemical treatment of theology, which is likewise found (albeit in a far different manner) in figures such as Nietzsche and Marx, rather than irreligionists such as Dawkins. Atheist or not, the very least a poet can do in writing about God, religion etc. is to show some respect - and not necessarily reverence - which, in this case, the poet has very much done. (I suppose it also works the other way round too: any religious poet should refrain from hagiography, so to speak, and instead humanise his sentiments.)

[thoke]

Hello, potato.

Why should an atheist poet show respect for something that doesn't, in his view, exist (God), or for something which is based around what he sees to be a falsity (religion) - possibly a very dangerous falsity.

Why not respect unicorns and 9/11 conspiracies and racism while we're at it?

The least an atheist poet can do is refrain from showing any respect whatsoever for the beliefs which he, by definition, disagrees with. To do otherwise would be to pretend not to disagree, and to pretend not to be an atheist.

Ben

[barrie]

the very least a poet can do in writing about God, religion etc. is to show some respect

- I don't entirely agree here - I think it depends on what aspect of god/religion is being aired.
You could argue that religion provides a social glue (spiritual & moral frameworks etc), but you can also argue that religion is a powerful political tool, riddled with corruption. God is a strong crutch that the pious can lean on - he's also the cause of wars and atrocities. God is on everyone's side when we go to war, he fights against himself, he has a personality disorder. But God is just a mask worn by men - we're all behind it, it just makes it easier for the whole of mankind when there's someone else to praise or blame.
I think Ben made a good point, but like I said, religion's not all bad and everyone has a (god-given?) right to believe in whatever they choose to. It's when that belief interferes with and disrupts the lives of others that it becomes a pain in the arse.

Now then, where's my rosemary beads, I'm away to the stone circle with a sacrificial slug.

Cheers both

Barrie

[thoke]

everyone has a (god-given?) right to believe in whatever they choose to

Yes, I agree. Well, except that I'm not sure you can really "choose" what you believe. But I definitely agree that we all have the right to believe absolutely anything. We just don't have the right to have our beliefs respected by those hwo don't share them.

Ben

[barrie]

We just don't have the right to have our beliefs respected by those hwo don't share them.

- I quite agree. I think my respect for a person depends on how they handle their beliefs - whether or not I agree with them isn't important. The trouble is, beliefs (Religious ones), are never uniform - I have respect for Yusef Islam (Cat Stevens) but tolal disrespect for the so called cleric, Abu Hanza - yet both claim to be true Muslims. Is it the faith, or how individuals translate it?

Int god a complicated bugger? Or should I say a complicated pigment of our imagination - a red earring.

cheers

Barrie

[David]

We just don't have the right to have our beliefs respected by those hwo don't share them.

That sounds alarmingly like a justification of religious persecution, much as Christians are finding out in Muslim countries (or as Christians of various sorts found out under Christians of various other sorts in the past).

I think respect is necessary, but up to what point? It is, as ever, a question of degree, but I do believe respect is essential.

David

[barrie]

That sounds alarmingly like a justification of religious persecution, much as Christians are finding out in Muslim countries (or as Christians of various sorts found out under Christians of various other sorts in the past).

- A valid point - if Ben's talking about religious institutions and not individual beliefs. You could argue here about how much respect 'Inqusition' Christianity commands, or Radical Islam for that matter - I think a lot depends on how much respect is shown to the rest of the world by the institution in question. How much respect has the USA lost because of the arrogance of the Bush administration? It all depends on who's controlling what at the time, I suppose. I used to respect the Labour Party.

Red Barrie.

[thoke]

I was talking about respect for beliefs. Respect for people is another matter. My parents are Christians, I have religious friends, Muslim co-workers, and I respect all of them to a high degree. But their beliefs about God are stupid and dangerous. I don't think anybody has any reason to respect beliefs in propositions which he/she takes to be false. Nobody respects the belief that the Earth is flat - respect just isn't an issue there. If you aren't a Muslim, that means you think that Muslims are mistaken in believing that Muhammad is God's messenger. Why respect their mistake? Isn't it enough to respect them as human beings, and treat them with that level of respect? It almost seems disrespectful to humour people that you disagree with by essentially saying, "I respect your desire to live a lie, worship a God that isn't there, and contribute to a climate of homophobia and sexual repression." Religious people are very often decent, likeable people, worthy of respect in so many other ways. I think they can manage without having their beliefs respected.

Ben

[barrie]

"I respect your desire to live a lie, worship a God that isn't there,"

- No-one's saying that, it's not so simple. Do you really believe that people who accept God as fact also believe that they are 'living a lie'. Just because you or I may think they are wrong doesn't make it so. Truth, like most things, is relative - How do you define truth - something that can be proved? Truth is something that's held to be true by whoever believes it - which means both the Muslim and you are correct at the same time. You have evey right (and reason) to strongly disagree, but you can never be said to know 'the truth', only your personal one. Maybe God should be treated like that - personal, not universal.

A man lived at the side of a seemingly endless, very high, unscalable wall. All his life he'd lived by this huge blue barrier and all his life he'd argued with the man at other side of this wall, who claimed that it wasn't blue, but red. Both knew that they were right but neither could convince the other. One day, in the middle of yet another argument, they heard a voice calling from the top of the wall, looking up, they were surprised to see a man walking along it.

He asked them what they were arguing about - When they told them he just laughed.
"You pair of fools," he said, " you're both wrong, the wall is green!"

Maybe there's no such thing as truth, like this god I have so much trouble with.

[dl04]

At first glance i was like 'oh great, this is such a humorous take', but on several more looks, something very poignant and though-provoking is evident.

