William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell

Any topics primarily focused on metaphysics can be discussed here, in a generally casual way, where conversations may take unexpected turns.

Moderator: Soul_of_Shu

User avatar
Soul_of_Shu
Posts: 1628
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2021 6:48 pm

William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell

Post by Soul_of_Shu »

This video is so artfully and beautifully created that I first thought of posting it in the art-form section, but given its thought-provoking ideas about polarity, good vs evil, individuality><mutuality, etc, it surely warrants a place here too ... William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell
Here out of instinct or grace we seek
soulmates in these galleries of hieroglyph and glass,
where mutual longings and sufferings of love
are laid bare in transfigured exhibition of our hearts,
we who crave deep secrets and mysteries,
as elusive as the avatars of our dreams.
User avatar
Lou Gold
Posts: 1250
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:18 pm

Re: William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell

Post by Lou Gold »

I love Blake and Dostoevsky. Yes, tension drives a certain notion of progress. "Hitting the wall" brings forth awareness to slow down and pay attention and NOT to keep hitting the wall. Paying attention and slowing down causes us to carefully evaluate the costs of progress as well as its seeming benefits, which often turn out to be short-term illusions. As the Taoist sage says, "There never was a big problem that could not have been solved when it was small." Indeed, keeping things small might be a sacred goal worth sacrificing for.
Be calm - Be clear - See the faults - See the suffering - Give your love
User avatar
AshvinP
Posts: 2977
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:00 am
Location: USA

Re: William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell

Post by AshvinP »

Soul_of_Shu wrote: Fri Jan 15, 2021 11:41 am This video is so artfully and beautifully created that I first thought of posting it in the art-form section, but given its thought-provoking ideas about polarity, good vs evil, individuality><mutuality, etc, it surely warrants a place here too ... William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell
That is a beautifully done video.

Blake was a breathtaking poet and painter and a profound philosophical thinker, but he does seem to fall short of a contemporary thinker like Coleridge because he views the opposites as separate forces rather than inter-weaving and inter-penetrating. Every energetic force has a creative and devouring aspect and both are necessary to move forward. I like those terms better than "good" and "evil", because we can easily confuse those for ultimate Good and Evil, which I would say are mutually exclusive rather than 'polar'. Evil being that which prevents us from integrating the polar opposite forces.
“It is your presumption that freedom is something which you already possess that ensures that you will remain in chains."
SanteriSatama
Posts: 1030
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:07 pm

Re: William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell

Post by SanteriSatama »

AshvinP wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 2:56 pm he views the opposites as separate forces rather than inter-weaving and inter-penetrating.
Not how I hear The Tyger.

User avatar
Lou Gold
Posts: 1250
Joined: Wed Jan 13, 2021 4:18 pm

Re: William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell

Post by Lou Gold »

WOW! What a wonderful reading of "Tyger" -- THX
Be calm - Be clear - See the faults - See the suffering - Give your love
User avatar
AshvinP
Posts: 2977
Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2021 5:00 am
Location: USA

Re: William Blake // Dostoevsky: Marriage of Heaven & Hell

Post by AshvinP »

SanteriSatama wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 7:48 pm
AshvinP wrote: Mon Jan 18, 2021 2:56 pm he views the opposites as separate forces rather than inter-weaving and inter-penetrating.
Not how I hear The Tyger.
The Thoughts on Thinking guy was going over Marriage of Heaven and Hell. Based on my reading, I believe he had an accurate analysis. But don't get me wrong... I also think Blake may have been the best poet in the English language, right up there with Milton and Shakespeare.

His philosophy, though, was a lopsided reaction to the rise of rationalism. He went too far towards the other extreme, i.e. instinct/imagination without reason is all that really matters.
“It is your presumption that freedom is something which you already possess that ensures that you will remain in chains."
Post Reply