Is Love the Only Muse?
By sharonaworks
@sharonaworks (3)
Japan
October 10, 2007 5:06am CST
The famous quote by Plato reads as follows: "At the touch of love everyone becomes a poet."I tend to agree. Speaking from personal experience, my first poem was definitely inspired by an emotion most people refer to as "love". That isn't to say that my first work was all pink hearts and sugary words. In fact, the absence of love or the desire for love has been a muse for most everyone. Hurt, devastation, loneliness also are muses, but they still touch on the "umbrella emotion", love.
One could argue that poems about death or self-improvement are of a different muse. And yet. A counter-argument is as such: what about the death of a loved one? Even an envisioned death of oneself is out of love (or lack thereof) of him/herself. The same idea applies to self-improvement (also: self-pity) poems, since it is out of love (or lack thereof) for oneself, or a desire to be loved.
What about hatred poems? Hatred for a person or an object is still attention to said person(s) or object(s). The mere fact that you would give your time in hating something is out of love for hating someone/something. One feels pleasure (aka "love") in hating.
What do you all think? Can every literary work (especially poetry) be condensed into the ever-broadening emotion, love?
2 responses
@crazypumpkin (501)
• Philippines
15 Oct 07
I hate to disagree, although when I first discovered my love for writing, "love" was my favorite topic. But as I grow older, I find that even mundane conversations can serve as a seed from where a good story grows.
@billy_shears (144)
• United States
11 Oct 07
What an interesting question! I think perhaps emotion itself is the muse. How many writers write in deep depressions? Only most of them! How about mysteries and blood and guts vampire stuff? Maybe poetry, but Bukowski often writes about anything but love. I think there's a sort of inner desire to write that surpasses anything to do with feelings towards other people.