I'm guessing it explores the lack of belief in God nowadays and the slow upheaval of religion by atheism and the general change in the 21st century. One line really emphasised this to me:

as the rain
curls his beard- Summed up my response perfectly. Shows that God is human and ageing after all. Surely not?

Very well done Barrie, i enjoyed the read

dl04.

[barrie]

Thanks 04 - glad it made you think.

I'm guessing it explores the lack of belief in God nowadays

- Sort of - Was it in Peter Pan a character said that each time someone stopped believing in fairies, a fairy died? I suppose it's a a similar kind of logic: each time someone ceases to believe in God, a small part of God dies, ad infinitum (well nearly).

cheers

Barrie

[thoke]

"I respect your desire to live a lie, worship a God that isn't there,"

- No-one's saying that, it's not so simple. Do you really believe that people who accept God as fact also believe that they are 'living a lie'.

No, but they do desire de re to live a lie; that is, they desire to do a thing, and that thing happens to be 'living a lie', but they don't know this.

Just because you or I may think they are wrong doesn't make it so.

You're right, but I'm not claiming otherwise. I don't think our beliefs make it so, I think the fact that it is so makes us believe it.

Truth, like most things, is relative

Completely disagree there. I'm a realist: I think there are mind-independent facts about the world. The tree either is or isn't there, and our seeing it or not seeing it doesn't make a difference. God either exists or he doesn't, and belief does not make it so (or not so). You've just said something very similar - "Just because you or I may think they are wrong doesn't make it so" - so I'm surprised you think truth is relative.

How do you define truth - something that can be proved?

No. A proposition is true if it corresponds to a fact (or state of affairs). We don't need to be able to prove the correspondence, it just has to be there. For it to be true that there is a God, it has to be the case that there is a state of affairs which makes true the proposition "there is a God". This might be unprovable, but it might nevertheless be the case (without our knowing it).

Truth is something that's held to be true by whoever believes it - which means both the Muslim and you are correct at the same time.

So when the Taliban stoned women to death for having sex outside of marriage, they were correct to do this, because they were correct to believe that it was God's will? Surely not. Surely they were just plain wrong to think that God wanted them to murder people. If not, why should we bother condemning this practice?

You have evey right (and reason) to strongly disagree, but you can never be said to know 'the truth', only your personal one. Maybe God should be treated like that - personal, not universal.

Subjectivity is failed objectivity. If it's only true 'for you', then it isn't true. Don't worry too much about knowing the truth; I'm not making any claims about that. My realism is ontological, not epistemological: it is a matter of fact whether God exists, even if we can never know the truth about it. At one point we didn't know that the earth revolved around the sun, but it was the case that it did. Facts are independent of our knowledge of them.

A man lived at the side of a seemingly endless, very high, unscalable wall. All his life he'd lived by this huge blue barrier and all his life he'd argued with the man at other side of this wall, who claimed that it wasn't blue, but red. Both knew that they were right but neither could convince the other. One day, in the middle of yet another argument, they heard a voice calling from the top of the wall, looking up, they were surprised to see a man walking along it.

He asked them what they were arguing about - When they told them he just laughed.
"You pair of fools," he said, " you're both wrong, the wall is green!"

Sounds like the wall was blue on one side, red on the other and green on the top! That's not relativity, it's just a colourful wall. Colour is a secondary property, anyway - I can be a realist without being a colour realist (or a moral realist, which i'm not). It may be a matter of perspective whether something is red or not, but it isn't a matter of perspective whether it's there or not, or whether it loves us or not.

Anyway, sorry for the big rant. I care about the truth more than almost anything else, so I get quite frustrated by the idea that it could be relative rather than real.

Ben

[barrie]

Sounds like the wall was blue on one side, red on the other and green on the top! That's not relativity, it's just a colourful wall.

Of course it's relativity - Everything seen, judged, believed or calculated is relative to the observer. Everything you've said, everything you believe is based on your own experiences and understanding - it's subjective, it's relative, it can't be anything else. Plus, we only have our senses to interpret what's out there - what makes you so sure they're really giving us the right information?

If you're interested in truth, try quantum physics. Paul Davies has written some fantastic books on it (and 'God'), and you don't need to be a mathematician to understand him.

If you want to carry on with this discussion, open a thread in Any other Business, it'll stop this being pushed to the top every time - I'm willing to carry on with it....in a relative sort of way.

cheers

Barrie

[David]

One last bite at this here, before it disappears into Any Other Business - I've got to say that I'm with Barrie on this one, Ben (or maybe he's with me, I'm not sure any more). I have devout Christian friends whom I love, and I respect their beliefs, but I reject their certainty, just as I reject yours. You're welcome to think you know better, but you really shouldn't think you know you know better. You should know better than that.

Cheers, and live long and prosper

David

[emuse]

The thread fascinates. This is a good example of why in workshop one is only to speak to the poem, it's effectiveness or lack of it and not to the poet nor the content. Most forums are too casual to adhere to these standards (which makes them a wamer place to be perhaps) but one always runs the risk of confrontation especially on volatile subject matter.

I love this poem and saw in it a humorous god and even a love for the "old man" who has fashioned the earth. I really like "manglue" and the lightness and clarity this poem holds. My only nit and perhaps it was my way of reading it was here:

God's ghost
walks through the wall
enclosing his infinity.

At first I read "enclosing" as the active verb. I don't know what the exact grammatical term is but I wasn't sure whether God was actively enclosing his infinity or whether this phrase was passive, i.e., the wall that encloses his infinity. I wonder if there is a way to make that more clear.

A good one B. Another to add to your ever expanding cache.

e

[barrie]

Thanks e.

Regarding -

God's ghost
walks through the wall
enclosing his infinity. - Enclosing his infinity is an adjective phrase (I think).

cheers

Barrie