“Where loss encourages the will for survival, a human will each believe that there is more to do, more to gain, and more for the stride. Such is how life functions, in contrast to the forced contentment from death. Or, in love? How does love also evoke the stillness of gratitude?”
She is the waltzer to this afternoon, embedded in a fervency alike the notes played upon the piano; and even he, a man with his fingers so engraved in the keys, as he seems to touch them a lot like the skin of a certain woman. And that woman, is the mover and the waltzer. She is the memorable beauty to strike bleakness out of the depressed gentleman, and cause him to rumble from the new light founded in his morose heart.
What is the maker of the memory? It must be the woman, the “she” spoken as either the “she” or the “her” around the atmosphere of the parlor, about nighttime, when guests are caked in candlelight.
The woman of any newest memory is from that moment, locked in the mind, the branching and stretched blooded veins, and nothing is represented as straight. It is said, or has been said, that a woman enhances herself in Lesbia, before straightness is met through a man. And what else better describes beauty than from Lesbia, the female-to-female, when the heart is cradled by a heart; and that is to speak on the term “possibility” when in the realm of that exact organ.
A heart, the realm of the unlimited, is where this certain woman, whose name is Beatrice, forms a curve with an arm.
So alike the curves from hips, the curves from Beatrice’s mouth, and the whispers spoken in the idleness of this afternoon, given from her cherished emotion. She walks to where the pianist has accompanied himself in his notes, to next accompany himself in her fragrance.
It entices him to an extent, so that in length, he turns his head towards her features, that are, at this moment, fluid and fervent in the many folds from eyelids and pouting lips. Her lashes are brought down to the lower lid, and remain there for but a moment; as then, her cheeks spread across them the crimson current, bleeding an emotion similar to stark resonation, the feeling of association with belonging; as then, her lips are curled to the area beneath her nose, with nostrils that find her scent to be, as well, pleasing.
“I had loved a woman,” says this man named Joshua, his feet carrying his body towards a certain uncertainty. He had indeed loved, bared himself wonderfully to a child of his own worship. He had been God upon a time, and gave birth to his pride; the flesh of his own flesh, that is, and made himself smile. Has one ever envisioned God to ever smile?
God is not a thing of power, were ever power to be attained as is, because power has no creation of itself without a viewing of a creation’s suffering; and as the Atheist would adore their emotion of denial, for whatever compiled list of emotions creates denial, sees God as the one to ignore suffering. A compelling sight of ignorance is drawn into the Atheist’s own mind, to say that God ignores suffering. A child, much alike to Joshua’s once-beloved he beheld for himself, is never a child for long. Much alike how Joshua abandoned his beloved, God abandons Mankind for their independence. The pitiful anger an Atheist throws to the sky finds itself nowhere fast, only swimming in the deepest darkness of a limitless universe; and that anger is only a depiction of a proof, that to be angered at God for his supposed refusal to cleanse suffering, proves the angered one to be eternally the child. Therefore, in comprehension of this, God becomes only ever-so powerful, in sight of suffering, in hopes of its thwarting of God’s own throne, in expectation of perhaps a certain someone to die and then ascend.
Joshua had abandoned a woman to her independence, and many movements have encouraged this, for a woman to abandon love, and abandon unity with a man; though, has God ever held the hands of a wife?
What has God built to destroy besides everything he sees with eyes that so many will believe to disbelieve does not exist, as such eyes are seemingly never opened? The sun, and what of the sun, besides warmth, and the warmth we find to open our own eyes after a night’s period of sleep?
Oh, love; such an emotion that awakens; as such occurs for a woman when she is kissed. Beautiful beauty. Beautiful recognition. Flesh rises when it is kissed, and denial only ever surfaces when depression strikes a man down to kiss the soil.
A man is in love with death, not in the act of stooping to kiss, though in the act of loss; to be a pauper is when a man would weep. And Joshua has lost, though of his own accord. A society of Democracy is now London’s breath upon the cold skin of this melancholy town. It is a society of eternal choice, of the uncertainty that comes from never an answer to show itself.
Beauty rapidly falls apart when it is not sustained by the support of love.
A man is in love with a woman when he desires to root her. In place, her desire for exploration is cast aside, and every dance she yearns for becomes wrapped in silence; a dance in silence, that is, and her place becomes the roots for a man’s belonging for her. A man is not in love with a woman when he desires to see her set free. In place of that rooting, she is married with Satan, or deception, and she makes her mark never in sight of God, but of countless opportunity.
