Professional performance poet! MA in Writing/Education and residencies at various schools. Books published by Bloomsbury. Sharing my poetry, students' work, and miscellanea. Blog posts not always child friendly.
For lots more exciting info about me, please go to my main home - www.joshuaseigal.co.uk
Obviously they are not strict opposites, in the sense that
if you look in the dictionary you will not find one defined in terms of the
negation of the other. What follows is not rigorous philosophical analysis so
much as an attempt to make a profound point in a scattered, imperfect and
perhaps awkward way.
Let’s start with science. A cornerstone of science is that
scientists change their minds if the evidence demands it. They construct
hypotheses to account for observed phenomena, and then rigorously test these
hypotheses, altering them or abandoning them as the evidence demands. Some
hypotheses stand the test of time, and others don’t, but in order to have any
validity a scientific hypothesis must be, in principle at least, capable of
being proved wrong. In the words of philosopher Karl Popper, it must be ‘falsifiable’.
Love, it seems to be, is the opposite of this. It is
unconditional, not falsifiable. The psychotherapist David Richo writes that love
“is an unconditional response to what is, rather than a conditioned response to
what we have learned.” In other words, love does not shift to fit the ‘evidence’; it integrates everything. It is in
this context that we can see that the phrase “I just don’t love you any more”
doesn’t make much sense – if you can stop loving someone then it wasn’t really
love in the first place.
This might suggest that love is something that just happens to us, out of the blue. However,
I don’t think this is true. The genesis of love is commitment, which is
governed by choice. We choose to love someone unconditionally. Those of us who
think of love as primarily a feeling will find this idea a bit weird – we can’t
choose what we feel, can we? – but love is not (just) a feeling, it is action,
or a commitment to undertake a course of action.
How does this relate to science? I’m not sure, except to say
that gathering ‘evidence’ doesn’t strike me as an especially helpful way of
deciding whether or not to embark on a course of loving someone. We might need
a certain threshold, some indication that our partner is basically reliable and
sensible, say. But love will always involve an element of risk. A commitment to
loving is not a commitment to examine the evidence but a commitment to act in
the light of incomplete evidence and the possibility of pain and
disappointment.
I said at the beginning that my thoughts would be scattered,
imperfect and awkward. Love itself is all of these things, so perhaps any
treatment of it in writing demands nothing less.
I recently worked with a group of students to produce poems for Mothers Day. I started by asking them to write (or draw) TEN OBJECTS that are particularly important to them. We then used these objects to create metaphors describing their mums. This is a very simple technique, and it can be used to create poems about anyone and anything. Here are some examples produced by the students at my weekly lunch club at Plashet School:
You Areby
Eliona
You are
the key to my heart
You are
the light showing me directions
You are
my sweater keeping me warm
You are
my pillow keeping me comfy
You are
my umbrella protecting me from the rain
You are
my teddy bear keeping me company
You are
always by my side
I Love You by Fatima
I love
you mum
because
you gave me everything
I love
you
I love
you because
you gave
me a gift
I love
you
I love
you like a star
shines
bright in the sky
I love
you
because
you make me happy
because
you laughed
My Mum by Safia
You are
my book
When I open
you
You get
me laughing and excited
You are
my sunshine
My shining
star!
My TV
When you
turn on
I’m really happy You Areby Farha You are my star always leading the way You are my key always opening up new places in me You are my glasses always opening up my eyes You are my umbrella always protecting me from the rain/sun You are my boat always holding me up You Areby Safiyah You are my phone My privacy You are my chicken curry and rice My favourite food You are my anime Thriller, Adventure, Horror, Romance You are my medals The achievements I've earned You are my books You are my glasses My shield You are my merchandise Everything I cherish You are my life My everything
I recently had a chat with one of my students who is
dyslexic. She explained to me that, whilst she feels she is clever, she has a
very hard time demonstrating this on paper. She knows that she ‘gets’ things
but she finds it difficult to express her ideas. If someone could see into her
mind, she said, they would appreciate what she is capable of, but as long as
her ability is gauged by her schoolwork, or by other such measurements of
‘success’, people will not know this.
I myself do not have dyslexia but there is a certain area
in which I can empathise with my student. That area is music. I feel there is a
huge discrepancy between my musical creativity and my ability to express this
creativity in conventional ways – by singing, for example, or playing an instrument.
I’ve never spoken to anyone about this before, and I do
not know how common this feeling is. Perhaps it is a kind of ‘musical
dyslexia’. I constantly have tunes bouncing around in my mind, and I do not
mean Coldplay or Mozart or whatever. I mean original compositions, tunes I have
come up with myself. I am constantly playing percussion on any available
surface, and am obsessed with making up little ditties. Perhaps it is a kind of
tic. I could easily spend an hour in the shower, singing or humming to myself.
But I have never been ‘musical’ in a conventional sense.
I was absolutely hopeless in music lessons at school. It didn’t help that the
only music taught at my school was classical music, and that this was taught in
an extremely dour way that seemed more akin to mathematics – tones, semitones,
crotchets, quavers and all of that stuff. We had to play on pathetic little
xylophones, and our teacher would bark at us if we made mistakes. I thoroughly
hated music lessons, and used to put no effort in at all. I didn’t see the
point.
As I got older I did take up a few musical instruments –
clarinet, bass and guitar. I was even in a band for a while, but I was never
any good. I could never for the life of me read music, and I didn’t have the
patience to improve. It’s not that I didn’t, and don’t, enjoy playing the
instruments; it’s more that I always felt inherently kind of crap at them, in
the same way as my dyslexic student feels useless at reading and writing. The
frustration, in other words, lies not in the fact that I am not musical, but
that I am musical but unable to
express it.
