Skip to main content
Outdated Browser

For the best experience using our website, we recommend upgrading your browser to a newer version or switching to a supported browser.

More Information

Nonfiction

On the Outskirts of Utopia

By Lana al-Majali
Translated from Arabic by Addie Leak
Jordanian poet and writer Lana al-Majali delivers a sweeping argument for the brilliance, and urgency, of poetry.

I’m not putting an end to anything
I don’t have any illusions about that
I wanted to keep on writing poems
But the inspiration stopped.
Poetry has acquitted itself well
I have conducted myself horribly.

— Nicanor Parra, “Poetry Ends with Me,” trans. Miller Williams

1

You rummage through your wardrobe, the pockets of your gray winter coats, the kitchen drawers. You contemplate the clothesline, then upend the empty vase on the table. You stick your head under the sofa and peel up the rug before finally giving up and sitting down, powerless, surrounded by chaos, wondering, What am I looking for? Have I totally lost it?

Don’t worry—it’s poetry you’re craving.

You rush to close the living room windows. You put on an extra sweater. You start up the electric heater, watch your toes turn blue, and feel chills run through your body despite the July heat. You obsess about the flu and your iron deficiency.

Don’t worry—it’s poetry you’re lacking.

Everyone goes to war in uniforms and combat gear, and you stay home, dressed in your loose white shirt, a peaceful river in your hands. They fight with rare valor on the battlefield as you water the potted plants on their abandoned balconies. They feel powerful, and you start doubting your courage.

Don’t worry—it’s poetry you’re defending.

2

Why poetry? And why now?

Because we live under the rubble of humanity. Here in this spot on the globe, where faces crowd the rooftops, looking down, and the air is dense with the smoke of heavy engines and the scent of decay, we point fingers at each other, and heaven, where our children play, is filled with vain intentions.

Because love is scarce and silence is delicate and what is the difference between poetry and love, as Ounsi el-Hajj said, except that the first gives words to silence and the second gives it action.1

Because poetry is a way of making the world mean something, or as the Chinese poet Lu Chi put it, “we [poets] wrestle with non-being to force it into being; we beat silence for an answering music.”2 And we are not alone, in our spot on the globe, to want to restore being, to find true meaning.

Because poetry, according to Aristotle, is an imitation “of things as they were or are, things as they are said or thought to be, or things as they ought to be.”3 I feel no guilt for removing “[imitation] of things as they were or are” from this definition, not because poetry exists in a bubble, as some theorize, but because I want the dreams of poetry to fly, far beyond the ceiling of this spot on the globe.

3

The poets’ crisis, a myth.

Good poets fill the earth, the world celebrates their poems, and we stone them in our countries with rock-sharp criticism and even sharper judgment. We put fresh and rotten eggs in a single basket because they’ve diverged from tribal conventions or, really, because we refuse to accept poetry as a child of its time, one who speaks that time’s language, carries its concerns, and keeps pace with its rhythms.

We threaten to strangle the prose poem in its cradle, somehow overlooking its silver tresses and deep wrinkles, and the sharp disputes of its heirs.

We bemoan new poets’ abuse of Jahiliyyah love poetry, how far they’ve fallen from singing the greats’ praises, and how they’ve abandoned truly potent poems for everyday Western gibberish. The same new poets who flee terrorist bombings with small leather cases, running from one rented apartment on the ninth floor to another one, ramshackle, on the verge of collapse. They bury a new group of loved ones in a mass grave every day. Looking into shattered mirrors, they stare loneliness in the face. They live on pizza and hamburgers in dark airport lounges.

4

The poetry crisis, a mess of papers and poor judgment.

Modern humans are the ones in crisis, not poetry. The frantic running, our smartwatches, the death toll in the breaking news ticker, the oscillating stock index—all of this and more has increased the distance between us and the immensity of poetry. The innocence of poetry. The purity of it.

The human crisis is global, not Arab. But we bury our heads in the sand and settle instead for eye-catching headlines on March 21, International Poetry Day, about the made-up poetry crisis, as myriad collective and individual efforts are made worldwide to support poetry.

