Okay, I have this very strange poem by Dickinson to share – one with which I was not familiar at all – and I got to it in a very odd way (literally “odd”, LOL – you’ll find out what I mean in a minute). And to be honest, this is really a post about two poems.
Here’s the story:
I saw a note on Substack: “Is there anything real that can be described with words?”
Hmm. I have to admit, at first I wondered if the person meant, “Is there anything real that CAN’T be described with words?” Or perhaps, “Is there anything real that can be described WITHOUT words?”
I dunno. I was just confused, but the note said, “Is there anything real that can be described with words?” – so I took a look at the comments to see how people responded.
There was this, “Other than here I communicate exclusively through interpretive dance,” and then this, “Fingers pointing at the moon are possible.” The next person simply said, “No.”
The next comment was this: “All complete descriptions are in the form of propositions constructed of concepts represented by words. Real is anything that exists, as it is. Rocks exist and are really ontological. Dreams exist and are really psychological. We can describe both propositionally, which presupposes the use of language.”
Okay, I re-read that a couple of times, and I have to say, yes, I agree with that – and it seems to be a thoughtful response to the original question. However, the main thing that stuck in my head when I read it, was “Rocks” – and I thought of Emily Dickinson’s poem, “How happy is the little stone” – so I posted that in response:
Here’s the story:
I saw a note on Substack: “Is there anything real that can be described with words?”
Hmm. I have to admit, at first I wondered if the person meant, “Is there anything real that CAN’T be described with words?” Or perhaps, “Is there anything real that can be described WITHOUT words?”
I dunno. I was just confused, but the note said, “Is there anything real that can be described with words?” – so I took a look at the comments to see how people responded.
There was this, “Other than here I communicate exclusively through interpretive dance,” and then this, “Fingers pointing at the moon are possible.” The next person simply said, “No.”
The next comment was this: “All complete descriptions are in the form of propositions constructed of concepts represented by words. Real is anything that exists, as it is. Rocks exist and are really ontological. Dreams exist and are really psychological. We can describe both propositionally, which presupposes the use of language.”
Okay, I re-read that a couple of times, and I have to say, yes, I agree with that – and it seems to be a thoughtful response to the original question. However, the main thing that stuck in my head when I read it, was “Rocks” – and I thought of Emily Dickinson’s poem, “How happy is the little stone” – so I posted that in response:
 | That same person then responded to my comment with this: “About as happy as the number 7 :)” Alrighty then. But I have to admit, I wasn’t quite sure what that meant, so I explored the number seven, and I found this: “Seven is a happy number: In terms of mathematics, seven is considered to be a Happy Number. A ‘happy number’ is such that when you square each of its digits, add those squares, then repeat the process, eventually you will get an answer of 1. See below for more info: |
To recap: I began by stating that I have a very strange poem to share, and that I got to it in a very odd way (literally ‘odd’), and also I stated that this was really a post about two poems. So far, I have shared one of the two poems, “How happy is the little stone,” and the “odd” path I was on – about the number 7. I’ll continue tomorrow and get to that “very strange poem.”
Stay tuned.
Stay tuned.
RSS Feed
