A Theorem

[PrinceMyshkin]

Every encounter is a theorem
by which we test the validity of love,
of friendship.

I sit beside S. at the counter
at the café and feel what it is like
to be at home in my skin
close to some other’s skin.

[everyadventure]

Such truth in this! You captured how we size each other up, make first impressions, search for connections... and then the comfort of recognizing a kindred spirit.

[Jerrybaldy]

A prince truism. Will chat to you further at the mall about this.

[Haunted]

Love it! The last two lines are so geniune, just like a good encounter, the kind that sparks a wonderful relationship.

[jajdude]

I enjoy your mathematical elegance.

[Jack of Hearts]

Prince,

Too much of your elegance is wasted on this reader who really understands very little technique in poetry. But in your work beauty shines through to spare and the lost ones drink from the overflow if not the cup.




J

[firefangled]

Every encounter is a theorem
by which we test the validity of love,
of friendship...

I sit beside S. at the counter
at the café and feel what it is like
to be at home in my skin
close to some other’s skin.


I think I see what your intent is with this poem, but I have questions about it.

IMO I believe every encounter we have with another tests the validity of our ability to love, but love is valid in and of itself. Love is how we are here to me. As ee cummings said, it "is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart." I think you can test the validity of friendship as an expression of love, so that part of S1 strikes true to me.

In S2 you seem to be getting closer to the truth in speaking of how we engage or don't others when we meet them.

I don't know if it is your intent that the narrator is still within himself or herself, close, but not engaged with the other. And is S. a Stranger? Extrapolating from Buckminster Fuller, love is a verb. It is all around us. How we engage ourselves in that activity is what we test constantly. Is this what you mean in your poem?

Intriguing as always and thought provoking.

[Hawkman]

I can't help but be reminded of John Forbes Nash, of Beautiful Mind fame, whose theorum described how everyone wins if no one tries to win the most desirable prize. Of course, not being a mathamatician myself I am unable to give more precise details but I'm sure someone will.

I do wonder at the choice of words in the poem though. Rather than each encounter being a theorem I'd have thought it more accurate to describe the encounters as experiments by which we test our theories - but it doesn't seem to matter much as everyone seems to know what you mean.

As always, Prince, a nice idea expressed with masterful economy.

Live long and prosper - H

[hillwalker]

I'm not sure the two sides of this equation quite balance - rather too much 'telling' in the first 2 lines of stanza 2 - 'at the counter/at the cafe'.

Also I was expecting to read about X, Y or Z rather than S.

On a separate note - I keep wanting to read the second 'skin' as 'sin' !!

Intriguing all the same.

H

[Delta40]

You feed us fulfilling morsels of insight, wisdom and ponderings to ponder over, over an espresso (with Jerry lurking in the mall, of course)

[blank|verse]

Another aphoristic gem, Prince, even if it is one that strikes me as a rather scientific, rational way of looking at something so personal.

Like hill, I found the repetition of the two prepositional phrases 'at the counter | at the cafe' a bit awkward. But still, the expression of the thought comes through strongly. Good to read, as always.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Thank you to the several of you who responded, many with provocative questions. For the moment let me try to answer just one of those:



I don't know if it is your intent that the narrator is still within himself or herself, close, but not engaged with the other. And is S. a Stranger?

If I had posed that question to myself at the time of writing this, I'd have said that paradoxically the protagonist of this poem is never entirely at home within his own skin unless he's next to skin he trusts implicitly or by which he feels trusted.

As for the "S," it is the initial of the actual person I was writing about.

[Lumiere]

Hm.

I agree with firefangled - love is valid. But humans don't always trust its validity. Kierkegaard said love is like faith. I don't know about that, but love at least requires a kind of faith. Or does faith require a kind of love? Both?

Your poems always lead to questions and I like that.

[qimissung]

Yes, and if love is a verb, it is our ability to do it well that is at stake, just as much as that of trusting the ability of the person/s we are attempting to connect with.

It is a beauty, all shiny in the sun, Prince.

[PrinceMyshkin]

Thank you, qimissung and Lumiere:


Hm.

I agree with firefangled - love is valid. But humans don't always trust its validity. Kierkegaard said love is like faith. I don't know about that, but love at least requires a kind of faith. Or does faith require a kind of love? Both?

Your poems always lead to questions and I like that.

Of course I believe that love is "valid" in the abstract, but surely every time we approach a potential new lover or friend we re-examine whether love will be valid in this particular case?

[Alexander III]

I like the mathematical symmetry of this, so precise and accurate, beautiful by its clockwork precision still and unchanging.

However In my opinion instead of ellipses ending the first stanza just a full stop would seem better.

[PrinceMyshkin]

I like the mathematical symmetry of this, so precise and accurate, beautiful by its clockwork precision still and unchanging.

However In my opinion instead of ellipses ending the first stanza just a full stop would seem better.

That's a very sensitive observation. The ellipsis is there because originally there were another few words at the end of that line & when I deleted them I replaced them with the ellipsis as one would do in a quotation to signify omitted words! I've now changed it as you suggest.