That book is one of my favorites and I am enjoying reading this again very much. I am a longtime reader of your books, a viewer of your video talks and interviews, and of this site. I treasure the theological/philosophical works, but if I had to only pick one of your books to take to the desert island it would likely be Prisms and Veils. Also, do you know the work of Makoto Fujimura? https://iamfujimura.substack.com/p/the-puppeteers-who-carry-us-home
My name is Mike Lueken and I teach theology at a Catholic high school. Thank you for your help in accomplishing that work.
Dreamed and dreaming are children born. Where the boat on the water can be one — and then something else. Where, with and without mirrors, diamonds and disguises picture themselves. Where trees grow from tangerines and cellophane blossoms and sun shines deep into and out from our eyes. Everyone doesn’t always smile as you trundle down to the shore. Someone is always there until they’re gone. (They weren’t necessarily waiting for you.)
Dreams, imagination, values, and morality are often contrasted to “reality.” So are abstractions like law, customs, and habit. Those also shape our thoughts, our behaviors, and our imaginations. But who can point for long at any reality without watching it change or wishing that it could?
And what about the challenges of other understandings of “reality” and the equally elusive dreams of others?
Is there a society that could actually survive, never mind tolerate, the brilliance, wit, and inventiveness that we are all capable of? What does it mean that we can imagine such? What would it mean if we couldn’t? Is there an individual who could actually survive, never mind flourish, amidst all the potential generativity of herself and everyone else? How do our imaginations contend with, help to facilitate, or poison the chances for a person such as this?
"They didn't want me so they made me a star."
We cast people up and we drive them out, creating nightmares to prioritize certain dreams. But mostly we ignore. Still, it's not always something to get hung about.
Goodness gracious. My friend John Betz just brought me a first edition from his last visit to Hay-on-Wye, and now I must take it apart to read again in pious silence.
I was introduced to your work through your Nabokov essays, David, and I have to say, as much as they hold a special place in my heart, this essay caused me to speedread it one sunny afternoon in Aberystwyth. Seeing as we're on the topic, what do/did you think of Karoline Leach's book, In the Shadow of the Dreamchild? I have not read it myself but have been led to believe it argued against some of the unsightly assertions in the Morton Cohen biography. Thank you. Looking forward to your new Nabokov essay in the collection due in August.
Dodgson was almost certainly sexually attracted to young girls. There is no indication that he acted upon his desires directly. The question has no bearing on the value of the books.
“Well now,” said the White Queen, adjusting herself with the air of someone remembering six impossible bibliographies before breakfast, “it was exceedingly considerate of you to tumble headlong into all that Looking-Glass chatter — very pretty, very literary, very upside-down indeed — but I cannot for the life of me remember whether you ever said what book it was you had begun with. One ought always to know the name of a book before wandering into another one, otherwise the stories get mixed together and start borrowing each other’s teaspoons.”
Somehow I've arrived just short of 6 decades having not read Carroll. I will hang my head in shame, but also rectify this shocking oversight before the dread date. In the meantime, thank you. I wish all literary essays displayed this kind of devotion to their subjects.
I was just typing an e-mail to a friend, wanted to share something about what I believed in sincerely, and came to a few realizations 💙🙏:
Honestly - i'm not sure what to make of them: Being not a Theologian, and poor with words-i'm not sure if it entirely makes sense, but still - i feel moved to share it here, maybe because i hope that if it is indeed of benefit, and speaks of truth, that it can be given & shared 💙🙏.
Forgive me if i may put things crudely, But:
There is a verse that says/talks about God choosing the weak and foolish things of the world to confound the wise and/or mighty. [I think shame is appropriate too - but only if understood in a beneficial-kind-Loving sense, the same way St. Porphyrios laughed and explained to a woman something regarding the Bible, she didn't want to participate in a certain Hymn/Chant/Liturgical practice because it was too ruthless/mean - that the language was different back then and it has a Loving meaning/sense - in any way, and that was the key message 💙🙏.]
