• About
  • Books

memoirandremains

memoirandremains

Tag Archives: Mirror

The Image of God as Mirror

12 Saturday Jun 2021

Posted by memoirandremains in Image of God, imago dei

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

image of God, Imago Dei, Mirror

As it happened in my reading I came to K. Scott Oliphint in Covenantal Apologetics making a point consistent with the point made by Kuyper and discussed in the previous post 

“This is one reason it might be helpful to remember the analogy of a mirror image. If the image of God is analogous to an image in a mirror, then we realize that the original must be at all times present, in front of the mirror, in order for there to be an image at all. But we also see that the image, as image, while reflecting the original, depends at every second on the presence of the original for its very existence. If the original is no longer present, the image is gone. Image is essentially dependent, for its existence and every one of its characteristics, on the original. The original, however, is in no way dependent on that image in order to be what it is.”

Shakespeare Sonnet 3 Images and Mirrors

06 Tuesday Aug 2019

Posted by memoirandremains in Shakespeare, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Adam, image, Mirror, Shakespeare, Sonnets

[1]       Look in thy glass and tell the face thou viewest

[2]       Now is the time that face should form another,

[3]       Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest,

[4]       Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother.

[5]       For where is she so fair whose uneared womb

[6]       Disdains the tillage of thy husbandry?

[7]       Or who is he so fond will be the tomb

[8]       Of his self-love, to stop posterity?

[9]       Thou art thy mother’s glass, and she in thee

[10]     Calls back the lovely April of her prime;

[11]     So thou through windows of thine age shalt see,

[12]     Despite of wrinkles, this thy golden time.

[13]     But if thou live remembered not to be,

[14]     Die single, and thine image dies with thee.

 

This sonnet continues the theme of the first two: an encouragement to marry and have children.

The distinguishes mark lies with the concept of “image”.  The idea of mirror/image appears in the first & third stanzas as well as the couplet. It also brings in a new element: the subject of the poem is himself the image of another.

 

First Stanza

[1]       Look in thy glass and tell the face thou viewest

[2]       Now is the time that face should form another,

[3]       Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest,

[4]       Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother.

 

 

The first line sets up the conceit for the rest of the poem. The image which he sees in the mirror becomes a separate-self, capable of replication. That face which he sees in the mirror itself should form another face of the same image.

 

This is a subtle and curious idea: Shakespeare is not saying, Make another “your”. Rather, make another in your image.  In this respect, Shakespeare is following in the language of  the Bible

 

Genesis 5:3 (Geneva)

Now Adám lived an hũdreth and thirtie yeres and begate a childe in his owne lickenes after his image, and called his name Sheth.

 

Adam and Eve were created in the image of God. Adam has a son is created in his own image.  And so it is not the man, but the man’s imagewhich is replicated. Thus, it is the face in the mirror which should replicate the image. The man himself will be no more; but the image which appears in the mirror will persist.

[3]       Whose fresh repair if now thou not renewest,

[4]       Thou dost beguile the world, unbless some mother.

This language also harkens back to Genesis. If the man will not renew the image (by having a child), he will “unbless” some potential mother by not sharing a child with her. In this, there seems to be a hint of Eve’s joy in getting a child (after the murder of Abel by Cain):

 

Genesis 4:1 (Geneva)

1 AFterwarde the man knewe Heuáh his wife, which cõceived & bare Káin, & said, I have obteined a man by yͤLord.

 

Second Stanza

 

[5]       For where is she so fair whose uneared womb

[6]       Disdains the tillage of thy husbandry?

[7]       Or who is he so fond will be the tomb

[8]       Of his self-love, to stop posterity?

 

This stanza fits neatly into two characters: the woman who will not have a child with him and the man who foolishly destroys himself.

 

So who is the woman so beautiful …

 

What is an “uneared womb”?  There is an obsolete use of the word “ear” which means to plow:

1 Samuel 8:12 (Geneva)

12 Also he wil make them his captaines over thousandes and captaines over fifties, and to eare his grounde, and to reape his harvest, & to make instruments of waire, and the things that serve for his charets.

The Merriam Webster dictionary offers this instance:

 

: to form ears in growing

the rye should be earing up

Or:

 

⌜SECOND⌝MESSENGER

(FTLN 0467)      [54]     Caesar, I bring thee word

(FTLN 0468)      [55]     Menecrates and Menas, famous pirates,

(FTLN 0469)      [56]     Makes the sea serve them, which they earand

(FTLN 0470)      [57]     wound

(FTLN 0471)      [58]     With keels of every kind. Many hot inroads

(FTLN 0472)      [59]     They make in Italy—the borders maritime

(FTLN 0473)      [60]     Lack blood to think on ’t—and flush youth revolt.

 

William Shakespeare, Antony and Cleopatra (Folger Shakespeare Library, n.d.), 39.

 

Therefore an “uneared womb” would be a woman who had not been “ploughed” – this matches the image of “tillage”.  The image of the field from the previous Sonnet is here returned and applied to the potential mother.

 

So what woman is there who is so beautiful that she would refuse to be the mother of your children? (She does not want to a farmer in her field. I don’t image this imagery would be very welcome in conversation with a woman today – and I have no idea that it would have pleased a woman four hundred years ago. But he also was not writing to the woman).

 

[7]       Or who is he so fond will be the tomb

[8]       Of his self-love, to stop posterity?

 

“Fond” is an old fashioned word for foolish. It was used as late as Wordsworth, “What fond and foolish thoughts”.

 

Who is someone so foolish that he will be his own tomb, but refusing to bear children?

