Posted by Helen on: 09.24.2007 /
The editor of the section of the local newspaper which has been publishing my dialog with Rev. Lueking sent me this poem yesterday.
The Journey
by Mary Oliver
One day you finally knew
what you had to do, and began,
though the voices around you
kept shouting
their bad advice–
though the whole house
began to tremble
and you felt the old tug
at your ankles.
“Mend my life!”
each voice cried.
But you didn’t stop.
You knew what you had to do,
though the wind pried
with its stiff fingers
at the very foundations,
though their melancholy
was terrible.
It was already late
enough, and a wild night,
and the road full of fallen
branches and stones.
But little by little,
as you left their voices behind,
the stars began to burn
through the sheets of clouds,
and there was a new voice
which you slowly
recognized as your own,
that kept you company
as you strode deeper and deeper
into the world,
determined to do
the only thing you could do–
determined to save
the only life you could save.
Comment by: Steve S.
1 09/24/07 7:09 AM | Comment Link |Wow!
I like the imagery, but it seems like we are being encouraged to ignore the people around us and live for ourselves?
Maybe I read that wrong, I am horrible with poetry. I hate reading the Psalms and Prophets, no matter how hard I try, poetry eludes me. I even bought Leaves of Grass and slogged through it in an attempt at self-indoctrination… to no avail!
Comment by: Helen
2 09/24/07 9:46 AM | Comment Link |Steve, I see it as a poem about someone’s journey back to balance, after having been so focused on trying to take care of everyone else that they forgot about themself.
I think it’s a journey a lot of ‘nice’ people go on, as they learn to say ‘no’ when ‘no’ is appropriate.
I don’t see it as a poem advocating selfishness, but rather, good boundaries and not letting forceful people in your life make you forget who you are.
Comment by: Karen
3 09/24/07 9:57 AM | Comment Link |Wow - that’s beautiful! I can definitely relate to that.
An anonymous poster over on the deconversion blog wrote something in a similar vein recently that really resonated with me:
Comment by: Doreen
4 09/24/07 11:11 AM | Comment Link |ah, Mary Oliver, favorite of UUs everywhere….
Comment by: Elaine
5 09/24/07 11:18 AM | Comment Link |I agree with Helen - that many (myself included at times in my life) - put others before themselves so consistently - they burn themselves out.
Balance. What is it? and how do you maintain it?
When flying you are always instructed in case of emergency, to place the oxygen mask on yourself first, and then, help someone else.
If I don’t take care of myself, what will I have to give to others?
Comment by: Stephan
6 09/24/07 12:07 PM | Comment Link |The Kierkegaard quote above is at least partially correct, in my opinion.
Honest questions are not a problem to the Christian faith. In then end, being a Christian is not about what you say you believe, but it is about how you live. Christians and non-Christians can ask whatever questions they want. The difference is that Christians, when confronted with an answer they do not like, choose to continue following anyway, with their faith in God. Atheists (well, some of them, at least), when confronted with an answer they do not like, choose not to follow and to deny God. So the issue of insubordination is significant.
I’m sure this is not the case with all atheists, but I’m sure it is true for some.
Comment by: Eliza
7 09/24/07 3:10 PM | Comment Link |Not recognizing the name “Mary Oliver”, I pictured this as someone local, known to the newspaper editor, who just happens to write poetry very well.
Oops! Thanks for the lead, Doreen - indeed, Mary Oliver is a much-published and -celebrated American poet. Here’s a writeup of the lecture (poetry readings) she gave at UUA General Assembly in 2006.
I want to read more of her work - can anyone suggest a volume of her poetry to start with?
Comment by: Eliza
8 09/24/07 3:42 PM | Comment Link |Stephan said (emphasis added):
First, isn’t that sort of the definition of C’s and A’s? C’s believe, A’s don’t - regardless of how they got there, whether or not those positions result from questioning & acceptance or not of the answers they hear?
Are you referring specifically to C’s who “lose religion” when you use the word “Atheists” above?
