Sympathy for the Devil? May 7, 2013
In light of the scribe and the phoenix poems, I decided to
revisit this poem too since my previous interpretation had painted it as part
of the romantic series (which it may still be) and yet may have broader
implications my previous view did not take into account.
This is especially true in the light of another recent poem
about fairness she posted which I have read but not yet analyzed which seems to
have a similar theme – if even more shocking.
In an upside down world, this poem claims-- as does the fairness poem-- ordinary rules no longer apply and the
ultimate end game is to be survive.
She claims what was on the bottom it's now on the top and
perhaps people with real talent and other virtues are frozen and dismayed and forgotten.
Her use of forgotten has multiple meanings: as people
forgotten and “we” people who have forgot to obey the anti-rules of the day-to-day
existence.
Anti rules have a number of inferences. The primary meaning:
not authorized, illegal, elicit or unlawful.
But more to her point, she likely means a world where
players are encouraged to ignore all rules creating a kind of chaos where
things are unpredictable, and a person cannot simply get along by obeying
ordinary rules
While my original assessment narrowly defined this in
regard to love. her later posts make it clear she meant this in a much broader
sense -- her language use reveals a much more aggressive approach to life and
merely the aftermath of a broken heart.
If she could “seize” what she felt she deserved she would
feel less put out by the society and the company in which she finds herself.
She seems to understand that if she doesn't grab what she
thinks she deserves she won't get it.
Yet, she implies in this poem that she might not be in a
position to do so at the moment
And in a clearly unfair world, where up is down and
perhaps right is wrong if she could grab what she deserves she would feel less
fearful and less restrained by what she is so “unlawfully restrained from” and
something that denies her self-forgiveness.
In her follow up poem on Fairness, she goes to a much
further and scary extreme in this regard, so shocking, I’m shocked she did not
yank the poem down before I could print it out.
In this poem, however, she defies my original assessment that
painted this phrase in a romantic way – such as marriage or entanglement
blocking her from getting the love she thinks she deserves.
It is clear this is a prelude to the much more unvarnished
fairness poem to come, and seems a kind of Sympathy for the Devil extreme where
right is wrong good is bad and in such a scandal existence everybody needs to
be operating with the same plane if that's the only way a person can get what
he or she deserves.
If there are no rules, then a person must do whatever it
takes to get what he or she deserves or needs to survive
This is a much harsher assessment of this poem than the
first one but is supported by the more recent fairness poem that takes this
theme to an even more realistic and scary level which I will get into shortly.
Comments
Post a Comment