For a woman is more-so the opportunist than ever a man was; and a modern realm for a world, especially for Joshua’s hometown of London that has embraced Democracy, has only sought to utilize the essence of the opportunist, so that work is rapid.
A thirst, a burning, a quenching; for the fires of love cannot be quenched, though the first of lust burn out on their own. What has a woman, for any world, in any society, desire for herself? Is it eternity in the arms of a truthful someone, or is it the many placed beams of support, that raises tall a fragile skyscraper, to indicate revolution and endless change?
How long will Joshua continue to travel?
To walk, upon the toes that were once there to see their cleansing in the running waters of a bathtub. And now, to merely stumble over the airy nature of his own depression; and such depression that is a past thrown forward.
He raises his head, during this moment, to espy the walkway before him. A marvelous sight of complete loneliness seems to be now his future.
For what has a man to do with freedom? It is a nothingness to him.
A man becomes the slave, while a woman becomes the asset, for a world that speaks of politicians as saviors.
Politicians have been the leaders of corruption, and nothing more. Love is the only weapon to cleanse; and from this factual sliver of evidence to what has been toyed with, strangled and buried, where are the books with the opening pages to remind all of it?
With what Joshua, as well, espies before him, is a river. In the metaphorical sense, it is another way to depict that road of loneliness, previously mentioned. Though, it is also a way to describe a place of uncertainty.
Of a man and his uncertainty: it is the sight of a globe rotating on the spine of disorder.
Love a man, and he will find himself to make a decision; and to take that decision will reflect upon him as himself never dwelling in eternity to make a decision; and this means, that should a man ever take a moment to decide, he will be forever in love. Though, should he ever take an eternity to decide, then he will be forever in Hell.
Offer freedom through love, to the man, and nothing more. Offer freedom to a woman, and she roams, and nothing more; or a woman will find herself crawling in filth, and still believe herself to hold power.
“I am death,” says a woman, whose power enables her to be that opportunist, repeatedly mentioned, now. “I am love,” says a woman, whose power enables her to cleanse the blood from the responsible man.
Joshua quits his walking, finally.
He has found something that strikes his interest to heart.
Empathy is the emotion of the personal. The snow and its cold are where people are buried. Beneath its flakes, there is the death of where people sleep. We have noticed of the towns and cities that are spread across the earth, that sympathy is now the emotion used for when one deserves to be equal. In death, we are equal. In love, we are equal.
Like a flower that
failed to bloom, and remained as a bud, there is a certain woman with the name,
Katharina, only about as beautiful as the black orchid, grown in Asia. She
prowls these streets in France, in the city of Reims, cradling a child of no
In love, we are
equal. For God, we are equal. A scientist will dig for truth, because a
scientist has no choice but to see their own feet. They refuse to be blinded by
God. It is because they believe God holds no truth.
The lack of a
reality makes either denial or yearning.
Truth is the flesh, separated from God, or love, so that what is noticed is only the body. As Adam and Eve, who were once nude, before betraying God, their bodies were risen from the soil, and from death, or the soil, came the life that we behold for beauty. Beauty, which is the truth or the flesh, made shocking, when exposed. Katharina is a woman of no love.
“Little to no love…”
Without love, she
cares little for what occurs about her. That which surrounds her holds no
interest to her wandering stare. She is in love with no purpose for love,
besides the cradled infant in her arms. An infant of no name, and certainly no
There are flakes
that descend and fall to land upon her nose and cheeks. They lay there against
the warm skin, to then melt and blend themselves in with the blackened tears
that wash from Katharina’s eyes.
She is surrounded
by the stares of the people of Reims.
She is surrounded
by their eyes.
Glares that have
witnessed her deformed appearance. An appearance that is stricken by grief. A
loss to which has touched her heart and has tainted the ruby orb into black
coal. Metaphorically, this would mean that there is something she flees from;
and as a woman will leap from one thing to the next, she will soon return to
Outside of a
woman’s home, there is the world. It is because a woman’s emotions, as
important as they are to her, branch throughout the world as temptation.
Femininity and temptation make business thrive. Temptation creates the fuel of
lust to make beauty an alterable thing. A changeable thing, because love cannot
ever be used. The limitations in love become an awareness to any human, when it
is simply stripped away.
