inventions
too many of us are offended
become demoralized and uneasy
when we are reminded of “the other”
of “its” masteries, in particular
while we keep on indulging
in “its” stellar gifts to “the self”
dissatisfaction
impatience
dejection
blame the aware few . . .
why stir up history
as it was written
as it is taught
for “the self”
by “the self”
why pull the brakes ever
of our speeding time-shuttle
to acknowledge “the other” at last
with “its” long-overdue recognition
contemplating thus our own human blood
God forbid!
if we so did . . .
we then might realize
for a passing moment at least
how abundantly the “self” benefited
for centuries not for a mere several years
from “the other” and “its” still-shedding labor-tears . . .
discoveries
our lives would not have been the same
had the “other” not invented or discovered
nor had left intact for the misuse by “the self”
“its” surname bleeding still
taken from “its” sweat and blood
together with all else that to this day does remain
donations
un-written . . .
yes
the subject is Sumerians
of Ancient Mesopotamia
“the cradle of civilization”
how often do we come across
the oft-cited term to belong
to a lobbying cultural entity
as if it were for it to own
no surprises there!
another always seems to bear
the highest octave to raise
so it gets the praise
our history books bear witness
yet those writes
suffer from a mono-lithic lens
thus we reserve the honor
for one or the other
as long as it is not
by no means!
“the other”
furthermore
we cheer from the sidelines
turning into a music buff of some sort
though we know
deep down we know
blame the aware few . . .
why alter a make-belief
a working bed-time story
with all its esteemed fake glory
the invention of
Agriculture
intact with its Plow
and System of Irrigation
the Wheel
the Chariot
the Sailboat
the System of Time
the Concept of Astrology
as well as that of Astronomy
the Map
Mathematics
Urbanization
the Cuneiform
the First Form of Writing
yes
the First Form of Writing
but . . .
our history books
continue to claim
Nay! Oh, nay!
The Sumerians?
Of Ancient Mesopotamia?
The Cradle of Civilization?
Nay!
No way!
. . .
feel free to fill in the blanks
with names that are yet to make the ranks
out of the abyss of intentional omission
for their past and present donation
after all should that not be our mission
unless of course we seek our due commission
blame the aware few . . .
© hülya n. yılmaz, April 18, 2018
[Published by Inner Child Press International in the May issue of the fifth volume of The Year of the Poet]
hülyaswritings 
“The world does not deliver […]”
“Stop worrying about your identity and concern yourself with the people you care about, ideas that matter to you, beliefs you can stand by, tickets you can run on. Intelligent humans make those choices with their brain and hearts and they make them alone. The world does not deliver meaning to you. You have to make it meaningful.”
~ Zadie Smith ~
Please click for Photo Credit
While I agree with what I have concluded to be the gist of this statement -only we are responsible for lending/creating/imagining/discovering/etc. a meaning to living, there are certain conceptualizations with which I am not in agreement. (There, of course, is a good chance that I am reading too much into the intended message of the assertion quoted here. Still, I am set out to indulge myself in some furthering thoughts. I want to hope you will bear with me.)
Firstly, the reference to “identity” seems to be rashly dismissed. Is it not one’s identity that -in its evolving states -is the most essential work we have upon us, for us? A look at the Identity Theory brings to our attention; or rather, re-introduces the concept of “Consciousness“. How would we arrive at the capable state of ‘concerning’ ourselves “with the people [we] care about”, if we were to “[s]top worrying about [our] identity […]”? Is it possible for an individual to achieve ‘consciousness’ regarding others, if s/he were not aware of the self in the first place?
Then, there is the reference to “[i]ntelligent humans” who are singled out in their ability to “make [t]he world meaningful”, but, who is intelligent, according to which standards, according to whom, where? “The world”, after all, does not comprise a singular entity. From various regions of the globe, sets of established communities of the field of psychology have had and continue to have ongoing debates on the subject of Human Intelligence. Under their work of expertise, multiple theories have been conceived, designed, refined and advanced upon. None is a closed case as far as evidencing unanimously, let alone throughout the entire world what ‘human intelligence’ is, nor can such finding be claimed when the numerous past decades are concerned.
I believe many of us would agree that [t]he world does not deliver meaning to [us]” and that “[we] have to make it meaningful.” However, the contention that such outcome depends on the intelligence of an individual appears to be an exclusionary thought process at its best.
Too psychological of a commentary? Perhaps. Then again, perhaps not. Would you like to spend some thought on it and then share your deliberations for all the readers’ sake but also for mine?
Share this:
Like this:
2 Comments
Filed under Reflections
Tagged as consciousness, human intelligence, meaning of/in life, personal commentary, Zadie Smith