Two weeks ago, the Older than I Am Old Woman I Meet With who shares poetry with me, listens to my stories, regards my art expressions, and asks me how things are with my soul, read a poem to me from the book In the Shelter, on finding a home in the world by Padraig O' Tuama. When I returned home I ordered a copy and it arrived last week from England. This stood out in my reading yesterday:
Sometimes, in the telling of stories, we injure and cure at the same time Once, people from a village in the wake of a murder gathered and told their stories of their trauma. They got telling other stories too, and one night we told stories of a time when we realized, 'I will be able to measure my life before and after this moment". People told stories of jobs, divorces, marriages, children, bodies, changes and death. Some of the stories told were told with aching and they were heard with an echo of that ache. At the end of the night, one of the participants looked around the room. Up until that point, the group used to call itself 'the two groups'--the Catholic group and the Protestant group. 'Well' the woman said, looking round, 'we're one group now'. And she was right. Another person had left the room. For her, the timing wasn't right and she couldn't stay. That wasn't failure, it was just a different kind of truthtelling.
I'm told linguists debate a particular question. One way of saying the question is: 'Do different languages carve out unique systems of thought, meaning, and value because of the cadences, histories and concepts within the language?' Some say 'yes'. The ones who say 'yes' say that because Irish has a particular word, ochon, to mean 'croon in grief', leading to a particularity of grief expression in Irish culture. Most say there is a deeper set of meaning indigenous to all humans and all languages circle this deeper set of meanings. For the latter group it doesn't matter that the Irish language has no word for 'no'; we're still stubborn bastards.
Myself I don't know how to know an answer to the linguist's question. What I do know is that I believe the woman who said, 'It's good to talk' and I believe the man who said 'I hate it when you say that' and I believe the group who said 'I'm glad the talking has begun'. These groups are often battered by murder and double battered by the disbelieving of the story of the murder They feel far from caring, and feel far from therapy, health and encounter. The ones who come to hold the story-spaces come with time and technique, but these can only go so far. It is in the shelter of the story telling that the people live, and that the people see their shadows. And sometimes the shadows are very long.
The dictionary of Etymology tells me that the history of the word story holds meanings of 'wise-man' and the verb 'to see' . To tell as story is to see wisely, I say to myself. I don't know if it needs to be true, but I believe it. If a story is a beginning, there might be a place it leads to, a deeper truthtelling about the essence of ourselves, and the essence of ourselves-in-relation-to-the-other, particularly the feared other. Some stories start off in rooms and end up in Narnia, Never-Never-land, Wonderland or other little hells. But if we stick with the story it will tell us something.
We can never tell the whole story--and we never try. I don't know if the story of our griefs has an ending, only the next chapter or perhaps, the careful telling and retelling of the recent chapters. We tell stories in groups so that people can be believed, so that people can make meaning, so that people can carve and create kindness for another and eventually themselves.
We hope that our storytelling can be a little shelter amid the trouble. We hope that we can tell stories of our troubles. We hope we can say hello to our shelter.
9 comments:
I had a massive argument about this with Dr. Fred.
I can't believe he can be so thick sometimes.
Because he was actually very smart.
But he speaks only one language. So he doesn't appreciate how language forms pathways of thought.
So I said, Mira! Sabo whereof *points to self, index finger twirling at mouth.*
As you know romance languages divide everything along gender lines.
And that forces one to actually think of everything in terms of gender. Even in English. The moon will always be female thereafter, and the sun will always be male. Your way of thinking is changed.
I know by studying English vocabulary in bulk via GMAT preparation books with verisimilitude exams, with the sudden influx of thousands of English words, that those new words provided new pathways for processing thought. I thought using these new words. They were very handy indeed. I didn't know how I got on without them previously.
I learned so many words I had to tone down the thoughts for speech lest I piss people off. I had to reorganize the original thoughts processed by the avenues of new language to vocalized language that is acceptable to my peers.
My younger brother challenged me by saying I was trying to prove to everyone that I'm smarter than they are by using unnecessarily difficult language.
I told him, look, Buddy, I AM TONING IT DOWN already. For you! If you knew the original thoughts before laborious editing then you'd really be pissed off. I'm giving up the perfect words for less perfect words just to fit in with my friends. And the thoughts that I'm giving you are worse for the editing.
Example: My mother's relatives were visiting from the east coast and they were all over our house. My father was working a crossword puzzle and got as far as he could go. He started calling out entries. I answered them, imagining this conversation was between my father and me. I said, "Come on, Dad, give me the hard ones." I did not know that everyone had been listening. All at once the visitors throughout the whole house all said at once, "N-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o-o!"
They didn't want the most difficult entries to get my dad unstuck. They wanted the easy ones. The one where they'd have a chance. But until that point no one had said anything. Because they couldn't even answer the easy ones.
And that told me, Jesus Christ, I really need to tone it down a LOT more.
Likewise ASL fairly insists that you drop English and begin thinking in terms of visual imagery. You speak as if producing a film. You must show the thoughts you are thinking. It's not so much subject-verb-object, rather, it's this is the picture, and this is how the picture changes. Your sentences are you building the picture. The most eloquent phrases flow like a film. And that takes a different way of thinking. And that forms new neural pathways. And when you retrace the pathways, they're broadened to avenues of thought. New pathways of thinking.