The Portuguese writer Afonso Cruz introduces us to the protagonist of his novel Let’s Buy a Poet, a girl living a dry life ruled by numbers, the laws of profit and loss, and the commodification of human beings, relationships, and feelings. “It was a beautiful morning,” she writes. “The air, as they say, smelled of dollars.” Then poetry begins to spread light and warmth: “My mother shouted out three words I found incredibly poetic: ‘I’ve had it!’” As a result of that epiphany, she says, “Our lives changed dramatically—and so did I.” Finally, as she wipes the condensation from a mirror: “I tried to clear the fog from life, as the poet told us to, scrubbing away at reality until a smile appeared. I know it’s hard work—there’s too much fog, and it blurs life and distorts it. But I’ll keep trying.”

Antonio Skármeta, meanwhile, invested his time and talent into a false biography inspired by poetry, creating the world of his astonishing novel The Postman. The hero of the novel is poetry—not the poet Pablo Neruda—and normal people who become inspired, like the Chilean postman Mario Jiménez, who gets dizzy when he first hears poetry. “I was like a boat tossing upon your words,” he says, before asking the question that leaves Neruda open-mouthed, his chin “ready to drop right off his face”: “Do you think the whole world is a metaphor for something?”4

Peter Weir’s Dead Poets Society (1989) motivates me, personally, to shred all the strict critical beliefs that stunt poetry’s development. I want to be like Professor John Keating (Robin Williams), who persuades his Wilton Academy students to rip up the preface to their English textbook: Dr. J. Evans Pritchard’s key to judging poetic quality by graphing. Now I dream of including Professor Keating’s advice on our syllabi one day: “We don’t read and write poetry because it’s cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. And medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for.”

Finally, director Jim Jarmusch, in his movie Paterson (2016), gave us a cinematic prose poem based on his love of the American poet William Carlos Williams, and Williams’s poem of the same name. The film’s protagonist, Paterson, a bus driver, writes poetry that celebrates the ordinary and marginalized. Until his dog Marvin eats his poems, he focuses on the beauty in the tangible: the brand of a matchbox, people’s daily conversations, and more.

5

When Plato banned poetry in his utopian republic, he justified his point of view by saying that the poet is like the painter, who mimics phenomena that deceive the senses without understanding their Forms, or true nature, and thus that poetry, too, is an imitation, three degrees removed from the truth.

If we reluctantly accept Plato’s opinion, we also deserve to know the motives behind banning poetry, killing it, and mutilating its corpse in cities Plato didn’t build, in a spot on the globe like this one, a thousand degrees removed from the truth.

 


The epigraph is from Nicanor Parra, “Poetry Ends with Me,” trans. Miller Williams, in Antipoems: New and Selected, ed. David Unger (New York: New Directions, 1985), 43. Copyright ©1972 by Nicanor Parra and Miller Williams. Reprinted by permission of New Directions Publishing Corp.

1. Ounsi el-Hajj, خواتم (or Rings; Beirut: Elrayyes Books, 1991), aphorism trans. Addie Leak.

2. Lu Chi, “Rhymeprose on Literature,” trans. Achilles Fang, in The New Directions Anthology of Classical Chinese Poetry, ed. Eliot Weinberger (New York: New Directions, 2004), 185.

3. Aristotle, “Poetics,” https://www.poetryfoundation.org/articles/69372/from-poetics.

4. Antonio Skármeta, The Postman, trans. Katherine Silver (New York: Norton, 2008), 13.

على تخوم المدينة الفاضلة” © Lana al-Majali. By arrangement with the author. Translation © 2024 by Addie Leak. All rights reserved.

English Arabic (Original)

I’m not putting an end to anything
I don’t have any illusions about that
I wanted to keep on writing poems
But the inspiration stopped.
Poetry has acquitted itself well
I have conducted myself horribly.

— Nicanor Parra, “Poetry Ends with Me,” trans. Miller Williams

1

You rummage through your wardrobe, the pockets of your gray winter coats, the kitchen drawers. You contemplate the clothesline, then upend the empty vase on the table. You stick your head under the sofa and peel up the rug before finally giving up and sitting down, powerless, surrounded by chaos, wondering, What am I looking for? Have I totally lost it?

Don’t worry—it’s poetry you’re craving.

You rush to close the living room windows. You put on an extra sweater. You start up the electric heater, watch your toes turn blue, and feel chills run through your body despite the July heat. You obsess about the flu and your iron deficiency.

Don’t worry—it’s poetry you’re lacking.

Everyone goes to war in uniforms and combat gear, and you stay home, dressed in your loose white shirt, a peaceful river in your hands. They fight with rare valor on the battlefield as you water the potted plants on their abandoned balconies. They feel powerful, and you start doubting your courage.