This feeling of frustration reaches its nadir when it
comes to singing. I cannot sing with my mouth, but I can sing with my mind.
This sounds very flowery I know, but that is how it feels. If someone could
wire up electrodes to my brain and convert my mental
compositions into actual songs, I would probably be a fairly successful
musician. The creativity is there, but the ability doesn’t seem to be.
Maybe I am making
excuses for myself. Maybe I just need to practice, to work harder to improve.
Maybe I am lazy. However, it does feel as though, whilst all of this might be
true, there is some kind of additional block as well, something similar to
dyslexia. I wonder how many people out there feel like they have music inside
them that is unable to get out. I would be really interested to know.
The psychotherapist and visionary Sheryl Paul,
drawing on the work of Carl Jung, talks of different ‘characters’ that inhabit the mind. One of these characters, I believe, is akin to the Nazi. Consider
this poem by Stephen Dobyns:
Confession
The Nazi within
me thinks it's time to take charge.
The
world's a mess; people are crazy.
The Nazi
within me wants windows shut tight,
new locks
put on the doors. There's too much
fresh
air, too much coming and going.
The Nazi
within me wants more respect. He wants
the only
TV camera, the only bank account,
the only
really pretty girl. The Nazi within me
wants to
be boss of traffic and traffic lights.
People
drive too fast; they take up too much space.
The Nazi
within me thinks people are getting away
with
murder. He wants to be the boss of murder.
He wants
to be boss of bananas, boss of white bread.
The Nazi
within me wants uniforms for everyone.
He wants
them to wash their hands, sit up straight,
pay
strict attention. He wants to make certain
they say
yes when he says yes, no when he says no.
He
imagines everybody sitting in straight chairs,
people
all over the world sitting in straight chairs.
Are you
ready? he asks them. They say they are ready.
Are you
ready to be happy? he asks them. They say
they are
ready to be happy. The Nazi within me wants
everyone
to be happy but not too happy and definitely
not
noisy. No singing, no dancing, no carrying on.
[from Velocities, Viking Penguin Books, 1994]
There is a Nazi in me. There is almost
certainly a Nazi in you too. It is that part of us that can’t tolerate any
perceived imperfection, that sees the world in starkly binary terms. It is that
part of us that projects our own insecurities onto the world around us, and
would rather annihilate that world than confront the monster within. (Indeed,
there is a school of thought that postulates a possible Jewish ancestry as the
source of Hitler’s vehemence.)
Do you deny that there is a Nazi in you? Are
you horrified by the notion? That horror and denial are themselves facets of
the Nazi. The Nazi in you can’t cope with blemishes. It believes itself to be
pure, to be free from reproach. It believes itself to be entitled to “the only
bank account,/the only really pretty girl.” And not for nothing did a whole
society become enraptured by Hitler. His ideas obviously spoke to something
very primal in us.
The challenge for us is to not let the inner
Nazi win. For as I indicated at the beginning, there are other characters in us
too. There is the inner Mother Theresa and the inner Gandhi. There might be an
inner Casanova. There might even be an inner God or Jesus – Jung speaks, for
example, of the “God archetype within.” So we have a choice. Perhaps we could
smash the inner Nazi with our inner Stalin:
Does that not make us simply one of them? Won’t
this produce an endless loop of self-loathing and self-reproach? After all,
depression, as they say, is “anger directed inward.” Or we could break the
circle with love, with acceptance and tolerance for what we cannot change about
our fundamental nature. In other words, we can attempt to integrate all of the
characters within us. Here is a workshop
idea. Read Dobyns’ poem above, then have a think about some of the
characters – good or bad – within you.
Using Dobyns’ structure, write a poem about ‘The X Within Me’. Here is my attempt:
The baby
within me needs to be fed.
The baby
within me wants to suck its thumb on the bus.
The baby
within me wants to shit itself
and for
nobody to mind.
The baby
within me demands love and care
and to
give nothing back but puke and noise.
It wants
songs and laughter and lullabies.
It wants
to be the only one to be allowed to cry.
The baby
within me wants to cover its eyes
and in
doing so make the bad guys
go away.
The baby within me wants to play.
The baby
within me can’t see black and white,
doesn’t
perceive future or history.
The baby
within me is innocent
and never
proven guilty.
The baby
within me is cooed over
by the
judge and jury.
The baby
within me hears its name as gospel.
The baby
within me is learning to smile.
Here is a selection of lines produced by some of my students during a trial run of this workshop: The Hulk within me releases the bull whenever I get angry The dancer within me makes me think of sunshine and rainbows My eyes and my thoughts reflect the animal in me - I am a liger, a hybrid The baby within me is a special gift The Spiderman within me swings from building to building saving the city from danger.
(Going back to the Nazi within, here is one final note. Jews sometimes refer to
themselves as ‘God’s chosen people’. This pernicious phrasing has been at the
root of much antisemitism and suspicion through the ages. In any racial sense
it is obvious nonsense. In any theological sense it is fraught with problems. I
don’t buy it at all. But consider this: every time I judge someone for their
perceived imperfections it is incumbent upon me, ‘as a Jew’, to remember that
not long ago my mere existence was perceived as just such an imperfection. This
is not some kind of unique ‘chosenness’ but it might well amount to a unique
responsibility.)