My thinking for that primarily is it shouldn't be read in a Humanistic-sense, with our tendencies [like what Nietzsche talked about- power-dynamics, to flip things on their head, superiority, etc.], Because God is Love.
To make this short (and what i am trying to say):
John 17:21-23, When Jesus was saying that How He and His Father are one and that we may be one in that manner - then: that we may all believe it was Our Heavenly Father that sent Jesus/Him.
I used to think that this was moreso about us being joined to God, through Jesus Christ [becoming Christians, being baptized, etc.], yet the truth is even amongst Christians we aren't really or necessarily united/one.
I just had a realization, given that is something i do believe in, maybe there is another sense: Like in the Trinitarian model, how it's about Love (Self-Emptying, Self-Giving Love) - that is what will make us all one [1 Cor 13]. And until we gain that sense, or when we gain that sense, we will be able to better see-each other, Things/matters, etc. and so believe that God Has sent Jesus [That Jesus was Love, indeed-Recognize Him].
Not by argument/theology, but Love as it is-as exists (as what is essential and vital):
Jesus, when He said Lazarus was simply asleep and called Him awake - i do believe it is Love that awakened the person who was asleep. I say this not only because God is Love (as the Bible says), but notice the verse: Jesus wept (the Bible verses speaking about Love, have this sense).
I believe this must be gained -
in this way it is simple, and counfounds/shames the wise, it will help them understand-realize-wonder-amaze, and it's good that way, because anyone can [simpler than say learning extended Theology & without this sense, we can't see Jesus as He is/Recognize Him clearly & hence deciper His Word as well-in as good of a manner as it could be]. God has chosen that for our good (not from wanting to "shame" the wise, but as the most efficient and effective means to help bring us into harmony-simple and accessible, and anyone could do it, practice, or cultivate it-the last sense is probably what is most difficult, but i think there's a way 💙). Though easier said than done, but i believe in that. From personal-experience, the only times i've able to get through to someone really, is through Love-not to gain an upperhand, but genuinely for their sake-loving them, i don't know if that makes sense.)
Also it does make sense in my mind, because eventhough the dead are "dead"-they're really alive in Christ [more alive perhaps 💙🙏]. And if we think about it, this world is pervaded by death [think: decay or just mortality], in this sense we are asleep-indeed, but Love is the harmonious voice that (can-)brings us awake (even in this death-pervaded-world/state), towards each other and God. Yes, we are alive now-but sleeping more than those who have passed and joined to/taken care by/in Christ 💙🙏.
I have read your NYT article Dear David 💙, i do agree that a moral-intuition, sense, is needed to read the Bible, and in some sense that your article here relates to that and also what i have shared 💙🙏. [those are things i have believed as well, in my personal-convictions, and what i felt was necessary, though my reasoning is probably more crude 💙🙏. - But what i wanted to share here mainly, is i've never thought about the verses that way-until after reading your post yesterday night & while e-mailing someone 💙, i'm not sure if there is a sense in that, but i do see something very important & what i believe is lacking/the problem/our solution].
---
As for my reasoning, I never really understood the Patristic sense of evil as privation of good or absence of good, but i thought about it more about (and it made more sense): in terms of Order and Chaos. If Chaos is simply Order misplaced, all that's needed is Love to bring it back into harmony (whether it be natural-evil, like sickness/suffering, decay, or even morally, etc.), if it's Love that binds everything and holds all things together-But Love from us, really-is what i am trying to say. [not just in the sense of Christianity's teachings/Christ providing a pathway to salvation, but what Christ did for us/How He "Loved", By Actual Lovingness-Towards one another, that we may be one... if that makes sense, we may hear a good sermon, assent to moral teachings, but to practice/understand/cultivate - i don't think it's anyone's fault in a way but there is a way towards that, similar to what you said about Metanoia, which i believe, seeing Beauty and being moved by that sight/recognition-(because) that Beauty is Love 💙🙏]
So privation of good (in terms of Order), in that sense - it makes sense personally to me 💙🙏, hence why i think it really is possible for Harmony, that we may be one-truly. I can't think of a more effective means than harmony itself to encourage/positively-reinforce that, but it really is more than music, imho-💙🙏, maybe music speaks of such things while also inherently being that in a way [Bearing with one another, finding a way to co-exist, maybe flourish, attempts, striving, yearning, progress 💙🫶🙏].