Don’t worry—it’s poetry you’re defending.

2

Why poetry? And why now?

Because we live under the rubble of humanity. Here in this spot on the globe, where faces crowd the rooftops, looking down, and the air is dense with the smoke of heavy engines and the scent of decay, we point fingers at each other, and heaven, where our children play, is filled with vain intentions.

Because love is scarce and silence is delicate and what is the difference between poetry and love, as Ounsi el-Hajj said, except that the first gives words to silence and the second gives it action.1

Because poetry is a way of making the world mean something, or as the Chinese poet Lu Chi put it, “we [poets] wrestle with non-being to force it into being; we beat silence for an answering music.”2 And we are not alone, in our spot on the globe, to want to restore being, to find true meaning.

Because poetry, according to Aristotle, is an imitation “of things as they were or are, things as they are said or thought to be, or things as they ought to be.”3 I feel no guilt for removing “[imitation] of things as they were or are” from this definition, not because poetry exists in a bubble, as some theorize, but because I want the dreams of poetry to fly, far beyond the ceiling of this spot on the globe.

3

The poets’ crisis, a myth.

Good poets fill the earth, the world celebrates their poems, and we stone them in our countries with rock-sharp criticism and even sharper judgment. We put fresh and rotten eggs in a single basket because they’ve diverged from tribal conventions or, really, because we refuse to accept poetry as a child of its time, one who speaks that time’s language, carries its concerns, and keeps pace with its rhythms.

We threaten to strangle the prose poem in its cradle, somehow overlooking its silver tresses and deep wrinkles, and the sharp disputes of its heirs.

We bemoan new poets’ abuse of Jahiliyyah love poetry, how far they’ve fallen from singing the greats’ praises, and how they’ve abandoned truly potent poems for everyday Western gibberish. The same new poets who flee terrorist bombings with small leather cases, running from one rented apartment on the ninth floor to another one, ramshackle, on the verge of collapse. They bury a new group of loved ones in a mass grave every day. Looking into shattered mirrors, they stare loneliness in the face. They live on pizza and hamburgers in dark airport lounges.

4

The poetry crisis, a mess of papers and poor judgment.

Modern humans are the ones in crisis, not poetry. The frantic running, our smartwatches, the death toll in the breaking news ticker, the oscillating stock index—all of this and more has increased the distance between us and the immensity of poetry. The innocence of poetry. The purity of it.

The human crisis is global, not Arab. But we bury our heads in the sand and settle instead for eye-catching headlines on March 21, International Poetry Day, about the made-up poetry crisis, as myriad collective and individual efforts are made worldwide to support poetry.

The Portuguese writer Afonso Cruz introduces us to the protagonist of his novel Let’s Buy a Poet, a girl living a dry life ruled by numbers, the laws of profit and loss, and the commodification of human beings, relationships, and feelings. “It was a beautiful morning,” she writes. “The air, as they say, smelled of dollars.” Then poetry begins to spread light and warmth: “My mother shouted out three words I found incredibly poetic: ‘I’ve had it!’” As a result of that epiphany, she says, “Our lives changed dramatically—and so did I.” Finally, as she wipes the condensation from a mirror: “I tried to clear the fog from life, as the poet told us to, scrubbing away at reality until a smile appeared. I know it’s hard work—there’s too much fog, and it blurs life and distorts it. But I’ll keep trying.”

Antonio Skármeta, meanwhile, invested his time and talent into a false biography inspired by poetry, creating the world of his astonishing novel The Postman. The hero of the novel is poetry—not the poet Pablo Neruda—and normal people who become inspired, like the Chilean postman Mario Jiménez, who gets dizzy when he first hears poetry. “I was like a boat tossing upon your words,” he says, before asking the question that leaves Neruda open-mouthed, his chin “ready to drop right off his face”: “Do you think the whole world is a metaphor for something?”4

Peter Weir’s Dead Poets Society (1989) motivates me, personally, to shred all the strict critical beliefs that stunt poetry’s development. I want to be like Professor John Keating (Robin Williams), who persuades his Wilton Academy students to rip up the preface to their English textbook: Dr. J. Evans Pritchard’s key to judging poetic quality by graphing. Now I dream of including Professor Keating’s advice on our syllabi one day: “We don’t read and write poetry because it’s cute. We read and write poetry because we are members of the human race. And the human race is filled with passion. And medicine, law, business, engineering, these are noble pursuits and necessary to sustain life. But poetry, beauty, romance, love, these are what we stay alive for.”

