"These are the days now that we must savour
And we must enjoy as we can
These are the days that will last forever
You've got to hold them in your heart."
-Van Morrison, "These Are the Days"
Today, strolling through the snow covered fields of tombs and headstones, I think of language. Each image I see, I immediately attach to language. Birds are chirping. A gumball caked in ice rests on the path. Today, amidst the unexpected warm wind of a fifty degree February day, I am highly aware of my language, and highly aware of its futility.
On one hand, I recognize my language as a function of my state of mind. Last week, walking through this space on a freezing cold day, I thought in a language of discomfort, dissatisfaction, and anger. My perception of stimuli (aka 'this sucks') created my language of the stimuli. I saw the world bleakly, for I felt discomfort. Thus, my language had no bearing on the things themselves, but rather reflected my own state of mind.
This becomes even more apparent today. I am seeing the same objects--the same claw-like tree limbs, the same camouflage sycamore logs--and yet my mind constructs them with a more beautiful, admiring language. No longer do they appear as contorted demons mocking my cold state; now, they appear inviting, pointing my gaze to the great expanse of white grey clouds retreating toward infinity above.
My language for these objects has changed, for my perception of these objects has changed. Calm mind sees calm nature; chaotic mind sees chaos.
Recognizing such a reality, I hesitate to attempt describing anything physical I encounter, for I recognize I am describing nothing external. We strive to write in an unmediated fashion, where language forms an inseparable relationship with the external, independent of ourselves. But this is an illusion. Emerson's idealism provides great daydreaming and great appreciation for immanence, but a transparent eyeball is unattainable. It is always
me perceiving, regardless of how mystical my experience may be.
Then I question--does language mediate the experience, or does the experience mediate the language? Does my propensity to name, to describe, inevitable limit my perception of what is occurring? Or does what is occurring give rise to a language unique to itself? I can't help but err toward the former. To further investigate, I go to the pond where I saw three deer grazing two weeks past. I go to meditate. I trudge through the snow, over the pellety piles of deer poo, through their thin and beautifully straight tracks, and stand still. The pond is covered in snow; I fear a child would not realize it's a pond and would fall through. But no one is around except for a jogger circling the area in varying patterns.
I stand and I breathe. Large rocks rest on the pond's surface. But do they? That's how they appear. But when I think about it, that's impossible. They are far too large to rest on this thin layer of ice. Rather, they sit at the bottom of the shallow pond and rise through the water. The ice has frozen around them. My language cannot describe.
But I want it to. I want to be able to capture in words the way the rock glows with greater brightness the longer I stare at it, to the point that my eyes burn and I must blink. I want language to show how upon re-angling myself I realize the rock is shaped like an arrow pointing to the sky, and that how after such thinking I realize it is just a rock, and my own interest in arrows and the sky cause it to assume such a shape.
So I pull out my notebook and begin to write. The words flow nicely. But after two sentences, my pen stops working. The ink is full, but it won't write. I scribble furiously until the tip rips through the paper. Suddenly angered, I breathe. Surely this is a sign from the universe.
I return my gaze to the pond. Can I see something without language mediating it? I try. I think only "Breathe in... breathe out..." but beneath my thoughts I hear a soft voice saying things like "The snow cools my feet" and "a train whistle blows distantly." Then it becomes "but how distant is the train? Regardless, the sound I hear is
here, so thus I create the distance."
It's no use. My language defeats me and the few shards of Emersonian optimism I still cling to.
I turn from the pond and enter the path and decide to go a new direction to the exit. Rounding a corner, I notice something I've never noticed before.
It's a temple, or a mausoleum, or perhaps a sanctuary. It's made of marble. Three columns rise about ten feet, forming a semi-circle, rounding back into a complimentary semi-circle, a solid wall of marble. Within the openness of the circle is a small circular table, its circumference lined with rocks and sea shells. But what makes me approach the site are the engravings on the marble wall.
A snow covered stone footpath leads to its base. There, I see the wall is separated into three sections. Each person designated has the surname "Watson." My gaze first goes to the right most section, for the engraving is the briefest. A man's name, and below a date of birth with no end date. The engraving reads:
"I went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived." -Thoreau
Relevant, I think. I then look to the leftmost section. A woman's name, a single birth date, and a long poetic engraving. Why would such a structure be created for living people?
Then I see the center piece, whose linguistic engraving descends the full ten feet. Jill Watson - 1964-1996. Dead, in her early thirties, and clearly the daughter of the two names I've just read. I am standing at Jill's memorial.
Slowly, calmly, I read the inscription. As I read, I come to feel as if I know this person, as if she were a close friend of mind. The engraving described Jill as "a being that was so many things -- architect, designer, sculptor, inventor, teacher and student ... a cornucopia of creative energy and a spirit that embraced the wondrous mysteries of life," how she was shy as a child but blossomed into a woman who could talk to anyone. And the engraving ended with a message saying: "We knew the real meaning of grief when we no longer could see your bright face. We will never forget you."
I stand still for several moments, breathing deeply. As I walk home, my mind reels on Jill. What happened to her? Who was she? Could I find out? Immediately upon arriving home, I get to searching. Soon, I find an article from the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette from 2006.
Jill Watson was a teacher of architecture at CMU.While flying over the coast of Long Island, en route to Paris with a close friend, the plane abruptly exploded. Jill and her friend were among the two hundred and thirty people killed in the explosion, which purportedly occurred due to "a spark of electricity igniting vapors in one of the fuel tanks." Jill was an only child.
Her body was recovered, cremated, and interred at the Homewood Cemetery crematorium. But her parents were not satisfied. She was housed in too dark a place. So they decided to construct the memorial. It went up in 2003. I happened upon it eleven years later.
Of the memorial, Mrs. Watson said: "It has created tremendous peace for us." Still, some wounds cannot be rectified. "'You never get over it," she said. "There's a hole in my heart that
bleeds and bleeds. You learn to live around the pain as time goes on."
Now, sitting, writing, reflecting, I recognize that never before has a gravestone or
memorial affected me so. But this one did. Not because of its shape.
Not because of its beauty. Because of its language.
Maybe language cannot accurately depict the world. Maybe it's always mediated by the speaker's state of mind. That's not to say it has no power. Strong language, written as an extension of the heart, has the power to arrest, to open, to realign a wanderer's perception of his unfulfilled day.
 |
| Jill's mausoleum/sanctuary. | | | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Photo from:
http://www.post-gazette.com/life/lifestyle/2006/07/17/Architect-s-memorial-helps-family-friends-find-peace/stories/200607170106)
I
went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only
the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to
teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/henrydavid107665.html#8ZbC5mFzP2MaQGsm.99
I
went to the woods because I wished to live deliberately, to front only
the essential facts of life, and see if I could not learn what it had to
teach, and not, when I came to die, discover that I had not lived.
Read more at http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/h/henrydavid107665.html#8ZbC5mFzP2MaQGsm.99