Don’t some of those people call themselves “Jesus-followers”? (That’s been my impression - alot of J-followers are former C’s who became discouraged with organized religion, not with God…so, they’re not Atheists…BICBW.)
Second, from my “A” point of view, I’ve never “chosen not to follow”, have never “denied God” - how can I, when I (myself, personally, not talking about anyone else) don’t sense/believe that there’s anything there to accept or deny, to follow or to rebel against?
It feels kind of like being told that I’m refusing to see something that as far as I can tell is invisible. Or, being told I can’t hear something that as far as I can tell is inaudible. Whether I just don’t have the capacity to sense these things, or whether the signal is adjusted to trigger others’ sense organs but not mine, or whether the signal doesn’t exist in any objective reality despite others’ reporting that they can sense it, I can’t say. But it’s not willful “denying” or “choosing not to follow.” I do ask questions - it’s how I learn best, and I appreciate you and others being so patient at answering my questions (or rebutting my assertions, as I know it sometimes comes to that!). But I can’t see that as insubordination - without questioning I don’t know how I might have any hope of coming to belief - that’s not the way my brain, skeptical as always, works.
Soapbox over! Thanks!
Comment by: Stephan
9 09/24/07 5:00 PM | Comment Link |Eliza, notice I said it is not true of all atheists. Your mileage may vary.
But I think you have to admit that you don’t like some of the answers given by Christianity. And rather than accept that these might be true answers you don’t like, you have decided that they are wrong and rejected them.
Comment by: Eliza
10 09/24/07 8:01 PM | Comment Link |(For anyone who’s wondering, the subtext here is a recent (ongoing?) exchange on the Discussion Board, which also recalls numerous discussions there in the past.)
Stephan, I try to consider at least 3 possibilities: (1) God exists like Christians believe, (2) God doesn’t exist like atheists believe, or (3) there’s some other truth out there that we’re not aware of and/or are not giving adequate consideration.
I react as I do - asking more questions, challenging assumptions, offering counterexamples - because many of “the answers given by Christianity” hinge on (1) being true, and (2) and (3) being wrong and rejected. And I don’t have any basis, so far, to embrace (1) and exclude (2) and (3). And my style is to seek more information, ask questions, try to see what it is I’m missing. And what I’m missing is that faith that (1) is where it’s at.
I’ll echo something you wrote recently:
So far in life, any change in beliefs I’ve had has come from asking questions and examining the answers. At least, I believe that’s the case. ;-) This may be one area, however, in which that approach isn’t welcome by others, and can’t provide the basis for convincing me of the truth of (1) to the exclusion of any other possibility…
Comment by: Helen
11 09/25/07 3:06 AM | Comment Link |It doesn’t make sense to me to say any atheist is an atheist because they don’t like God’s rules and so they refuse to obey them.
Someone with that attitude is a theist - albeit a theist in rebellion against God, if you will.
I think what may be true sometimes, is that a move away from theism begins with “I don’t like these rules” or “these rules make no sense to me”. If you don’t like something or it doesn’t make sense to you, that motivates you to examine it closely to see if it is in fact correct/true. And for some people, the result of that examination is that they conclude it is not in fact correct/true.
So I see a link between an unwillingness to submit and moving away from faith altogether, because of the chain of events that unwillingness sets in motion. But I don’t think it’s framing the process accurately to say “atheists are people who didn’t like God’s rules so they decided not to obey them and tell themselves that was ok because God didn’t really exist after all”
Comment by: Helen
12 09/25/07 3:08 AM | Comment Link |Eliza, there seem to be a number of Mary Oliver poems online. This was the first one I read so I have no idea which book to recommend. Maybe Doreen or UU friends you’ve met through going to a local UU church would have some ideas?
(Hey, sometime will you write about your UU experiences for us?)
Comment by: Helen
13 09/25/07 3:20 AM | Comment Link |I think submission is fine as long as it’s a choice a person makes in full knowledge of what they are doing. Which is why I don’t necessarily have a problem with groups saying “these are the rules you have to submit to, to belong”.