Finally, director Jim Jarmusch, in his movie Paterson (2016), gave us a cinematic prose poem based on his love of the American poet William Carlos Williams, and Williams’s poem of the same name. The film’s protagonist, Paterson, a bus driver, writes poetry that celebrates the ordinary and marginalized. Until his dog Marvin eats his poems, he focuses on the beauty in the tangible: the brand of a matchbox, people’s daily conversations, and more.

5

When Plato banned poetry in his utopian republic, he justified his point of view by saying that the poet is like the painter, who mimics phenomena that deceive the senses without understanding their Forms, or true nature, and thus that poetry, too, is an imitation, three degrees removed from the truth.

If we reluctantly accept Plato’s opinion, we also deserve to know the motives behind banning poetry, killing it, and mutilating its corpse in cities Plato didn’t build, in a spot on the globe like this one, a thousand degrees removed from the truth.

 


The epigraph is from Nicanor Parra, “Poetry Ends with Me,” trans. Miller Williams, in Antipoems: New and Selected, ed. David Unger (New York: New Directions, 1985), 43. Copyright ©1972 by Nicanor Parra and Miller Williams. Reprinted by permission of New Directions Publishing Corp.

1. Ounsi el-Hajj, خواتم (or Rings; Beirut: Elrayyes Books, 1991), aphorism trans. Addie Leak.

2. Lu Chi, “Rhymeprose on Literature,” trans. Achilles Fang, in The New Directions Anthology of Classical Chinese Poetry, ed. Eliot Weinberger (New York: New Directions, 2004), 185.

3. Aristotle, “Poetics,” https://www.poetryfoundation.org/articles/69372/from-poetics.

4. Antonio Skármeta, The Postman, trans. Katherine Silver (New York: Norton, 2008), 13.

على تخوم المدينة الفاضلة

/لا أُطالبُ بوضع نهايةٍ لشيء/ لا أصنعُ أوهامًا بهذا الصَّدد”
/أردتُ أن أواصل قرض الشِّعر/ لكن الإلهام انتهى
أحسَنَت ربّة الشِّعر التصرُّف/ وأسأتُ أنا التصرُّف بصورةٍ مُرعِبَة.”
نيكانور بارَّا

1
تفتِّش خزانة ملابسك، وجيوب معاطفك الشَّتويّة الرَّماديَّة، وأدراج المطبخ. تتأمَّل حبل الغسيل، ثمَّ تعود لتقلب المزهريَّة الفارغة فوق الطَّاولة. تحشر رأسك تحت الأريكة وترفع طرف السّجَّادة، قبل أن تجلس على مقعدٍ جانبيّ؛ خائر القوى، مُحاطًا بالفوضى، مُتسائلًا: ما الذي أبحث عنه؟ هل فقدتُ ذاكرتي؟
.لا تقلق، أنتَ، فقط، تَتشهَّى الشِّعر
تُسارع إلى إغلاق شبابيك غرفة المعيشة. ترتدي كنزة صوفيَّة إضافيَّة. تُشغِّل المِدفأة الكهربائيَّة، تراقب ازرقاق أصابع قدميك، وتكابِد القشعريرة التي تسري في جسدك بالرغم من شمس تمّوز الحارّة في الخارج. تَهجِسُ بالأنفلونزا  ونقص الحديد في دمك
.لا تَقلق، أنتَ، فقط، تَتوقُ إلى الشِّعر
يذهب الجميع إلى الحَرب بملابسهم العسكريَّة ومعدّاتهم القتاليَّة، فتلزم بيتك، مرتديًا قميصك الأبيض الفِضفاض وبين يديك نهرٌ مُسالِم. يقاتِلون ببسالةٍ نادرة في ساحات المعارك، وتسقي أُصص النَّباتات في شرفات بيوتهم المهجورة. يشعرون بالقوَّة وتنتابك شكوك حول شجاعتك
.لا تقلق، أنتَ، فقط، تدافع عن روح الشِّعر