Then that blends into your original language. Your English is affected by sign, just as your sign was affected by your English. Your brain is forming new neural pathways upon which your thoughts flow.
I'm still amazed that Dr. Fred did not accept this explanation drawn from experience. But he was adamantly against it.
So that you find yourself processing thought through different languages, such that you dream in English, Spanish, and ASL with French, German and Japanese throughout. It's not mental confusion, rather, it's thought flowing along established neural pathways.
What is so impossible to see about that?
Why is there even a discussion?
I don't get it. Come on. Just accept mah authoritah!
But Dr. Fred did not.
This is where I do my story telling. My stories are of turning. Carving? Not so much.
I have mentioned to my ASL teacher and several of my fellow students that as I am learning ASL I am remembering French, Italian and Spanish. Even Japanese creeps in. Neural pathways, baby, *pantomimes rocking a baby in my arms*.
ASL learn I. Class good. Class hard. *makes scroonched up face*
Fill Our Need
A story is a shelter.
Against what?
Against the outer storm.
Which is why we form a circle
Our backs to the dark
Our fronts warm
In the circle
Around the story teller.
"Tell us a story!" the children cry.
I answered them, imagining this conversation was between my father and me. I said, "Come on, Dad, give me the hard ones."
It's hard to be ahead of the curve, to test out with an IQ that is present in only one or two in a hundred who take the same test, or to have skills, ability, insight or intuition not common to others. Learning to live with a gift like that and communicate with others can be a challenge. I know, as I grew up in the presence of this and encountered it while homeschooling the SonsM.
When motive and intent aren't clear, it's easy for communication to get twisted up. It falls on the speaker to be as clear as possible, within themselves and with others, regarding what they wish to convey, and how they wish to present themselves to others.
Did you honestly believe your dad was lame and stupid enough to get stuck on the easy ones and ask others for help with them?
Or were you attempting to joke with him, ding him a little and let others know those were easy for you?
Communicating without clarity regarding motive is referred to as "Bird in the bush" where something is said or heard that sounds like a bird without knowing what it is actually making the sound or causing the cheeping.
I appreciated Padraig's response to the language question regarding unique streams or deeper set meaning indigenous to all, as he let us know which way he was leaning by the examples provided without setting up an either/or answer.
Is it possible both could be involved?
Below is the paragraph I didn't include in the post, as I let fear of what those who hold communion sacred might think get in my way, but reading it again before placing it here led to a curious place as well:
Once, in a group, somebody said, Let's have something like communion. So, we did. We read words from the prophet Ezekial and we read words from Ted Hughes. We had the Gideon Bible and we had Ted Hughe's Crow. We ripped bread, talked and, instead of wine, we drank whiskey. It was cheap whiskey. It burnt as it went down. We found shelter in the sharp words and the shadows were made sharper by firewhiskey.
As I was unfamiliar with Ted Hughes writing I looked up Crow and found a series of Crow poems with this one intriguing and repulsing along with the flips presented.
Apple Tragedy
So on the seventh day
The serpent rested,
God came up to him.
"I've invented a new game," he said.
The serpent stared in surprise
At this interloper.
But God said: "You see this apple?"
I squeeze it and look-cider."
The serpent had a good drink
And curled up into a question mark.
Adam drank and said: "Be my god."
Eve drank and opened her legs
And called to the cockeyed serpent
And gave him a wild time.
God ran and told Adam
Who in drunken rage tried to hang himself in the orchard.
The serpent tried to explain, crying "Stop"
But drink was splitting his syllable.
And Eve started screeching: "Rape! Rape!"
And stamping on his head.
Now whenever the snake appears she screeches
"Here it comes again! Help! O Help!"
Then Adam smashes a chair on his head,
And God says: "I am well pleased"
And everything goes to hell.
I didn't read that but I am familiar enough with Ted Hughes to skip it and know that I have not missed anything. Years ago I watched The Iron Giant animated movie with my children and we enjoyed it. Then I read the book by Ted Hughes. The only thing it had in common with the movie was the title. Then there was the whole Sylvia Plath thing and I am completely over Ted Hughes.
Walking to the edge of my discomfort and taking a look around is part what I need to do to grow and determine what personally matters most to me. That's why I ordered the book after being introduced to it, aware that I might not agree with or appreciate all it contained. Since I did not have the option early in life, particularly in regard to religious stories and beliefs, to bring questions or curiosity to the table, I honor the opportunity to do so now in ways that work for me, without losing my balance or allowing chaos and incongruity to pull me off center. We're each responsible for finding and working with our own center and edges.
When I see the work you do with burls and downed tree parts, Sixty, I marvel at your ability to find something of note and worth in that which appears knotted, twisted or dead and on its way to decay or the fire pit.
Thanks, MamaM. The great Japanese-American woodworker George Nakashima talked about honoring a tree and telling its story by preserving it and allowing its history to be seen. I just try to capture what nature gives me - of course the pieces that blowed up don't have stories told about them, alas. Thankfully most of them hold together and become something and have their picture taken.
Maybe I should post some pictures of ones that made it and those that didn't...
Post a Comment