I think the poem is about a journey to awareness of what choices the journeyer has. At first he/she does not know he/she can say no - and he/she does not know he/she has so taken on the views and demands of others that he/she has lost awareness of his/her own inner voice.
To me, the poem is about waking up and realizing “Hey, what happened to me? I have a voice too!” and realizing “no” is an ok thing for a human being to say.
It’s ok to say “yes” as long as you know that “no” is also an option. If people sacrifice themselves for others voluntarily, I see that as their choice. I don’t know if I would or even could do that. If people sacrifice themselves for others because they don’t realize they have any other choice, I see that as tragic.
The gospels are written in such a way to make it clear that Jesus chose the path he took. He believed it was good and right. One of the interesting things is - suppose people (like Peter) had been able to prevent Jesus going to the cross. Then he would have lived longer but he would have been miserable, because it wasn’t what he wanted.
If you take the last line about saving oneself not to mean ‘prolonging your life’ but rather ‘taking back your right to do as you wish with your life’, then it affirms self-awareness and choice, rather than saying ‘be selfish’.
Or so it seems to me.
Comment by: Stephan
14 09/25/07 7:03 AM | Comment Link |I respect the idea of setting boundaries, but I think the poem sounds rather depressed and defeatist.
That sounds like a pretty cold and bitter world. And quite self centered.
Comment by: Karen
15 09/25/07 9:50 AM | Comment Link |Yes, that’s what I got out of the poem also. And why I liked the comment I reprinted about self-assertion being vital.
In the Christian tradition I followed, we were taught that the highest calling was to “die to self” and submit completely to god’s will. We were not to consider our own needs, thoughts and desires as valid or good due to original sin.
This doctrine, for me, was quite poisonous and unhealthy psychologically.
Comment by: Karen
16 09/25/07 9:56 AM | Comment Link |Interesting. I think there may be a baseline difference in As and Cs reactions here. For instance, I don’t view that conclusion as cold, or bitter, but rather as realistic.
In the end, we do have to realize that we don’t control anyone else’s life and we are responsible truly only for ourselves and how we react to the circumstances we face. We can help others and do our best to reduce suffering and harm, but we can’t ultimately be in control of anyone but ourselves. (Of course while our children are minors we are responsible and in control of them to some extent also, so that’s the exception.)
That’s not depressing or selfish to me, it’s just honest.
Comment by: Helen
17 09/25/07 9:58 AM | Comment Link |Karen, yes, I liked the comment you reprinted too.
Evidently your experience as a Christian was negative, whereas Stephan’s is positive.
Stephan, I hear what you’re saying about the end of the poem, but it didn’t strike me that way. I see it as a poem about moving from trying to do the impossible, to understanding what’s possible (doable) and focusing on that.
Comment by: Stephan
18 09/25/07 10:44 AM | Comment Link |Helen, I see your point, but the poem seems to phrase it as either/or. Either you can take care of others, or you can take care of yourself. Maybe the poet was reacting strongly to something very negative in her own life and needed a complete reversal of course. I also realize that art is sometimes provocative to prove a point, so maybe there is some of that going on too.
But for me a balance is much more helpful and appropriate. Obviously I need to take care of my own needs, but I am also responsible to those around me to be as helpful and giving as I can without damaging myself in the process. I don’t see that in this poem.
Comment by: Helen
19 09/25/07 11:20 AM | Comment Link |Stephan wrote:
I aim for that balance too.
I see what you’re saying; I guess the poem strikes each of us differently.
Comment by: Karen
20 09/25/07 4:12 PM | Comment Link |The strange thing is that while I was having the experience, I would have said it was very positive. It’s only after I got out and gained some perspective that I recognized how negative much of it had been. And certainly not all of it - there were lots of positive things too. I wouldn’t be the person I am today without all the experiences I had during my life, for good or bad.
Comment by: David H
21 09/25/07 5:42 PM | Comment Link |I can see both reactions to this poem because the author has left some things undefined. While I’m not saying this is a great poem, those undefined things certainly take it from being purely didactic to being one that allows the reader to develop their own ideas.