---
I'm not sure if anyone bothers to read this far 💙🙏. Thank you for bearing with me, if you have done so. Also Dear David (if you read this per chance), there is something i wanted to inquire about-But it is a private matter, i hope to send you an e-mail that is very short & concise (i had written several paragraphs but sighed and deleted it a few days ago/previously, because I want to be respectful towards your condition and time - i think i can distill/do it in a several sentences (when i have time/it is appropriate), thought it would be nice to let you know here beforehand, as you answered a query i had intended for Q&A privately and quickly, for which i am very grateful - i remember it was a short-request, so i'll keep it the same to my best 💙🙏.
This was as beautiful as it was helpful. Years ago when reading Coleridge's AIDS, something in me began to awken. Your work has been coaxing that little flame in a mysterious way I'm very grateful for.
It's always so hard for me to tell when people are injecting even a dollop of irony or humor in online comment threads, so I try to error on the side of taking things seriously.
Whenenever I read scholary papers on Coleridge, they use that abbreviation for Aids To Reflection, but, not being a scholar myself, I am happy to call it anything that makes sense and saves my fingers a few extra clinks and clanks. Hope you're well.
Currently reading The Wind and the Willows, to my wife.
That book is one of my favorites and I am enjoying reading this again very much. I am a longtime reader of your books, a viewer of your video talks and interviews, and of this site. I treasure the theological/philosophical works, but if I had to only pick one of your books to take to the desert island it would likely be Prisms and Veils. Also, do you know the work of Makoto Fujimura? https://iamfujimura.substack.com/p/the-puppeteers-who-carry-us-home
My name is Mike Lueken and I teach theology at a Catholic high school. Thank you for your help in accomplishing that work.
Yes, I know Fujimura’s art. I met him years ago in NYC, though I doubt he would recall. I am an admirer.
Prisms, Veils and Roland, as you may know, are my favorites among my own books.
Dreamed and dreaming are children born. Where the boat on the water can be one — and then something else. Where, with and without mirrors, diamonds and disguises picture themselves. Where trees grow from tangerines and cellophane blossoms and sun shines deep into and out from our eyes. Everyone doesn’t always smile as you trundle down to the shore. Someone is always there until they’re gone. (They weren’t necessarily waiting for you.)
Dreams, imagination, values, and morality are often contrasted to “reality.” So are abstractions like law, customs, and habit. Those also shape our thoughts, our behaviors, and our imaginations. But who can point for long at any reality without watching it change or wishing that it could?
And what about the challenges of other understandings of “reality” and the equally elusive dreams of others?
Is there a society that could actually survive, never mind tolerate, the brilliance, wit, and inventiveness that we are all capable of? What does it mean that we can imagine such? What would it mean if we couldn’t? Is there an individual who could actually survive, never mind flourish, amidst all the potential generativity of herself and everyone else? How do our imaginations contend with, help to facilitate, or poison the chances for a person such as this?
"They didn't want me so they made me a star."
We cast people up and we drive them out, creating nightmares to prioritize certain dreams. But mostly we ignore. Still, it's not always something to get hung about.
Yes. Strawberry Fields Forever.
Imagine
This made me order a 1906 illustrated copy of Looking Glass on eBay for 38 bucks.
I had just ordered the Annotated Alice 150th anniversary edition and the Annotated Snark. I say it’s so I can read it to my 5-year old baby brother.
That reminds me, it’s been 150 years since the Snark was published!
Goodness gracious. My friend John Betz just brought me a first edition from his last visit to Hay-on-Wye, and now I must take it apart to read again in pious silence.
"I also recently finished writing a novel in which Through the Looking-Glass figures quite prominently"
What excellent news.
