Category Archives: Emily Every Day

Death At The Birthing Bed

Again, Emily concerns herself with potential coming into expression.

#952, c. 1864

A Man may make a Remark —
In itself — a quiet thing
That may furnish the Fuse unto a Spark
In dormant nature — lain —

Let us deport — with skill —
Let us discourse — with care —
Powder exists in Charcoal —
Before it exists in Fire.

Here the potential is a fire, which may be productive or destructive. A fire may warm you through the winter and cook your food. Or it could destroy the whole village. Pure potential is morally neutral. It answers only to itself when not directed toward any goal. The fire doesn’t care if it burns down a village or warms the nourishing soup. It’s all the same to the fire.

Em says we are shaped or our potential is ignited at various times in our lives by outsiders. A chance remark made without explicit intentions could start a fire that burns down the village. We don’t know what we possess until we are forced to react to random intrusions from the outside. We can’t know the breadth of our potential (or the moral content we may give it) until irritated into a response. We won’t know if our fire is that flame of inspiration, a cheery warming force that feeds us and others. Or if we contain the earth-scorching force that brings down the foundations of our structure.

That’s the test for evolving beings. How do we direct our power as it explodes from potential into expression?

Emily points out that this is a dangerous test. She cautions care because many have failed. None of us knows what we may be setting in motion either within ourselves or others. That unrealized darkness is exciting because it contains everything in potential. The movement into expression, like birth, contains many perils. The angel of death always perches over the birthing bed, waiting and watching. The result is not certain or safe until it arrives in sensible hands. Even then . . . who knows.

Leave a comment

Filed under Emily Every Day

Lenten Promise

So I gave up wine for Lent, and I’m real cranky about it. Now, seems as good a time as any to review my progress. I do not enjoy this business of imitating Christ’s suffering. If he wanted to fast in the desert for forty days and grapple with Satan, that’s his decision. What does it have to do with me? Still not sure what benefit I am supposed to derive from this practice, except that I get to observe how angry I am when I can’t have a glass of wine with my dinner. Sure, observing one’s own anger is always useful. Yep, there goes my anger again. I’d recognize that anger anywhere. No mistaking it, that’s my anger, all right. Hey, know what would help my anger? A glass of wine. Thank goodness for the loophole. Ya’ll know about the Great Catholic Loophole, right? You can break your fast on Sundays during Lent because it’s a sin to fast on the Prince’s Feast Day. Sometimes my Sunday comes on a Thursday, but I figure if I make it up later, then I’m in the clear. It all comes out in the wash. For the love of Christ, Easter can’t come soon enough this year.

(Being Catholic isn’t a struggle. Being polite is a struggle. Catholic is easy. It gives me something to write about for all my life.)

Speaking of art forms that spring from repression . . . I went to hear Zachary Richard, the Acadian activist rebel poet, play last night. He told us a story about his earliest memory of music. He sang in an all-boys church choir in Lafayette. The bishop had envisioned something like the Vienna Boys Choir in Southeast Louisiana. Richard was first soprano. Later when he got to be a teenager, he decided he preferred the Devil’s music and started a garage band because he thought that would help him meet girls. The history of rock and roll could be written with that one sentence.

Entirely by chance, I received this comforting note from Emily this morning.

#1101, c. 1866

Between the form of Life and Life
The difference is as big —
As Liquor at the Lip between
And Liquor in the Jug
The latter — excellent to keep —
But for ecstatic need
The corkless is superior —
I know for I have tried

When she writes the difference between “Life and Life”, she means the difference between potential and expression. The inner life and the outer life. Both are alive in that they have force and movement. Both are informed by spirit. Without clubbing us with her joke, she puns on spirit(s) so both resonate at once—the alcohol and the eternal aspect of ourselves, the ghost in the machine. Further to be “inspired” is to be intoxicated with spirit, or out of your everyday head space where mundane tasks are accomplished.

Get drunk on joy, she advises. Allow yourself to be overtaken by this expansive wave of power and creation. It carries you (against your better judgement) out of the usual sober sense of duty into a realm without boundaries. Here is a place of perfect indulgence, where you can’t put a foot wrong. You move perfectly in time to the music. Everyone likes you, and your jokes are always funny.

Emily has been there, she says. She also says that we need this indulgence, this departure from sobriety into unalloyed happiness. That it fails to resemble a workable everyday life is not the point. The point is to be released from restrictions to make real what had existed as potential. Emily says, you must drink deeply of yourself and become intoxicated in order to write that poem. Or converge toward whatever center your life demands.

She calls this an “ecstatic need”. Imagine if we treated transcendent joy, the pure pleasure of being alive, as something we needed, like vitamins? Emily says we are nourished when we release the contained self outward into expression. Probably a lot of us keep that potential creative expression stoppered-up in a sober safe container because if we do drink deeply of ourselves and go on that antic joyous spree . . . we’ll be out of control and probably look silly. Then what? We’ll have some explaining to do. Some mopping up, maybe. Big deal. Fortunately, no one has ever really died of embarrassment.

Emily says, it’s a waste of fine spirit(s) to hold your creative gifts in a state of contained potential. Lose yourself, once in a while, to find yourself.

Leave a comment

Filed under Emily Every Day

Mind Lives On the Heart

Now that Mars in Leo stations direct in the year of the Tiger, things move forward with a roar. You can put out a saucer of milk if you like, but a bloody slab of meat might yield better results.

Emily also wants to ponder this business of eating and feeding.

#1355, c. 1876

The Mind lives on the Heart
Like any Parasite —
If that is full of Meat
The Mind is fat.

But if the Heart omit
Emaciate the Wit —
The Aliment of it
So absolute.

The first time I read this, I thought the word in the second to last line was “ailment” not “aliment”. Very different. In my mistaken reading, the Wit grows sick. In the second reading, the one Emily intended, the Mind starves from lack of food from the Heart. So completely does the Mind depend on the Heart’s nourishment that when deprived of it—following the logical progression suggested by the word “aliment”—the Mind or Wit (now a starved parasite) detaches its hold and moves down the alimentary canal, the intestines, etc., to depart the body through an ignoble exit . . . like any piece of turd.

What a thorough condemnation of intellect uninformed by emotional intelligence. Emily says it’s just shit. Next time somebody wants to characterize her as a decorous Lady Poet, please point that reader toward this poem.

She arranges the power dynamics so that the heart stands above the mind in the hierarchy of who is in charge of what. Not only does the mind depend on the heart to keep it alive, but the heart may, if it chooses, slough off this weaker thing. If the heart grows weary of supporting this parasite, the host may withdraw its food/love, thus starving out the intruder. In such an arrangement, the mind better behave itself, not get too fat or burdensome to this bountiful muscle of heart.

Emily’s hierarchy of power that puts heart above mind is a direct subversion of the stuff I am reading in Plato’s Symposium lately. At times, I grow impatient with this Platonic elevation of the mind without really knowing why. Difficult to articulate how this writing makes me feel boxed in. Something is missing from these lofty perorations on love. In Plato’s dialogues, of course, the element most often missing is the presence of women. Also missing is all that women would most likely bring to a discussion on love, which is that they’re really not all that interested in a discussion of love. That’s like discussing dance or food or sex. You’re kinda missing the point, if you’re discussing it. That’s how it feels when the heart meets too much emphasis on the mind. When something essential has been diminished, then the heart will exercise its superior power to rid itself of the offenders, which can feel like an earthquake. If we are not able to understand this by reading poems, then the earth itself will show us.

2 Comments

Filed under Emily Every Day