2 
لماذا الشِّعر الآن؟
لأنَّنا نعيش تحت أنقاض الإنسانيَّة. هُنا؛ في هذه البقعة من العالم، حيث الرُّؤوس البشريَّة معلَّقة فوق البنايات، والهواء مُلَبَّد بدخان المحرِّكات الثَّقيلة ورائحة عُفُونَة تبادلنا الاتِّهامات، والسَّماء مُكتظَّة
.بأراجيح الأطفال، ونوايانا
لأنّ الحبّ شَحيح والصَّمت ناحِل، وما الفرق بين الشَّعر والحُبّ، كما قال أنسي الحاج، إلا أنَّ الأوَّل.
.كلام الصَّمت، والثَّاني فعله
لأنّ الشِّعر طريقٌ يجعل العالم يعني شيئًا—أو بتعبير الشَّاعِر الصِّينّي لوتشي؛ نحنُ الشُّعراء نصارعُ اللاوجود لنجبره على أن يمنحَ وجوداً، ونقرع الصَّمتَ لتجيبنا الموسيقى- ومن غيرنا، خارج هذه البقعة من العالم، يرغب باستعادة الوجود، واستجواب المعنى؟
لأنَّ الشِّعر، بحسب أرسطو:”محاكاة للأشياء كما كانت، أو كما ينبغي أن تكون، أو كما اعتقد النَّاس بأنّها كانت كذلك”. دون أن أشعر بتأنيب الضمير لحذف عبارة “محاكاة للأشياء كما هي” من التَّعريف أعلاه؛ ليس لأنّ الشِّعر يعيش في قوقعته الخاصّة كما يزعم المنظِّرون، بل لأنَّني أريد لأحلام الشِّعر أن تَطير، متجاوزة سقف هذهِ البقعة من العالم

3
.أزمة الشُّعراء، خُرافَة
الشُّعراء الجيِّدون يملأون الأرض، يحتفي العالم بقصائدهم، ونرجمهم في بلادنا بالحِجارة النقديَّة والأحكام القَطعيَّة، ونضع البيض الطّازج والفاسد في سلَّةٍ واحدة؛ لأنّهم خَرجوا على أعراف القَبيلة، أو بالأحرى، لأنّنا نرفض أن يكون الشِّعر ابن زمنه، يتحدَّث لغته، ويحمل همومه، ويواكب إيقاعه
نُهدِّد بوأد قصيدة النّثر في مهدها، دون أن تلفت انتباهنا خصلات شعرها البيض،وتجاعيدها الغائرة، وخلافات أحفادها الحادَّة حول توزيع الإرث
نتحسَّر على تفريط الشُّعراء الجُدد بالمقدّمات الطلليَّة، وابتعادهم عن التَّغني بمآثر العظماء من أسيادنا. وتنازلهم عن فحولة الشِّعر لصالح الرَّطانة اليوميَّة الغربيَّة، الشُّعراء الجدد أنفسهم الذين يهربون من التّفجيرات الإرهابيَّة بحقائب جلديَّة صغيرة من شقَّةٍ مؤجَّرة في الطّابق التّاسع إلى أخرى آيلة للسُّقوط في حارةٍ من العشوائيّات. يدفنون ثلَّة من أحبابهم في قبورٍ جماعيَّة كل يوم. يواجهون الوحدة في المرايا المهشَّمة. يعيشون على “البيتزا” و”الهمبرجر” في صالات المطارات المُعتِمة.  