 

Third Stanza

 

This stanza picks up the elements of image from the first stanza and mother from the second stanza:

 

[9]       Thou art thy mother’s glass, and she in thee

[10]     Calls back the lovely April of her prime;

[11]     So thou through windows of thine age shalt see,

[12]     Despite of wrinkles, this thy golden time.

 

He himself is the image of his own mother – and replicates her spring. He is a joy to his own mother by recalling to her, her own “April of her prime”.

 

The “mirror” is here replicated and transformed into a “window” – glass being the common medium of both.

 

At present, he looks into a mirror and sees his own image. But with a child, he sees through the glass as a window into the image replicated in another human being. There is an advancement in the image.

 

The language of mother is used to put him into relation. He has come from a mother (like Eve having a son), and he will be like Adam replicating his image.

 

The Couplet:

 

[13]     But if thou live remembered not to be,

[14]     Die single, and thine image dies with thee.

 

If he dies single – without taking a mother to him – he will not be remembered. And that image in the mirror will be nothing being that image in the mirror. He can replicate his image in a mirror only as long as he lives. But he if has a child, the image is replicated outside of the mirror – it becomes visible through a window (as he was visible to his mother).

Soren Kierkegaard, The Mirror of the Word, Part Two

24 Tuesday Apr 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Exegeting the Heart, Kierkegaard, Kierkegaard, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Executing the Heart, heart, James 1, Kierkegaard, Mirror, Obedience, Reading, The Mirror of the Word

“What is Required in Order to Derive True Benediction From Beholding Oneself in the Mirror of the Word?

“First of all, what is required is that thou must not look at the mirror, not behold the mirror, but must see thyself in the mirror.”

At this point, Kierkegaard is getting to what the Word is supposed to do to one when it is read: specifically, what does this passage in James say the Word is supposed to do when it is read. He explains this by referring to “reading and reading”:

Thus the lover [who had received a letter] had made a distinction between reading and reading, between reading the dictionary and reading the letter from the lady love.

This means that when we read the Word, we must not treat the Word as the object and we the subject in control: rather, the Word is the subject and we are the object being examined. — This is not bare subjectivity of meaning — this does not mean that there are thousand “meanings” in the text and thus all ‘readings’ are equally valid. It would be easy to understand Kierkegaard as advocating some sort of hyper-reader-response theory:

So the lover made a distinction, as regards this letter from his beloved, between reading and reading; moreover, he understood how to read in such a way that, if there was a desire contained in the letter, one ought to begin at once to fulfill it, without wasting a second.

Think now of God’s Word. When thou readest God’s Word eruditely — we do not disparage erudition, far from it — but remember that when thou does read God’s Word eruditely, with a dictionary & c., thou are not reading God’s Word …

There are words on the page, that is true. But the reading does not stop at understanding the words: the words are there to do something to the reader. The one who reads the lover’s letter is not merely engaged in an intellectual exercise; the reading is undergone to change the reader.

There is a “point” to reading the Word:

And if there is a desire, a commandment, an order, then (remember the lover!), then be off at once to do accordingly.

To which one may object, but what of all the obscure and difficult passages. Kierkegaard answers brilliantly: well there are many things you do understand. Tell you what: do all the things which you in fact can understand, and after you have done all that let us consider the obscure passages.

This gets to a matter of Hebrews 5:14. There is a correlation between our ability to uderstand the Word and our obedience to the Word. Our correspondence in life to the Word, our correspondence in affection transforms our ability to understand:

14 But solid food is for the mature, for those who have their powers of discernment trained by constant practice to distinguish good from evil.

Cognition

Behavior                       Affection

Each of these three affect the other. Kierkegaard is explaining that if we read merely for cognition, we have not read the Word. It is not inert knowledge which one seeks, but transformation. And James 1:22 explains that one transformation which must take place is that the Word must illuminate and expose the reader: the reader is being examined and seen when the Word is rightly read.

How then is this done? What does it look like in practice?

The Seducer’s Diary (Kierkegaard, Either/Or)

10 Friday Feb 2017

Posted by memoirandremains in Kierkegaard, Philosophy, Psychology, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Either/Or, Kierkegaard, Mirror, Philosophy, Psychcology, Renoir, The Seducer's Diary

22352827002_2f0fbbcc27_o

(Renoir, Girl Looking Into Mirror, 1912)

She has not even seen me. I am standing at the far end of the counter by myself. A mirror hangs on the opposite wall; she does not reflect it, but the mirror reflects her. How faithfully it has caught her picture, like a humble slave who show his devotion by his faithfulness, a slave for whom she indeed has significance, but who means nothing to her, who indeed dares to catch her, but not to embrace her. Unhappy mirror, the can indeed seize her image, but not herself! Happy mirror, which cannot hide her image in its secret depths, hide it from the whole world, but on the contrary must betray it to other, as now to me. What agony, if men were like that! And are there not many people who are like that, who own nothing except in the moment when they show it to others, who grasp only the surface, not the essence, who lose everything if this appears, just as this mirror would lose her image were they by a single breath to betray her heart to it?

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior 1.1.6
  • Addressing Loneliness
  • Brief in Chiles v Salazar
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior, 1.1.5
  • Draft Brief on First Amendment Protection

Categories

Archives

Recent Posts

  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior 1.1.6
  • Addressing Loneliness
  • Brief in Chiles v Salazar
  • Thomas Traherne, The Soul’s Communion With Her Savior, 1.1.5
  • Draft Brief on First Amendment Protection

Blog at WordPress.com.

  • Follow Following
    • memoirandremains
    • Join 630 other followers
    • Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
    • memoirandremains
    • Customize
    • Follow Following
    • Sign up
    • Log in
    • Report this content
    • View site in Reader
    • Manage subscriptions
    • Collapse this bar
 

Loading Comments...