each word, together or separately, hold the whole of reality. it is also a body - heavy-laden with life - in its moment of being; bookended not by then and later but now and now.
My sister and I used to go for "tree rides." We would get in her car when there were no leaves on trees and go off in search of trees. She would stop the car and sketch and I would make up a story.
Just came in here because of your comment on Erin's post about my post "goopy." And I will be coming back. This post and the previous one have sort of knocked my socks off. Oh. Wait. I have no socks. They moved me.
OK I love the photo and the title. And then I am so interested in the comments, because I, too, wanted to complete a sentence I thought you had begun. But! You did not put any ":" or ". . . " . . . so I think Andreas was right: The tree is.
the tree is, but we always know of its existence only through our gaze (and speech) - the tree is within our gaze, so to say. what is the tree when there is no one to look at it? how is its existence then? we can never say. we can never think of it outside the meaning we give to it from within our human sphere. isn't this torturing?
JeanetteLS: thank you for this memory ... i would love to hear some of the stories from these rides :-) when i see sockless footprints, i will know it was you ...
Ruth: i didn't intend the title as a sentence to be completed, no ... i was thinking only of the overwhelming fact of the tree's existence and of saying so ... but the responses went beyond my borders, and that is always welcome and good :-)
inarguably.
ReplyDeleteisn't that something!
(insert argument here:)
could the same ever be said of man?
xo
erin
erin: i am a flicker against the trunk of a tree like this one ... a poor mouthful of flame, no more, of no greater duration ...
ReplyDeletethis tree is.
ReplyDeletethis. tree. is.
each word, together or separately, hold the whole of reality.
it is also a body - heavy-laden with life - in its moment of being;
bookended not by then and later but now and now.
resolute ...
ReplyDeleteBeautiful, graceful, complete.
ReplyDelete...poised for flight.
ReplyDeleteMy sister and I used to go for "tree rides." We would get in her car when there were no leaves on trees and go off in search of trees. She would stop the car and sketch and I would make up a story.
Just came in here because of your comment on Erin's post about my post "goopy." And I will be coming back. This post and the previous one have sort of knocked my socks off. Oh. Wait. I have no socks. They moved me.
OK I love the photo and the title. And then I am so interested in the comments, because I, too, wanted to complete a sentence I thought you had begun. But! You did not put any ":" or ". . . " . . . so I think Andreas was right: The tree is.
ReplyDeleteAnd that is perfect. Today. Always.
the tree is, but we always know of its existence only through our gaze (and speech) - the tree is within our gaze, so to say. what is the tree when there is no one to look at it? how is its existence then? we can never say. we can never think of it outside the meaning we give to it from within our human sphere. isn't this torturing?
ReplyDeleteThe tree TOTALLY is. I like its spine...
ReplyDeleteis creation of the great Nature! ;-)
ReplyDeleteAndreas: now and now and now is eternity
ReplyDeletewe throw words against the silence, like a handful of hailstones against a wall
the is a world inside each bit of ice
Susan: ... and standing ...
ReplyDeleteMiss Jane: ... and full to its margins, in a way that i will never be or even understand ...
ReplyDeleteJeanetteLS: thank you for this memory ... i would love to hear some of the stories from these rides :-) when i see sockless footprints, i will know it was you ...
ReplyDeleteRuth: i didn't intend the title as a sentence to be completed, no ... i was thinking only of the overwhelming fact of the tree's existence and of saying so ... but the responses went beyond my borders, and that is always welcome and good :-)
ReplyDeleteRoxana: yes, yes!! this is the torture ... can we ever really know the world, or only gaze at our reflections on its surface? ...
ReplyDeleteand yet -- i feel (feel, ha!) that the tree must exist in some majesty that i can barely conceive ...
and yet -- if you told me the tree only exists when i am looking at it, would there be any way to say that you are wrong???
torture ...
Hannah: yes, its spine! this creature lifting itself from the earth, straightening its bones toward the sky ...
ReplyDeleteLucia: i have this (romantic? childish?) faith in Nature -- not that it will save us, but that it goes on, unconcerned with me ...
ReplyDelete