Among the things not said:
1. Who are the voices that keep calling?
2. What is a person’s duty to such voices?
It is quite possible to read this as the viewpoint of a deluded selfish person simply walking away from those to whom they have some responsibility. It may not be exclusively Christian to believe that one has a responsibility to mend the lives of those closest to them regardless of how misguided and unhelpful those people are. Were you to read this poem with a hint of irony in your voice, it could come off as an observation of a deluded life.
However, it is much easier to read it as someone walking away from a hopeless situation. Their vision clears and they can suddenly hear their own voice. What they are walking toward isn’t defined either. There is no bed of roses described at the end of this journey. “Determined to save the only life you could save,” isn’t the end of a story, rather it is the beginning of one.
I wouldn’t describe this as a cold conclusion, but it isn’t necessarily a happy one either. But from my life experience, I would say it is realistic. I am a Christian and yet this poem in many ways describes where I am and have been going over the past few years. There isn’t much joy in walking away from those who would like to help me while demanding that I fix their lives. Being able to see and discover that I can speak is weighed against the sense of failure in helping those who wished that of me. They didn’t want to harm me, but our relationship depended on me being a mender of things they didn’t necessarily want mended. And my effort isn’t in ending the relationship, merely walking away from that impossible role.
Perhaps the poem is depressed. Perhaps it describes a person who is defeated. It may take such things to convince some to walk away from a battle that can’t be won and, perhaps, shouldn’t even be fought.
I was raised to believe that being a Christian meant you remained inside impossible situations until God changed them. If you were faithful the healing or change would come. But what if the healing is the ability to walk away?
Comment by: Doreen
22 09/26/07 7:42 AM | Comment Link |Hi Eliza (and everyone),
I recommend Mary Oliver’s “Owls and Other Fantasies: Poems and Essays.” This is what Publisher’s Weekly says about it:
Alternating poems, short essays and drawings of feathers, Oliver’s 12th collection is strongest and most direct when using the first person to show the second a path to the good life:
“You do not have to be good.
You do not have to walk on your knees
for a hundred miles through the desert, repenting
You only have to let the soft animal of your body love what it loves.”
Comment by: Staci
23 09/27/07 10:16 AM | Comment Link |The apostle Paul expressed a similar sentiment about only being able to save one’s own life. He said he would give up his salvation so that others could be saved, but said it was impossible.To me, the poem, like Paul, does not say you should ignore other people but rather that giving up yourself in favor of others will not benefit either you or anyone else.
Comment by: Steve S.
24 09/27/07 6:04 PM | Comment Link |My existentialist, atheist, friends would say, (quoting some obscure author I have never heard of, who is probably not that obscure, and I should be able to quote him too…), simply by virtue of our common existence, we are responsible for everyone else!
I think this is exactly the point Jesus is making in his answer to the lawyer’s question, “Who is my neighbor?”
Comment by: David H
25 09/27/07 9:13 PM | Comment Link |So, we can fix everyone’s problems and the only responsible thing to do is to live in miserable situations until we fix the people who are making them miserable?
Here is reality: I can’t fix the problems of many who are willing. I certainly can’t fix the problems of the unwilling. Yes, everyone is my neighbor, but even Jesus told his disciples to sometimes just walk away: Mark 6: 11 “And if any place will not welcome you or listen to you, shake the dust off your feet when you leave, as a testimony against them.”
The character in the poem didn’t testify against those voices that
“kept shouting
their bad advice.”
He/she simply walked away in order to save them self.
Comment by: Steve S.
26 09/28/07 2:41 PM | Comment Link |I guess I see a middle road between telling someone you will do whatever they ask, and ignoring them…
Like the panhandlers, they usually don’t get any money from me (probably 1/4 of the time I do give money), but they always get my eye-contact, a hand-shake if they want it, my compassion, and often food, a ride, or the use of my cell-phone.
Just an example, but none-the-less, I feel that we must take responsibility for the people in our world, otherwise we really are living self-centered lives, no matter what name we sprinkle over it (Jesus, whatever…); being responsible for others, however, is not the same thing as obeying others every whim…