poetical poots and SK

My Dad suggested that my blog reveal me to be "a seeker." I told him I would enlarge on that.
I am a seeker in the same sense that Walker Percy and Flannery O'Connor would be


This would be the situation in "Waiting for Godot." Much of the dialogue is spent in trying to explain things one to another. They also explain that "to have lived is not enough--they have to talk about it." At the end of the play ,. SEE BELOW--the ghost in this machine has totally trnsmixed the paragraphs. You will have to work at unravelling this--sorry--think of it as a prose poem or a long Kierkegaardian sentence to be unravelled!
 Poems can suggest by an oblique mechanism but do not instruct. 

 In other words, poems are a matter ofexploration not explanation. In that sense, anyone  who embarks in the poetics fields will be a kind of seeker--especially experimentally, to stretch the limits of language, create neologisms, and to be less than totally penetrable. Poetry can explore even politics but not prosaically or all of its effect will be lost. (I will excuse the satiric for the moment.) Garcia Lorca's political self was well-shrouded in fantastic word combinations; I think that was what kept him from being executed for at least enough time to leave a legacy of fascination that goes well beyond Franco or the limits of human understanding.

SEE ABOVE--with no guarantees that stuff hasn't been left out!!!

–as I have always like to think–in an oblique manner rather than a literalist prosaic fashion. Poems are not confessionals--at least not the best ones. One has to do some work rather than just imbibe--as such they are not the ideal form of entertainment unless they are sagas etc. Knight of Faith that one has to go through this stage and exhaust it. It is my theory that this is what occurred to T.S. Eliot and W.H. Auden and a host of others, particularly poets who are after all seeking the ineffable. "Poems aren't for teaching; they insinuate."--From Maureen N McLane on the back cover of Poetry magazine in the May 2012 issue.
SEE ABOVE, it is interesting that the two tramps do remain faithful believers, after all was said and done, and, "They do not move." They are resigned to Infinity/eternity and, for the moment anyway, have stopped making any inquiries. This fits the Kierkegaardian definition of the absurd; without the negative connotations brought to the fore by later secular thinkers.
Secular critics bring their best guns to the works of Walker Percy and  do not even aim remotely at the works or the man. I could call this the Secular Sieve which strains out all great or infinite matters and lets through only the most Trivial Pursuits--rather like dry sand. THE END by Mr. Thomas MoreLater and Mr. Smoketoomuch.  . I would be probably in the category in which most Christian believers fall into, which would be Kierkegaard's, "Knight of Infinite Resignation.", The sort of person that typically wants to be reductionist in the sense that people, I think particularly males, want to have lots and lots of explanations which they can understand in order to reduce reality to their level where they can "handle it." Actual reality of course is overwhelming not only to the senses but to the intellect and tends to paralyze the will, as well.