4
.أزمة الشِّعر، خلط أوراق وسوء تقدير
الإنسان الحديث متأزِّم، لا الشِّعر؛ الرَّكض المحموم، وساعاتنا الذَّكيّة، وعدد القتلى في شريط الأخبار العاجلة، ومؤشِّر البورصة المتذبّذب، كلّها وغيرها، زادت المسافة التي تفصلنا عَن شساعة الشِّعر. طفولة الشِّعر. صفاء الشِّعر
أزمة الإنسان عالميَّة لا عربيَّة. لكنّنا ندفن رؤوسنا في الرّمل، ونكتفي بعناوين لافتة في 21 آذار حول أزمة الشِّعر المفتعلة، فيما تُبذَل الجهود الجماعيَّة والفرديَّة في العالم لدعم الشِّعر، والأمثلة كثيرة
يعرّفنا البرتغالي أفونسو كروش على بطلة روايته “هيّا نشترِ شاعرًا” التي تعيش حياة جافَّة، حيث الأرقام، وقوانين الرّبح والخسارة، وتسليع الإنسان والعلاقات والمشاعر: “كان صباحًا جميلًا، الهواء كما يقولون يفوح دولارات”، ثمَّ يبدأ الشِّعر بنشر الضّوء والدّفء “صَرَخَت أمِّي بكلمتين شعرتُ بإنّهما شاعريّتان للغايَّة: لقد مللت”. /” تَغيَّرت حياتنا كثيرًا، وحياتي أيضًا“، إلى أن تُعلن قرارها في نهاية المطاف: “أسعَى لدرء سَديم الحَياة مثلما طلب الشَّاعِر أن نفعَل، نمرِّرُ اليد على الواقع لكي نرى ابتسامة، أعرف أنَّهُ عمل مرهق، فهناك كثير من البخار يجعل الحياة حادَّة قليلًا وغير واضحة، ولكنَّني سأظل أحاول
أمّا أنطونيو ساكارميتا، فقد استثمر سيرة ذاتيَّة استوحاها من نصٍّ شعريّ، في خلق عوالم روايته المدهشة “ساعي بريد نيرودا“. بطل الرّواية هو الشِّعر لا بابلو نيرودا نفسه، بالإضافة إلى أشخاصٍ عاديّين تحوَّلوا إلى ملهمين؛ مثل ساعي البريد التشيلي ماريو خمينيت الذي أصيب بدوار الشِّعر عندما سمعه أوَّل مرّة: ” كنتُ أتأرجح مثل سفينة على كلماتك”، قبل أن يطرح سؤاله الذي ترك فم بابلو نيرودا مفتوحًا، وذقنه تكاد تنفصل عن وجهه: هل تعتقد حضرتك أنَّ العالم كلّه هو استعارة لشيءٍ آخر؟  
يحفِّزني فيلم ” مجتمع الشّعراء الأموات”/ (1989) للمخرج بيتر وير، بشكلٍ شخصيّ، على تمزيق  كل معتقداتنا النقديّة الصّارمة التي تُعرقِل نمو الشِّعر، كما فعل الأستاذ جون كيتنغ- أدّى دوره روبن ويليامز- عندما أقنع طلّابه في أكاديميَّة ويلتون بتمزيق مقدّمة كتاب الأدب الإنجليزي، وهي المقدِّمة التي كتبها الدكتور جي ايفانز بريتشارد، متناولًا فيها الشِّعر، وكيفيّة الحكم على جودته باستخدام الحسابات  البيانيَّة الدَّقيقة عموديًّاوأفقيًّا، كما يمنحني حلم تضمين نصيحة الأستاذ كيتنغ في مناهجنا ذات يوم: ” لا نقرأ  ونكتب الشِّعر لأنّه ظريف، نقرأ ونكتب الشِّعر لأنَّنا أفراد من الجنس البشري. الطبّ، والمحاماة، وإدارة الأعمال، والهندسة، حرف نبيلة ومهمّة لكي نحافظ على الحياة، ولكن الشِّعر، الجمال، الرُّومانسيَّة، الحُبّ؛ هذه هي الأشياء التي نعيشُ من أجلها
أمّا المخرج جيم جارموش في فيلمه “باترسون”/ (2016)، فيقدِّم لنا قصيدة نثر سينمائيّة، معتمدًا على شغفه الشّخصيّ بالشّاعر الأمريكي وليَم كارلوس ويليامز، وقصيدته “باترسون”
بطل الفيلم “باترسون” سائق حافلة نقل عام، تستهويه كتابة الشِّعر الذي يحتفي بالعادي والمهمَّش، ويرصد الأشياء الملموسة مثل ماركة أعواد الثّقاب، وأحاديث النّاس اليوميَّة، وغيرها، إلى أن يقوم الكلب “مارفن” بتمزيق كل قصائده.  

5
عندما حرَّم أفلاطون الشِّعر داخل مدينته الفاضلة، علَّل وجهة نظره، قائلًا، إنَّ الشَّاعر مثل المصوِّر، يحاكي ظواهر الأشياء الخادعة للحواسّ دون أن يفهم طبيعتها، وبهذا فشعره تقليد، وبعيد عن الحقيقة بدرجتين
لو سلَّمنا برأي أفلاطون، على مَضَض، فمن حقِّنا أن نعرف دوافع تحريم الشِّعر وقتله والتَّمثيل بجثّته في مُدنٍ لَم يشيِّدها أفلاطون على هواه؛ مثل هذهِ البقعة من العالم والتي تبعد عن الحقيقة، ألف درجة

Read Next