I was introduced to your work through your Nabokov essays, David, and I have to say, as much as they hold a special place in my heart, this essay caused me to speedread it one sunny afternoon in Aberystwyth. Seeing as we're on the topic, what do/did you think of Karoline Leach's book, In the Shadow of the Dreamchild? I have not read it myself but have been led to believe it argued against some of the unsightly assertions in the Morton Cohen biography. Thank you. Looking forward to your new Nabokov essay in the collection due in August.
Dodgson was almost certainly sexually attracted to young girls. There is no indication that he acted upon his desires directly. The question has no bearing on the value of the books.
“Well now,” said the White Queen, adjusting herself with the air of someone remembering six impossible bibliographies before breakfast, “it was exceedingly considerate of you to tumble headlong into all that Looking-Glass chatter — very pretty, very literary, very upside-down indeed — but I cannot for the life of me remember whether you ever said what book it was you had begun with. One ought always to know the name of a book before wandering into another one, otherwise the stories get mixed together and start borrowing each other’s teaspoons.”
I loved this. Beats Hegel.
There’s not a lot of whimsy in Hegel, one has to admit. Plenty of Geist but not much esprit.
Ah! I had been thinking of emailing you about this article to ask if you'd consider posting it here. It's my favourite piece of yours. Love it.
Somehow I've arrived just short of 6 decades having not read Carroll. I will hang my head in shame, but also rectify this shocking oversight before the dread date. In the meantime, thank you. I wish all literary essays displayed this kind of devotion to their subjects.
A bittersweet essay to start the morning, enjoyable.
I was just typing an e-mail to a friend, wanted to share something about what I believed in sincerely, and came to a few realizations 💙🙏:
Honestly - i'm not sure what to make of them: Being not a Theologian, and poor with words-i'm not sure if it entirely makes sense, but still - i feel moved to share it here, maybe because i hope that if it is indeed of benefit, and speaks of truth, that it can be given & shared 💙🙏.
Forgive me if i may put things crudely, But:
There is a verse that says/talks about God choosing the weak and foolish things of the world to confound the wise and/or mighty. [I think shame is appropriate too - but only if understood in a beneficial-kind-Loving sense, the same way St. Porphyrios laughed and explained to a woman something regarding the Bible, she didn't want to participate in a certain Hymn/Chant/Liturgical practice because it was too ruthless/mean - that the language was different back then and it has a Loving meaning/sense - in any way, and that was the key message 💙🙏.]
My thinking for that primarily is it shouldn't be read in a Humanistic-sense, with our tendencies [like what Nietzsche talked about- power-dynamics, to flip things on their head, superiority, etc.], Because God is Love.
To make this short (and what i am trying to say):
John 17:21-23, When Jesus was saying that How He and His Father are one and that we may be one in that manner - then: that we may all believe it was Our Heavenly Father that sent Jesus/Him.
I used to think that this was moreso about us being joined to God, through Jesus Christ [becoming Christians, being baptized, etc.], yet the truth is even amongst Christians we aren't really or necessarily united/one.
I just had a realization, given that is something i do believe in, maybe there is another sense: Like in the Trinitarian model, how it's about Love (Self-Emptying, Self-Giving Love) - that is what will make us all one [1 Cor 13]. And until we gain that sense, or when we gain that sense, we will be able to better see-each other, Things/matters, etc. and so believe that God Has sent Jesus [That Jesus was Love, indeed-Recognize Him].
Not by argument/theology, but Love as it is-as exists (as what is essential and vital):
Jesus, when He said Lazarus was simply asleep and called Him awake - i do believe it is Love that awakened the person who was asleep. I say this not only because God is Love (as the Bible says), but notice the verse: Jesus wept (the Bible verses speaking about Love, have this sense).
I believe this must be gained -
in this way it is simple, and counfounds/shames the wise, it will help them understand-realize-wonder-amaze, and it's good that way, because anyone can [simpler than say learning extended Theology & without this sense, we can't see Jesus as He is/Recognize Him clearly & hence deciper His Word as well-in as good of a manner as it could be]. God has chosen that for our good (not from wanting to "shame" the wise, but as the most efficient and effective means to help bring us into harmony-simple and accessible, and anyone could do it, practice, or cultivate it-the last sense is probably what is most difficult, but i think there's a way 💙). Though easier said than done, but i believe in that. From personal-experience, the only times i've able to get through to someone really, is through Love-not to gain an upperhand, but genuinely for their sake-loving them, i don't know if that makes sense.)
