I watched a young couple at my usual taco breakfast place this am. They were lovely with their youth and love for each other. To what extent were they being led by their chemistry, and to what extent by their heart and mind I do not know. The urge to have children is universal. I could see urges bubbling out from their skin. Those who avoid having children, or even intimate relationships, seem to adopt others to care for in one way or another.
Wordsworth wrote, "the child is father of the man." Gerald Manley Hopkins wrote (I assume in response),
‘THE CHILD is father to the man.’
How can he be? The words are wild.
Suck any sense from that who can:
‘The child is father to the man.’
No; what the poet did write ran,
‘The man is father to the child.’
‘The child is father to the man!’
How can he be? The words are wild.
How can he be? The words are wild.
Suck any sense from that who can:
‘The child is father to the man.’
No; what the poet did write ran,
‘The man is father to the child.’
‘The child is father to the man!’
How can he be? The words are wild.
As babies are being born, others are finding the end to their lives. Another mystery. Reminds me that one thing just leads to another.
Is the larger figure in the drawing a man, someone closer than the mother and child, god, or ???. I don't know.
1 comment:
Perhaps a self portrait, and all three figures are one (the holy trinity of mans existence), father, son and spirit. The man as child is defined in silhouette by the parent. They both share the same emotion and pose. But does the child within animate the parent, or does the child simply mimic the parent? I think at times both are true and necessary. And that the child, much like a cicada, stretches through this repetitive process the skin of mortality eventually to break free. But what then… is the spirit (much larger than life) thus released more Father or more Child?
Post a Comment