Naïve

Zakyath

Member
Reaction score
239
Naïve is very straight forward and the most honest attempt to actually 'understand myself' for the last years (through poetry). I find it much harder to find the right words when they mean so much to you, but I gave it an attempt. I like to distance my texts from myself and delude myself that I have full control and know all I need to. Not now, though.

I wished that you would show me,
just what you do.
I dreamed that I would some day find bliss,
that I would come to be as blind as you.

But it didn't require many words,
before everything came crumbling down.
I had built my own desolate castle,
Each other brick another lie.

Now I'm not sure of anything at all.

I've really tried but I'm not yet there,
hopefully, soon I'll be.
It's not as easy as I would wish;
To concede to be naïve.

There's just to many facts to grasp,
Why can't the truth be unraveled.
I try to open my eyes and behold,
But it hurts too much to pull through.

How can I turn my ignorance to bliss?
 

Ninva

Анна Ахматова
Reaction score
377
You begin the poem with a statement, not a question or a demand. This is only significant because it shows that the speaker does not care to learn or gain anything from "me" or the person who is blind and therefore finds bliss.

The second stanza is busy. When the speaker talks about a "desolate castle," I think of Usher's castle: the moral and inner conflict that destroys man. In some ways, I believe you were referring to that concept, yet you also go on talking about bricks being laid next to each other. But you say, "Each other brick another lie." ... So I get this image of bricks in a straight horizontal line: = = = =.

I'm not sure what to say about the third stanza.

The forth stanza is just strange. "To concede to be naive..." seems to be the main idea. But what does that mean? Well, "concede" is to acknowledge, which would mean that the speaker wishes "to acknowledge to be unaffectedly simple." That just doesn't seem to make sense.

In the fifth stanza, the speaker implies that "facts" are directly proportional to truth. But then we'd have to assume that facts, mere observations that are proposed as truth, must be truths. The phrase "to many facts" is also incorrect. It should be "too many facts." And then the speaker does not end the statement with a period, but instead, he ends it with a comma. This is odd since his idea should've been completed, but he ends with a period it in the second line of stanza five.

Line two of stanza five goes: "Why can't the truth be unraveled." Why isn't there a question mark? I assume it contributes to the speakers apathetic outlook on blissfulness, which he never describes as the opposite of his current state.

The last line of stanza five is probably the most important line in the entire poem. The speaker reveals his true intentions in writing this poem. He says, "But it hurts too much to pull through." Since conforming to blindness is too painful, he can't. So he remains defiant to it and chases countless facts that trickle out of his grasp with no hope of ever putting them all together. So he asks, "How can I turn my ignorance to bliss?"

Importantly, the last stanza is the only question asked. So after admitting his incompetence to gather the truths, he wishes to turn the part of him, which is void of truth into bliss. And with that, lies the complicated question: since he does not ask how to become blind, he simply asks how to turn his ignorance to bliss.

To "turn to" does not mean to transform. It means he wishes to change the direction of his ignorance to bliss. This is not asking to be in the state of bliss but to be turned towards it. And by being turned towards truth, he may find it. And this is what he has dreamed of.

Wow, great poem. Just a few mistakes.
 

Zakyath

Member
Reaction score
239
Wow, that's some good criticism, Ninva.

>yet you also go on talking about bricks being laid next to each other. But you say, "Each other brick another lie." ... So I get this image of bricks in a straight horizontal line: = = = =.


Hm, well, the bricks were supposed to be the bricks of the castle - which btw isn't Usher's castle :) (never heard of it)

>I'm not sure what to say about the third stanza.

I wrote it as lyrics for a song and... it needed a line there :(

>The forth stanza is just strange. "To concede to be naive..." seems to be the main idea. But what does that mean? Well, "concede" is to acknowledge, which would mean that the speaker wishes "to acknowledge to be unaffectedly simple." That just doesn't seem to make sense.

It's about getting yourself down on the ground - me accepting how naïve I am and how little I know, when I've always wanted to be the best. Since English is not my native language it has flaws; but I'm working on them. But I still don't understand what's wrong with that sentence: to concede (admit) to be naïve (in lack of information). Could you expound?

>In the fifth stanza, the speaker implies that "facts" are directly proportional to truth. But then we'd have to assume that facts, mere observations that are proposed as truth, must be truths. The phrase "to many facts" is also incorrect. It should be "too many facts." And then the speaker does not end the statement with a period, but instead, he ends it with a comma. This is odd since his idea should've been completed, but he ends with a period it in the second line of stanza five.

Line two of stanza five goes: "Why can't the truth be unraveled." Why isn't there a question mark? I assume it contributes to the speakers apathetic outlook on blissfulness, which he never describes as the opposite of his current state.

Would this be better?
"There's just too many facts to grasp;
Why can't the truth be unraveled?"

(the obvious lack of a question mark and an O were simply typos)

And what I was trying to say is that whenever I learn and accept something I'm eventually presented with new facts to alter my opinion. I can never be sure, because there's always something more that I haven't even considered. It can be very frustrating - I just want to know how it actually is. But the more I understand, the more I also realize how much there is I don't.

>Importantly, the last stanza is the only question asked. So after admitting his incompetence to gather the truths, he wishes to turn the part of him, which is void of truth into bliss. And with that, lies the complicated question: since he does not ask how to become blind, he simply asks how to turn his ignorance to bliss.

To "turn to" does not mean to transform. It means he wishes to change the direction of his ignorance to bliss. This is not asking to be in the state of bliss but to be turned towards it. And by being turned towards truth, he may find it. And this is what he has dreamed of.

Well, I was trying to kinda summarize it with that; I've seen others as ignorant, and always believed that ignorance = bliss. But when I realize that I'm no better than them, how come my ignorance isn't equal to bliss? How can I turn my ignorance to bliss?

And I wasn't aware of that "turn" didn't work there :p am I looking for a word with the same meaning as transform?

Thanks again for your comment:shades:

Edit: Wait, I never thanked you a first time. Oh well.
 

Ninva

Анна Ахматова
Reaction score
377
Yes, I suppose the words "concede," "naive," and "turn" just didn't work out. When you wrote "to concede" it does kinda mean "to admit," but there's a slight difference. Concede primarily means "to acknowledge as true." "To admit" is primarily "to allow [with conceding] validity." You're not conceded by colleges. You're admitted.

Keep writing!
 
General chit-chat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.

      The Helper Discord

      Staff online

      Members online

      Affiliates

      Hive Workshop NUON Dome World Editor Tutorials

      Network Sponsors

      Apex Steel Pipe - Buys and sells Steel Pipe.
      Top