The home of a
woman is the heart, itself. The love; and the streets away from it, are the
veins. Are we as one body? As a species, we are as one body, and the roads that
led out of Eden, were endless.
God has no wife,
because He has no home, besides Heaven. For a man will make his home, a woman’s
heart. God would have to make his home, as everyone’s heart.
Temptation is for
flesh. Love raises flesh. After love is abandoned, there is flesh exposed to
the cold. Warmth no longer makes flesh warm. A shelter, a home, a shield, or an
encasement, makes the flesh warm, through love. Modesty is the love. Beauty is
the flesh. When love is gone, there is flesh exposed; when flesh is torn
through, the human has died.
is the cold stone withdrawn from the evermore cold river and held close to her
face so that she may examine its appearance. If winds run against it, it would
not become colder.
Love is the
emotion of modesty.
Love does not show
itself, so therefore, God would not show Himself.
To the woman, and
her cravings or yearnings, would a man show himself, as God is asked to show
Himself? A craving, a saving, and a woman who pleas to the Lord above. In
turning away, woman is betrayed by God, or a man, and beauty is revealed.
A woman’s pride,
or even the downfall of any love that centered herself, comes by way of
following those veins throughout a city.
She walks, Katharina, down an endless road, because she has nowhere to turn, and no time to cease her pacing.
“A vein is as any other…”
Her face holds the
appearance of possession.
Possessed by the
limitations in love. She has exposed her warm flesh, no longer warm to the
shelter of a home, and open before the descending flakes of snow. Like a canvas
drawn with a nude for reveal, shock and controversy are there for viewers.
She walks with the
infant enclosed in her cradling arms.
Her only love is
The roads are
She follows them
like the veins from her heart. When a woman moves her arm, she moves a vein.
When a woman moves her leg, she moves a vein. When a woman desires freedom, she
doesn’t desire love.
encases, and imprisons a woman in a home. For a man, love traps him to the
study and examination of a woman. She may see what she sees, but he cannot see
anything. To pierce his eyes, would be simple. To pierce her eyes, would take
What is Katharina?
She is a woman who
wanders. The road she wanders is as any other vein, as the sympathy to which is
offered upon a passerby. A road and its paupers are met by the sympathetic
Katharina offers a
degree of sympathy to a pauper who passes her. Though, as he passes on the
endless road, the sympathy acts as the road. No intimacy is shared between
them. The road is as any other vein. The sympathy for the pauper treats the
pauper as any other pauper.
What would hurt
And the pain would
oftentimes be mistaken for pleasure.
Q: You say that sympathy is the only utilization of any form of government?
A: It is correct.
Q: Why is that?
A: There used to be a time when the common American would empathize, not sympathize, with their nation. Understand, this is purely a psychological argument. This was during the time when only men were allowed to storm on foreign soil, during a heated war. Psychologically speaking, men went to war to “free their lands” and this means to keep the weak free; that is, to keep women free. Empathy was in their hearts, and such battle cries were there for inspiration. What America’s founding fathers fought for, was for the government to fear its people, not for the people to fear their government. When the people benefit the nation, the people love the nation, through empathy. When the government benefits the nation, the government cannot understand the individual, or individualism, so therefore, the common American is neglected of their ability, which relates to their ability to work and prove themselves.
Q: You mean that when a population of people use empathy for their nation, then the people are seeing the nation as a one?
A: That is correct. A population of people who see their nation as a one, will be the same as an individual viewing another individual as a one, and never part of a group. A nation’s government, whose leadership views its people as a one, will again, never see its people for individuals. Individualism is left to die, and the government becomes the one.
Q: And this means that the people will, though unknowingly, empathize with their government?
A: For the same reason that a child will look after his or her own mother, in return for the shelter that the mother had offered, by her home, then such a government is therefore, seen as a parental figure. Purely psychological, again, and for a population of people to see their nation, not its leaders, as offering shelter, will mean for the population to empathize and love their nation. This all forms the difference between submission to a government, and submission to a nation, and its individuals. The government would have no choice but to submit to its army of citizens.
Q: And if the people submit to their nation’s leaders?
A: That would be the same as such a nation of individuals remaining as children. Every American that loves animals more than people, subconsciously believes in the innocence that they, themselves, long for, by way of being ignorant. To know nothing, and let a war rage on, or to allow their home to burn, and not react, is epitome of American apathy. As children, and their leaders as a “parental figure” means for such Americans to never mature and become as intelligent as their leaders.
