Expect the end of the world. Laugh.

As I wrote on my Facebook page, this poem captures my philosophy, or at least what I attempt to aspire to. As Paul said in the Epistles, I often manage to do the opposite of what I want to do. We're all trying, though, and Berry's helping to lead the way.

Words to live by, regardless of political affiliation. Hell, who needs politics at all, after that? Thank you.

I get a horrible feeling in the pit of my stomach by saying this because I get the feeling that this may start a flame war, and I want to start off by saying that I like this poem, I really do... with that being said, stylistically, this poem is similar to many poems of Maya Angelou, and yet I recall you writing that her poetry was kitsch.

m.e.graves,

this poem is similar to many poems of Maya Angelou, and yet I recall you writing that her poetry was kitsch.

Very true. However, MA's poems are generally disordered, while WB's are generally refreshing and rightly ordered. But I agree - both are pretty poor in quality when viewed stylistically. You have to view WB as you would the Shire - simple yet true - to get into it.

Yet there is one example of a WB disordered line in this poem: Praise ignorance, for what man
has not encountered he has not destroyed.

Love these very rightfully ordered lines, however:
Be afraid
to know your neighbors and to die.
And you will have a window in your head.
Not even your future will be a mystery
any more.

and

Swear allegiance
to what is nighest your thoughts.

mdavid--

I think you are missing the point of the "ignorance" line too.

I think what he means is more with retaining a proper sense of mystery with our growing knowledge. Basically humanity vs. technocracy. If the world (including human individuals and "humanity", hence the consumer references earlier in the poem) is all just something we (or advertisters/'experts'/politicians) can look at, examine and then make a field of science out of, then we usually end up bungling it up. (E.g. modern deterministic psychology and its reductionist view of humans.)

However, if we don't just view nature (esp. people) as just raw material for our ends but something to be used in a stewardship mentality, with a degree of piety and reverence (hopefully for is maker, more than the creation), then we will accept we may be technologically advanced but still ignorant of many things and 'ends' (like the future!), and then not destroy it as we use it.

Last post, sorry. In order to avoid the impression that my last post was a quote, rather than my feeble attempt at summarizing, here is the actual quote, in Lewis' words. Please compare to the W. Berry lines. I think recognizing these limitations of man is a key to deep conservatism:

"There is something which unites magic and applied science while separating both from the wisdom of earlier ages. For the wise men of old the cardinal problem had been how to conform the soul to reality, and the solution had been knowledge, self-discipline, and virtue. For magic and applied science alike the problem is how to subdue reality to the wishes of men: the solution is a technique; and both, in the practice of this technique, are ready to do things hitherto regarded as disgusting and impious—such as digging up and mutilating the dead.

If we compare the chief trumpeter of the new era (Bacon) with Marlowe's Faustus, the similarity is striking. You will read in some critics that Faustus has a thirst for knowledge. In reality, he hardly mentions it. It is not truth he wants from the devils, but gold and guns and girls. `All things that move between the quiet poles shall be at his command' and `a sound magician is a mighty god'. In the same spirit Bacon condemns those who value knowledge as an end in itself: this, for him, is to use as a mistress for pleasure what ought to be a spouse for fruit. The true object is to extend Man's power to the performance of all things possible. He rejects magic because it does not work; but his goal is that of the magician..."

http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/abolition3.htm

I have to agree with m.e.graves that it's not very good as poetry, however much one might agree with the sentiments. But Berry is capable of good poetry, as well. See, for example, the poem he uses as proem to Remembering: Three Short Novels:

...Keep my mind within that Mind
Of which it is a part, whose wholeness is
The hope of sense in what I tell. And though
I go among the scatterings of that sense,
The members of its worldly body broken,
Rule my sight by vision of the parts
Rejoined. And in my exile's journey far
From home, be with me, so I may return.

Why, pray tell, is this stylistically "poor" and not "good poetry"? Maybe it's just my simple "ignorance", but simple poems expressing beautiful truths seem pretty good to me.

To all who commented:

I don't think I missed the meaning of his line. I've read most of WB's works, and I think I know his mind well. I got it. I just think he is disordered here (and on a few other issues as well I've read in his prose). Probably for the same reasons y'all love it; heck, I would expect nothing less, considering the values and views of the average Rod reader. And that's ok.

Mdavid, now you've got me curious. Please explain why you think the line is disordered. We've explained why we like it, so it seems only fair. Especially since you've just lumped me in with "the average Rod reader." I DO read this blog regularly, but would be hard-pressed to pin down its "average reader." More than any blog I know, the readers here are all over the map in terms of views and values.