Belief

[Equester]

I was once told

That I’m a lunatic

For believing in a world

Without God.

I asked that judging person,

“Do you believe in all that’s written

In your holy scriptures,

Every tale of flood and life

And murder and lessons?

Do you believe in all its axioms,

To love thy neighbor,

To turn the other cheek,

To harm not your enemies,

And above all else,

To leave all judgments up to God?

Do you believe what the crusaders believed

As they murdered more Christians than Arabs?

Do you believe the same things

As those ‘fallen’ priests of ill repute?

Do you believe in forgiveness and free will,

Or do the laws of your religion

Bend entirely to your whim?”

I was answered with silence.

[Wyvern]

A nice poem, Equester. The beliefs that it expresses are strongly driven across through its questioning of organized religion. I particularly liked the manner that contrasting terms such as "murder" and "lessons" were placed side by side in lines to emphasize ambivalence, as well as the constant repetition of "believe" which was striking and evocative.

 

In terms of improvements, there was a minor tense problem in the first two lines, as they switch from past to present tense. The ending of the poem also struck me as a bit awkward, as it seems to back the narrators views by presenting a rather unrealistic reaction that only gave them a weak sense of authority. Perhaps the poem could be tied together through the voice of the narrator, rather than an outside reaction?

 

Once again, nicely done. You can read Parmenion's poem Christianity for more work of this nature, if the concept interests you.

[Equester]

I was once told

That I was mad

For believing in a world

Without God.

I asked that judging person,

“Do you believe in all that’s written

In your holy scriptures,

Every tale of flood and life

And murder and lessons?

Do you believe in all its axioms,

To love thy neighbor,

To turn the other cheek,

To harm not your enemies,

And above all else,

To leave all judgments up to God?

Do you believe what the crusaders believed

As they murdered more Christians than Arabs?

Do you believe the same things

As those ‘fallen’ priests of ill repute?

Do you believe in forgiveness and free will,

Or do the laws of your religion

Bend entirely to your whim?”

I was answered with silence.

 

Edit: Changed the tenses of the stanzas and removed "lunatic", on reading it again it seemed an awkward word. The "answered with silence" was meant to be the silence of a guilty concience rather than the silence one gets from those too angry to reply. The peom was aimed at those people who decide to alter the word of god to fit thier lifestyle, rather than the other way around. With that in mind, should I still change the ending?

[Equester]

Just read Parmeions poem, an awesome write...makes me wish I had joined earlier so I cold have told hime so, but the thread appears to have dried up. Ah well, I'll be ready next time...

 

***Takes stance of someone facing a twenty stone burk with the ball...

[reverie]

Eq,

 

First off, it's nice to see such a prolific new spring of talent in our hall.

 

hmm, as far as your ending goes... that really depends on what you want to do with it. If you say the poems finished it's finished. However, you could expand the poem some by focusing on that "guilty conscious" reaction...

 

i.e.

 

...um, well before I start that, to help set up the expansion you 'could' play around with your introduction of the "judging person."

 

I asked that judging person

 

Myself, i would tweak it to:

 

I asked the judge

 

I can't fully describe in coherent words what this does for the tone of the poem, but I know it does change it… maybe more metaphorical? Though, it might have just jumped out at me because, I avoid using "that" as much as possible, but that's justs me

 

 

Anyway, one possibility could be to break the poem and insert a new stanza after your “Whim” question. This new stanza could serve as a resolution… similar to cadence in classical music. The new stanza could switch the focus/perspective of the poem from the ‘speaker’ to that of the ‘judge’…and then describe his/her reactions more thoroughly. However, this approach runs the risk of taking a simple poem and making it complex and cumbersome… Then again, you could declare this poem finished and just write a few Variations on it, with wyvern suggestions.

 

 

 

 

As a side note, I found this poem by e.e. cummings. He ends his poem in similar varation on the way you end yours.

 

 

e. e. cummings (1894-1962)

Picasso

 

1Picasso

2you give us things

3which

4bulge: grunting lungs pumped full of sharp thick mind

 

5you make us shrill

6presents always

7shut in the sumptuous screech of

8simplicity

 

9(out of the

10black unbunged

11Something gushes vaguely a squeak of planes

12or

 

13between squeals of

14Nothing grabbed with circular shrieking tightness

15solid screams whispers.)

16Lumberman of the Distinct

 

17your brain's

18axe only chops hugest inherent

19Trees of Ego,from

20whose living and biggest

 

21bodies lopped

22of every

23prettiness

 

24you hew form truly

Edited January 9, 2005 by reverie

[Peredhil]

Well-written and provocative poem.

 

Definitely designed to make those who look at the forms of their beliefs without understanding the contents think twice. Could apply to any religion out there actually, due to the fallen nature of mankind.

 

I'm with Reverie on removing "that". In my limited experience, making something sound accusational immediately puts a reader on the defensive whether it is directed to them or not.

 

Few people feeling accused really want to listen to the lesson.

 

*hugs*

 

-P