Q: And to the men who protect their nation, or protect their women?
A: When men no longer protect women, it is a singularity of people, a neutrality of people and their inspiration, to ever want to be raised to the height of the nation’s leaders; and the men who once protected women, now protect themselves. It is psychological, because when men protected women, soldiers protected their nation; and this means that men kept their women free, and soldiers kept their land free. The fertility of a woman and her place as a mother, and a nation with its place as a Motherland, makes freedom necessary for the nation and its people, not for the leaders.
Q: Anything else?
A: The basis behind Socialism and its creation of poverty is a war between development and poverty. This is a war between the Primate Brain and the Reptilian Brain. A war between the primate and the reptile. A war between development and underdevelopment. A war between the mind and the heart. A war between leadership and Liberalism. A war between the rich and the poor, as it has always been, for millennia. Two singularities, with one who are rich and the other who are poor, where the rich grow taller and the poor die off.
“It should be evident that in the embrace of the common ‘opinion’ that such answers to a problem, would never be a true answer. That the question would be more prominent than the answer. That the questions, for how much a human breeds, and for how curious a child behaves, would be more vast in number than the answers. Can a human return to a one? Can a human return to the universal? Can a human ever once again, comprehend the wisdom in seeing, in perception, and in vision; and in such sights, know that the solutions are infinite and never will solve the limitations of life?”
“The vulnerability that love creates for the withered soul, is the breakdown of pride. A world devoid of trust, is a world that seeks to right the wrong to the self; to repair the self; to sculpt the flesh; and to renew the heart. In respect, there is far more safety than to be in love. For with respect, one is both feared and fears themselves. The feared one will do something drastic, and will soon bury their guilt, while love will raise all truths from the heart to the highest point, though is out of reach. The loving one will have a warmth, that is unquenchable by all rivers and oceans, by all tears and sorrows, able to break the proud one so that the impossible happens; so that water mixes with fire.”
Q: You have mentioned that despite Feminism believing itself to better marriage for women, that it was inevitably to destroy the entirety of marriage?
A: It is correct, because Feminism had a main ideal, and that ideal was discontent. The essence behind love is to make a human not want for more, other than the one who they’ve devoted themselves. Love does not make a human want more, and because Feminism has made a woman want more, then marriage inevitably would have succumbed, as it has done.
Q: Could you elaborate on why love is never to be met with discontent?
A: It is because marriage is there as a lock, and bound together, no two of the ones who are married should ever part from the other. Through the marriage, the ‘leaving of the house’ initiates the process of longing, and the forcefulness of patience. A man lacks the most patience over a woman, and his inevitable ways with discipline, does not make him the patient one. Over a man, a woman will listen to words, and words entice the utmost out of patience. Love cannot, or rather, should not be met with discontent, due to how love operates in the sense that love offers rest. Love offers relief, away from the stresses of life.
Q: And on why Feminism would have inevitably succeeded in destroying marriage, and even love?
A: It is because the most discontent find ways to make use of things. And the most useful of things, are in fact, the most useless of things. This is love, the most useless thing, because one is not meant to look upon family through lust. Discontent makes the human want more, and in wanting more, one makes use of tools. When in lust, a human is out of love, and in the process of wanting more, and that is either a child, or escapism away from stagnancy. Creation, that is, to make art, and therefore, the artist is always the one who is discontent. A world that wishes to create further stagnancy is a world that is seeking the other form of equality.
Q: What form of equality is that?
A: There are only two forms of equality: love and death. Love, as the former, is the higher equality. Death, as the latter, is the lesser equality. Meaning, love is raised, and death is lowered; or rather, love raises, and death lowers. A skeleton, when relating to death, is just as any skeleton, by the bones. Through flesh, and through love, we recognize life, the breathing, and the emotions, because we abandon the dead, save for the memories of their life. Through flesh, a human will recognize their beloved, just as a skeleton, were it to walk, would recognize another skeleton as the same, and be a slave. It is so, because a slave has no way to distinguish his misery from another slave. In today’s world, death has grown to be the new form of equality, because truth, or a woman, or flesh, is never raised. This is Socialism, because death, or poverty, is the only other form of equality, besides a love for God, or the love for a husband, being the love for a father.
