makyo
/
zk
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

update from sparkleup

This commit is contained in:
Madison Scott-Clary 2022-05-25 20:35:06 -07:00
parent 29736fdc05
commit 2bd96a572c
2 changed files with 9 additions and 3 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

4
writing/3/terrifying/index.md
View File

@ -3,3 +3,7 @@
Wherein Maddy waxes rhapsodic about how love is right at the margin of the terrifying through the lens of Time War and also Rilke.
* [.] [Intro](intro.tex)
* [ ] Blind strife
* [ ] Assessment
* [ ] Engagement
* [ ] I wish I could see your triumph

8
writing/3/terrifying/intro.tex
View File

@ -19,10 +19,10 @@ Give to us today bread for the day ahead; And excuse us our debts, just as we ha
\noindent(Matthew 6:9--13, \cite[10]{dbh-nt}\footnote{I figured I'd spoken too much on the topic of translation already for it to be worth yet another go, but here I am again. You can surely remember my delight in Weinberger's idea of translator as active participant, and yes, this plays as much a role here as it did with my choice of Alter's translation of the Hebrew Bible, but I'm leaning on Hart's translation here for its distinctly modern and universalist take on the New Testament. Hart himself is a staunch universalist, his book \emph{That All Shall Be Saved} neatly lays his reasoning bare, and much of the focus on ineffable love feels applicable to the discussion of the ineffability of love, no matter how secular.})
There are two faults within this system of classification. The first is the sheer amount of territory covered by each of the categories. Prayers that fall under \emph{help} may cover requests for deliverance from hardship, requests for plenty, requests for salvation, or even the panicked gaspings toward God that come with terror. \emph{Wow} prayers may come from terror as well, or perhaps beauty\footnote{I'm not sure there's any clearer explanation than that which Rilke provides:
There are two faults within this system of classification. The first is the sheer amount of territory covered by each of the categories. Prayers that fall under \emph{help} may cover requests for deliverance from hardship, requests for plenty, requests for salvation, or even the panicked gaspings toward God that come with terror. \emph{Wow} prayers may come from terror as well, or perhaps beauty. I'm not sure there's any clearer explanation than that which Rilke provides:
\begin{verse}
Who, though I screamed,\footnotemark would hear me among the ranks \\
Who, though I screamed,\footnote{I dearly love this translation by Will and Mary Crichton \emph{except} for this word. Will, my friend, 'cry' is \emph{right there}. So many before and after you chose it. Who, though I cried out...but alas, we come round once more to translations and translators.} would hear me among the ranks \\
of the angels? And even supposing one of them took me \\
suddenly to his breast, I would perish within his \\
overpowering being, for the beautiful is right at the margin \\
@ -33,7 +33,9 @@ and does not destroy us. Every angel is terrible.
\parencite[11]{duino}
\end{verse}
\emph{Ein jeder Engel ist schrecklich}, he writes, and I cannot think of a prayer more powerful than one spoken from the limen of terror and beauty we call awe.}\footnotetext{I dearly love this translation by Will and Mary Crichton \emph{except} for this word. Will, my friend, 'cry' is \emph{right there}. So many before and after you chose it. Who, though I cried out...but alas, we come round once more to translations and translators.}. And \emph{thanks}? There is too little bound up in that word for us to hang our hats on. I've marked none of the Lord's Prayer as \emph{thanks}, despite the very nature of its praise.
\emph{Ein jeder Engel ist schrecklich}, he writes, and there is perhaps no prayer more powerful than one spoken from the limen of terror and beauty we call awe.
And \emph{thanks}? There is too little bound up in that word for us to hang our hats on. I've marked none of the Lord's Prayer as \emph{thanks}, despite the very nature of its praise.
The second, however, is that there are categories that is misses by virtue of the way it thinks about prayer. It comes at it so literally! How could it possibly hope to encompass the headiness of ritual? The comfort of mantras? The familiarity of well-worn words that linger with us through liturgy? It is a goal-oriented, Christian (indeed, largely Protestant and Evangelical) view of prayer.