Also it does make sense in my mind, because eventhough the dead are "dead"-they're really alive in Christ [more alive perhaps 💙🙏]. And if we think about it, this world is pervaded by death [think: decay or just mortality], in this sense we are asleep-indeed, but Love is the harmonious voice that (can-)brings us awake (even in this death-pervaded-world/state), towards each other and God. Yes, we are alive now-but sleeping more than those who have passed and joined to/taken care by/in Christ 💙🙏.
I have read your NYT article Dear David 💙, i do agree that a moral-intuition, sense, is needed to read the Bible, and in some sense that your article here relates to that and also what i have shared 💙🙏. [those are things i have believed as well, in my personal-convictions, and what i felt was necessary, though my reasoning is probably more crude 💙🙏. - But what i wanted to share here mainly, is i've never thought about the verses that way-until after reading your post yesterday night & while e-mailing someone 💙, i'm not sure if there is a sense in that, but i do see something very important & what i believe is lacking/the problem/our solution].
---
As for my reasoning, I never really understood the Patristic sense of evil as privation of good or absence of good, but i thought about it more about (and it made more sense): in terms of Order and Chaos. If Chaos is simply Order misplaced, all that's needed is Love to bring it back into harmony (whether it be natural-evil, like sickness/suffering, decay, or even morally, etc.), if it's Love that binds everything and holds all things together-But Love from us, really-is what i am trying to say. [not just in the sense of Christianity's teachings/Christ providing a pathway to salvation, but what Christ did for us/How He "Loved", By Actual Lovingness-Towards one another, that we may be one... if that makes sense, we may hear a good sermon, assent to moral teachings, but to practice/understand/cultivate - i don't think it's anyone's fault in a way but there is a way towards that, similar to what you said about Metanoia, which i believe, seeing Beauty and being moved by that sight/recognition-(because) that Beauty is Love 💙🙏]
So privation of good (in terms of Order), in that sense - it makes sense personally to me 💙🙏, hence why i think it really is possible for Harmony, that we may be one-truly. I can't think of a more effective means than harmony itself to encourage/positively-reinforce that, but it really is more than music, imho-💙🙏, maybe music speaks of such things while also inherently being that in a way [Bearing with one another, finding a way to co-exist, maybe flourish, attempts, striving, yearning, progress 💙🫶🙏].
---
I'm not sure if anyone bothers to read this far 💙🙏. Thank you for bearing with me, if you have done so. Also Dear David (if you read this per chance), there is something i wanted to inquire about-But it is a private matter, i hope to send you an e-mail that is very short & concise (i had written several paragraphs but sighed and deleted it a few days ago/previously, because I want to be respectful towards your condition and time - i think i can distill/do it in a several sentences (when i have time/it is appropriate), thought it would be nice to let you know here beforehand, as you answered a query i had intended for Q&A privately and quickly, for which i am very grateful - i remember it was a short-request, so i'll keep it the same to my best 💙🙏.
God Bless you all 💙🙏 (づ ◕‿◕ )づ
This was as beautiful as it was helpful. Years ago when reading Coleridge's AIDS, something in me began to awken. Your work has been coaxing that little flame in a mysterious way I'm very grateful for.
Can we not refer to it as Coleridge’s AIDS?
Hi Michael,
It's always so hard for me to tell when people are injecting even a dollop of irony or humor in online comment threads, so I try to error on the side of taking things seriously.
Whenenever I read scholary papers on Coleridge, they use that abbreviation for Aids To Reflection, but, not being a scholar myself, I am happy to call it anything that makes sense and saves my fingers a few extra clinks and clanks. Hope you're well.
Let’s go with Aids. Italicized if possible, but not all-caps. This is my humble entreaty.
Yeah, that looks better. Thanks, Michael. Thanks, David.
Orthography is all.