Continuer sur Netlog

Il reste secondes

Blog / Hymns Of Life

samedi 23 avril 2011 à 14:22




I have once listened to hymns of life sung by birds of Freedom in sacred woods. So what? What I am trying to say is that such hymns sung by such birds, albeit few and rare, have been faithful to the promise they gave and now continue to hail. One of the hymns they celebrate is "Sapere aude" which basically means this: "have the courage to use your own understanding."

What reasons have we for hoping against emotionally atavistic stances ironically targeted towards the future? The idea is this: when the past calls for a meeting with the future in the province of the present, the future seems to be arrogant and boastful in character and looks at the past call, accordingly, with exaspiration. The present, not able to understand what is happening because of politicians, nevertheless purports to reconciliate between them, moves back and forth, taps out insightful elements from the past, brings them up to theory and practice, studies the expediency, and imparts the results obtained thus far to the future.

The future refrains for a moment from its pride and prejiduce and gets to know how unity, not division, between past and present has managed to deliver a present perfect beyond the simple.
Now, by virtue of the present, the future changes and takes towards the past so modest, sincere and negotiated a stance. Unity, not division, will make the difference now towards a future perfect that will have obtained by the time unity becomes not a means to an end but a spirit persistently calling for a proper meeting of past, present and future in the making in the present progressive now safely geared towards the future.

Here, thus, are the questions:

What is Freedom?
What is Love?
In the questions
There is the answer.
But is it safe to say
they now belong to this part
of the world: TUNISIA?
But see, can Freedom come about
without Love?
Can Love obtain and entertain
without Freedom?
Can paths of Life cross again
without decoded signs of Love
encoded in signs of hatred?
Seekers of Truth,
The Freedom we seek to seize
is Freedom with Love.
Neither more nor less.
For never has darkness
concealed sparkling stars above.
And Flowers have never come
and gone without a promise of spring.
Brothers of Truth,
Enough is enough of fearing.
Enough is enough of tearing.
Keep the Love of Truth.
Keep the Freedom of souls.
Keep the beautiful Revolution
Of Hearts against the scams
of tamed minds and have
The courage to use your own
Understanding: "Sapere aude".

Chokri Omri

It is worth pointing out, by way of elucidation and explanation, that the dictum “Have the courage to use your own reason!”, used above, (in Latin sapere aude!), is the battle cry of the Enlightenment. It was articulated by Immanuel Kant in his famous article ‘What is Enlightenment?’ (1784). Obstacles that can stand in our way in achieving ‘maturity’, i.e. thinking for ourselves, are manifold and have to do with: the self, politics and society, as well as culture. These are problems that concern academics as much as anyone else: In a letter to his sovereign Kant declared freely that he believed Rousseau to be correct in saying that rulers only tolerate those intellectuals who are happy to simply “adorn our chains with flowers” – as many do. The greatest difficulty lies in motivating people to shake off immaturity: “It is so easy not to be of age. If I have a book which understands for me, a pastor who has a conscience for me, a physician who decides my diet, and so forth, I need not trouble myself. I need not think, if only I can pay – others will easily undertake the irksome work for me.” Immanuel Kant writes:
"Enlightenment is Man's emergence from self-imposed tutelage, that is to say, from the inability to use the intellect without guidance by another. It is self-imposed if its cause does not lie in a deficiency of the intellect but of the courage and determination to use it autonomously. Sapere aude! Have the courage to think!" (I. Kant, Was ist Aufklärung:).


Commentaires 3

Tu dois te connecter pour poster un commentaire. Si tu n'as pas encore de compte, inscris-toi tout de suite !

  • 30

    saphirymene1987 14 mai 2011

    When I read your poem, a scent of jasmine wakened my neurons. However, it was a scent of jasmine heavily jasminized: at a certain moment in the poem, I felt like you are imposing freedom on love and love on freedom so that freedom is no longer free.
    Plus, you wrote "the freedom we seek to seize" and in this way you committed an involuntary hegemonic act on your own poem. Firstly, by using the definite article "the", you emptied freedom from its freedom as you immured the word into the cage of the known whereas freedom pertains more to the world of the unknown. "The" denotes uniqueness, one-ness, and concession which run against the very ethics of freedom.
    freedom is without "the". It is as free as the air contained in the "f" sound, free without "f". Second, the word seize is slightly strong in this context because the verb orbits around the idea of appropriation and possession. freedom when possessed is no longer free
    Thirdly, by deploying the imperative form ("keep"*3), you gave orders; you closed down the range of possibilities and alternatives: you oppressed freedom.
    Moreover, I think that the poem does not need any punctuation. Punctuation is a law. laws are conditions. freedom should not be under conditions. By punctuating your poem, you put obstacles to the freedom without the "the" that your poem is celebrating, and you curtailed ( the) freedom of the poem from itself. In so doing, you imprisoned the poem within the poem.
    Another remark on punctuation is the use of capitalization, Why Freedom with capital F? a small "f" would be more free than a capital "F" where two sticks are handicapped by one stick in a manner that the word is handicapped, freedom is not free. freedom without a full stop , nor a question mark , neither a capital letter. freedom is NOT.
    One final remark, the poem is written as one block and the lines are not free from each other. the arrangement of lines obfuscates the very idea of freedom. The poem should be free from itself, free from poetry , free to go about the world freely, freeing it without preaching freedom.


  • 31

    chokri_omri 13 mai 2011

    - saphirymene1987:
    GREAT!!

    Thank you. Please post your critical commentary.


  • 30

    saphirymene1987 13 mai 2011

    GREAT!!

Ta note : 0
pas de note