Q: You say that to seek the “evidence of God”, one must look no further than upon themselves and their yearnings?
A: What have we of the “Second Coming”? It can only mean that such an event is similar to any other event in one’s life, that involves the “return of love”. As well, the “loss of virginity” to a woman reveals a certain void in her, one that has not yet been filled by the “returned lover” who had taken it. Should it be that such a man who took, or rather, stole a woman’s virginity had only done so, for the sake of taking it, then the “Second Coming” then becomes the yearning. To “look upon themselves” as you quoted of me, is the evidence of yearning. One doesn’t at all seek the “evidence of God” unless through humanity. A machine is impossible in such a task. “God” is always only either denied or longed for, in the return upon the weak, could they be a woman, who desire that void to be filled.
Q: Then, the “evidence of God” has only to do with humanity. How does a scientist comprehend such an ideal?
A: The scientist can only comprehend what changes consistently. Therefore, the scientist, as a scientist, can only comprehend science. The scientist, as a human, will comprehend love, through humanity. For a human inevitably believes in God when in love, and when in love, a human should find that their love is unchanging, much like God. Love should not change, or otherwise when it does, it was only because discontent met love on a path. Everything unchanging dies, and becomes unrecognizable, when it changes. We describe the “face of God” as linked to those we love. And, in the same fashion, those we love should always be recognized.
Q: How is science not ever able to discover the “evidence of God”?
A: It is because science represents the “changing” while God represents the “unchanging”. God is called “unfathomable” or “omniscient” or “perfect” and all such words, because God is unlike the ordinary human, who continually seeks change in their own imperfect lives. As well, God is the God of both love and death, not just love. Such things, both love and death, are invisible to life, especially death. Though, the one thing that puts a halt to life, is death. And the one thing that puts a halt to discontent, is love.
“The ‘Age of Reason’ as it was dubbed in the 18th century was the beginner of dishonesty for the current day. Any man or woman who utilizes reason against intuition, has turned what should be a judgement into an analogy. The ‘judgement’ is the honesty. The ‘reason’ or the ‘question’ is the ‘dishonesty’ or ‘confusion’. The 18th century’s ‘Age of Reason’ brought about the rising of business and industry, though also brought about the downfall of human honesty. It is because a decision made instantly over something, would be deemed as insight, over what incessantly changes through reason, when it comes to long-term development. Intuition is, therefore, the blatancy that resonates with honesty and the human commitment, as one cannot ‘think about love’ anymore than such an emotion could be made academic, or anymore than one can say they only ‘partially love someone’. To love, or to be honest, must be an instant display of vocabulary, and never require a time to think about an answer to the question. For as it is among those seeking honesty, the questioner is always the ‘confused’ one, and is the one perhaps reasoning the question to themselves.”
Addiction forms a barricade before burden. And the addiction only forms itself as an addiction, when the persistence to face the responsibility of one’s faults, is kept. That “barricade” will form, through the addiction, though when the effects of the addiction wear off, then the pain rushes into the mind, so that the heart becomes affected.
The heart is affected by the mind, while the mind, in return, is affected by the heart. This is a vicious cycle. It is only a thought that creates an emotion. The mind is a pounded gong, while the heart listens to the mind’s echo. In return, the heart is affected by the echo enough so that the mind feels the heart’s pain. This is to say that the mind should be more sympathetic than the heart, though is also to say that the mind will create a greater effort to show sympathy over the heart.
That the mind has to create positive thoughts of sympathy for the heart to listen, is meant to be in place, for there to be healing. Though, the addiction is the barricade between the mind and the heart. The pain that the mind endures, is only due to the mind’s continuous instability. It is while the heart is always renewed and refreshed and reborn, that the mind shows this instability. The Saint will declare themselves as “reborn” when they relieve themselves of burden, and this was the mind dominating the heart. The Demon will declare themselves as a “deceiver” when they show the promise of power, and this is intelligence manipulating the weak.
Such a barricade between the mind and the heart is revealed when the mind cannot control the heart through an effort of sympathy. When the heart shows sympathy, it had only been because the mind showed it, first. When pain rushes in, the addict will reach for the addiction and rebuild the barricade so that the mind cannot tame the heart. The barricade both stops the pain from the mind to the heart, as well as stop the mind from taming the heart so that an addiction is not needed.