I don't suffer from a futility of words
but from the suffrage of meaning.
nuances aside
is not acceptable comprehension.
the dictionary is a book
from the death of meaning,
as still shots from the past
implied to be relevant.
meaning should be slippery and evocative.
it should take you up into the provocative,
not hammer you
to the cross of understanding.
we all want wishes, whimsey,
windy and wings.
words should be flags
in the breeze for saying it.
meaning should be a levity in an upliftment,
the want for sizzle of the mind-stir,
and thrive of the feelings generated.
sure, one can name the stream
but not the flow.
one can say whatever as if topically driven
but the adventure is into the source
who said it.
a conversation is just a ropes-course
of listening,
if not for the presence of others
in the discourse.
we all need speak-abouts
as a way of entry into another,
to find ourselves nested
vibrationally in another.
as long as language is allegiance
to that cause,
words may serve us well,
even if meaning has moments,
as if words deliver,
but the tonal is blessed
with the calling wanted,
while words are just a delivery system
of that means.
if only our ears were that good
at feeling what is said,
as understanding makes claims
to extensively comprehend
the topic at hand . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment