Fallen

I think the line "as it was destined" is the important one. How do we recognize light if there is no darkness to which to compare it? The Bringer of Light, does, in fact, bring light. By providing a choice, a contrast, a dark option, some are pointed to the light.

I agree, one needs to make a choice. Dichotomies illuminate the options starkly and simply. But the Bringer of Light was given no choice, no freedom. Does that mean his enslavement provides our freedom?

In cases such as this (and Judas as well), I consider the source, and the motivations of the creators of the source material. It never made sense to me that the creator of choice would eliminate that option for one or two. Why couldn't one choose enslavement for other's freedoms, just as one might choose sacrifice for other's redemption?

Did I mention I really, really like this poem? I mean REALLY like it.

The choice of sacrifice is a good point Pat. And it makes it even more upsetting. With my studies and the theme of human sacrifice, it is a pivotal role within the society. The question still stands was it always prisoners? New data is pointing to the opposite in the some recent excavations. High powered nobility from varying areas wiling sacrificing themselves.

I'm glad you like it. I was sitting on for a few months, it seemed too much.

This is beautiful! Takes me into deep thought.

Thanks Amy. I wondered if it was too heavy. I'm glad it resonated with you.

Do you mean can an omniscent being be the betrayed or can they be the betrayer? If it's the former, I'd say yes, just because the being knows about the betrayal doesn't mean it didn't happen. If it's the later, again I'd say yes, as betrayal usually has more to do with expectations of the recipient, then he who betrayed. Maybe. I feel dumb all of a sudden.

Nice poem.

The first point: If when created you knew the events that were to unfold and you still created the being is it really betrayal or merely the scripting?

I concur a hundred percent with your second point.

Very beautiful Viv.

Thank you Wendy. It is complicated and yes these things wake me up in the middle of the night. :)

Thats very good. I believe that The Lightbringer shall one day be redeemed.

If he is playing his role, his raison d'etre, does he need redemption?

Viv, I know so little about poetry that I'll just say this is...well, quite poetic :-)

Honestly, Jill the question it evokes is probably superior to the form.

Love the poem and the questions it brings.

Any conclusions Wanda?

Vivian, this reminds me of a comment you made about Lucifer, who was a lead character in my story "Descent by Locomotive." There, also, you talked about the Bringer of Light. On reflection, I understood this poem better. Recalling: "All the world is a stage, and all the men and women merely players." If you play your destined role, why should that be considered a curse? Thought provoking.

Bringer of Light is Lucifer's translation. While working on Celestial Chess this poem popped into my mind.

Destiny and the condemned, Lucifer and Judas have been cast in pivotal roles. I question the concept of betrayal here since Jamie so eloquently pointed out is dependent on the betrayed's perception. BUT if the betrayed always knew the outcome can it truly be betrayal?

Or does their presence magnify the "betrayed?"

The clearest examples of betrayal, Lucifer, Judas and Eve all have pivotal roles in the biblical story. Without the betrayal of Lucifer there wouldn't be that contrast between good and evil. I even feel some sympathy towards Lucifer as he felt the best way to always have obedience to God would be by force- without free will or choice. He was offering another way but he missed the boat, the idea was to give Man free will and let him choose.

Eve also had a role to play. Without her betrayal (eating the apple and offering it to Adam the race of Man could not begin. They could have lived their lives, perhaps without death, in the Garden if they had 'obeyed' the commandment. However, if they didn't eat of the fruit of the Tree they couldn't procreate and fulfill the other commandment.

Judas had the role of betrayer to assure the crucifixtion of Christ. Without that betrayal and the crucifixtion Jesus couldn't rise again or fulfilled his role as the Lamb.

My thinking leads me to conclude that the betrayal is pivotal in each case and known beforehand by the Creator. If these people or in the case of Lucifer, an angel had chosen to not 'betray' then probably another would have been offered the choice. My thoughts presuppose a belief in the biblical story.

Yes! They are all instrumental steps of advancement. Since their role was predetermined, there can't be betrayal only fulfillment. The so called Best Supporting Actor/Actress.

Exactly. But to the 'audience' the betrayal must be portrayed for all to see as an object lesson. But looking closer you can see the 'script' points that must be written in. Not only is "all the world a stage" but "all the universe is as well."

And that is my scholarly conclusion. I'ved studied and pondered this through the years and it seems to me that the only conclusion to be drawn is the one I presented above.

He must forgive himself for his pride. The redemption is for him, not the Light Source.

I am reading Foucalt's Pendulum today (yes, I know, everyone else read it practically as a toddler, but being an autodidact, things come a bit slower to me). At any rate, I tripped over these lines and thought of your poem (attribution, Umberto Eco):

"I am like God, as solitary as He, as vain, and as despairing, unable to be one of my creatures. They dwell in my light, while I dwell in unbearable darkness, the source of that light."

And I believe just about exactly what Wanda does.

Glad to see I'm in good company Pat. And no I haven't read Foucault's Pendulum, and it is not a toddler's book. Let me know what you think at the end. Maybe I'll add to the Must Be Read pile.

What I have found is that without an education, it must be read with pen and paper at hand to make note of stuff to be looked up later. It's quite the education. My list so far contains things like Numinous, Comte de St. Germain (who is actually quite interesting), panta rei (another interesting concept), and ogive. And those are just the ones I've looked up. The list is much longer. And the book is about editors, writers and Templars, which is entertaining.

Oh, and the word Demiurge comes up often, which is interesting in the contest of this poem.

contest, of course being the sleepy-need-a-nap version of "context". Sigh.

I had a professor who adored the word numinal, I considered creating a Bingo card for lecture.

Demiurge, I had to look up again. In the Greek context this goes back to Prometheus creating man from clay, the lesser known tale than the giving fire to man.

I'm a huge Templars fan, power struggles between kings and religious sects are always fun.

Sounds like you're having fun.

I was thinking of demiurge in this definition: "a supernatural being imagined as creating or fashioning the world in subordination to the Supreme Being, and sometimes regarded as the originator of evil." Subordination being the interesting word, as in betrayed? Anyway, the book is a bit of a brain strain, and totally not linear with all sorts of interesting diversions and digressions, but yes, fun.

I've never read it either Pat. And now I feel I gotta. Just sayin'. You make it sound pretty darn interesting. And I love words too, the feel of them in your mouth, the way they echo in the mind and the meanings all mixed together for a feast of the senses. Yum, almost better than.... pie.

I'm a fan of things Templar as well. Church and state, good and evil, all played against the human canvas.

Beautiful. Complex and fascinating. I like the poem and the discussion.

I was fascinated to read about the connection Isaiah's fall of Lucifer and the day-star, Babylonian tale.