Jesus's Words

The Instant, No. 7, August 30, 1855

back  |  next

Why does "man" love the "poet" above all?

and

why, speaking in a godly sense, is precisely the "poet" the most dangerous?

ANSWER: Precisely for this reason is the poet the most dangerous, in iia godly sense, because man loves the poet above all.

And for this reason man loves the poet above all, because he is the most dangerous. For it is an ordinary accompaniment of illness to desire most vehemently, to love most of all, precisely that which is injurious to the sick man. But, spiritually understood, man in his natural condition is sick, he is in error, in an illusion, and therefore desires most of all to be deceived, so that he may be permitted not only to remain in error but to find himself thoroughly comfortable in his selfdeceit. And a deceiver capable of rendering him this service is precisely the poet; therefore man loves the poet above all.

The poet has to do only with the imaginative powers, he depicts the good, the beautiful, the noble, the true, the sublime, the unselfish, the magnanimous, etc., in a mood as remote from reality as imagination is. And at this distance how charming is the beautiful, the noble, the unselfish, the magnanimous! On the other hand, if it is brought so close to me that it would compel me as it were to make it reality, because he who depicted it was not a poet but a man of character, a witness to the truth, who himself made it reality — frightful! That would be unendurable!

In every generation there are very few so hardened and depraved that they would have the good, the noble, etc., clean done away with; but also in every generation there are only very few so serious and honest that they truly wish to make the good, the noble, etc., a reality.

"Man" does not desire that the good be so far away as those first few, but neither would he have it so near as those last few.

Here is the place of the poet, the beloved foundling of the human heart. That he is, and how can we wonder at it ? For the human heart, among other qualities, has one which, to be sure, is rather rarely mentioned (but this after all is obviously the effect of the same quality), the quality of refined hypocrisy. And the poet is the fellow who can play the hypocrite with men.

That which, if it is made into reality, is the most dreadful suffering, the poet is able to transform dexterously into the most refined enjoyment. To renounce the world in reality...is no joke. But, while secure in the possession of this world, to revel in sentiment along with the poet in a "quiet hour," that is the most refined enjoyment.

——And it is by this kind of worship we have reached the point of being all Christians. That is to say, all this thing about "Christendom," Christian states, lands, State Church, National Church, etc., is removed from reality by the whole distance of imagination, it is...a conceit, and, Christianly, a conceit so pernicious that we may apply to it the proverb which says, "Conceit is worse than pestilence."

Christianity is renunciation of this world. This is the theme of the professor's lecture, and then he makes lecturing his career, without so much as admitting that this after all is not Christianity. If it is Christianity, where then is the renunciation of this world ? No, this is not Christianity, it is a poet's relation to Christianity — The priest preaches, he "witnesses" (No, I thank you kindly!), that Christianity is renunciation, and then makes preaching his remunerative profession; he does not so much as admit to himself that this is not Christianity. But where is the renunciation? Is not this then also a poet-relationship?

But the poet plays the hypocrite with men — and the priest is a poet, as we have seen. So then the official worship is to play hypocrite — and to attain this great blessing the State naturally does not hesitate to spend money.

If hypocrisy is to be checked, the mildest form in which this can come about is for the "priest" to make the admission that this after all is not Christianity — otherwise we have hypocrisy.

What therefore is stated in the title is not quite true, that the poet is the most dangerous thing. The far more dangerous thing is that one who is only a poet is for that called a priest, gives himself out to be something far more serious and true than the poet, and yet is only a poet. This is hypocrisy in the second degree (raised to the second power). Hence there is needed a police expert who, merely by pronouncing this word, by saying that he was only a poet, could get in behind the scenes of all this mummery.

back  |  next