A Meditation from a Terrible Archer

A Meditation From A Terrible Archer

By Kaley LeBlanc

A Meditation From A Terrible Archer

By Kaley LeBlanc

Dedicated to my Dad and Mom, David and Maria LeBlanc

Acknowledgements

Special thanks to Professor Fannie Bialek Teacher Assistent Safa Khatib, and Teacher Assistent Emily Cosgrove

A Meditation From A Terrible Archer

By Kaley LeBlanc 5/7/2023

Growing up, I watched Love and Reason fight. Who was right? Who was wrong? Whose side was I on?

Growing up, Love commanded me to love, But without any reasons, I refused. Igniting a fuse.

Growing up, Love forbade me to doubt. I stood stout, And vehemently began to question. This raised the tension.

I arrogantly renounced my minority. As I had refused to forfeit my curiosity, In doing so, I scoffingly dared, To mock Love’s care.

Enlightened, Alas

I was so crass

That I left in accordance with Reason! Love watched me commit treason. Independence tested my foundation. It left me in emotional isolation. Afraid of my stability, I learned of my fragility.

Growing up,

I hated Love because love justified terrible pain. Yet, I idolized Reason, who turns out, did just the same.

Growing up, Had I been wrong?

About who was right and who was not?

I heard laughter from the top of the Hill, Obnoxiously pointing out, my division of the will.

And then I got an inclination, A product of my decaying imagination, Could it be A frank theory, Of not sacrifice or mutuality, But love as the reason?

Of both capable of being understood by me! Of not exclusivity, But of radical unity Of Love and Reason.

I offer one amendment, To ease some discontentment. Of A fundamental pursuit, Of gratitude.

The Purpose

“A Meditation From A Terrible Archer” is a Poem by Kaley LeBlanc that aims to describe Kaley’s perception and understanding of her relationship with her parents. Through her studies in the Washington University in St. Louis’ class, Love and Reason, taught by Professor Fannie Bialek and assisted by Emily Cosgrove and Safa Khatib, Kaley was finally able to give her reflections a deeper meaning. In conjunction with her new philosophical foundations and years of entries in her diaries, Kaley derived a poem to best capture her understanding of the class’s themes through her familial experiences. She hopes that her application of the material will help others questioning or trying to understand their relationships gain some clarity.

The Importance Of A Poem

Kaley deems poetry to be a perfect medium to convey her reflections. Through playful rhymes and metaphors describing a topic of importance, poetry has the capability of being both serious and silly. In this way, the paradox of a serious and silly piece of literature complements addressing the topics of love and reason within the format. Seemingly opposites, love and reason can indeed exist in union. The metaphor continues as Kaley assigns Love to be her mom and Reason to be her dad. This poetic liberty creates a story of Love and Reason that has both foundations in Kaley’s personal life and academic philosophy. The motion of thinking metaphorically prepares the reader’s mind to think abstractly, which is critical in understanding the complexity of love, reason, and their relationship.

Poems, like art, are capable of capturing emotions. However, poetry offers more clarity for the reader as the words serve as a foundation and guidance for their thoughts. Trying to grasp the emotions that come with these topics, Kaley uses particular vocabulary and sentence structures to evoke different feelings. As the viewers read the poem in their own way, they create a personal interpretation of the work expanding its meaning.

Finally, a vast majority of people have the time and the capabilities to read a poem. Whereas, only a niche group of people get exposed to the academic writing that the poem explicitly and implicitly addresses. While some readers may not grasp the philosophical depth of the poem, most will be able to understand the surface-level argument (the most important part) without needing any prior knowledge of philosophy.

About The Author

Kaley Maria LeBlanc was born in Florida, United States of America to David and Maria LeBlanc. David Michael LeBlanc was born to Joe and Margaret LeBlanc in a town outside Boston, Massachusetts. Maria Guadalupe LeBlanc Bravo was born to Maria Guadalupe Anguiano Garibey and Agustin Bravo Pimentel in Zamora, Michoacan, a ranch eight hours outside of Mexico City. Kaley’s family moved all around the world from Barcelona, Spain to Shanghai, China. After returning to America, they moved three more times within the United States. When Kaley was 12, her older sister, Tracy, went to boarding school. Kaley’s dad traveled a lot for work, leaving Kaley and her mom at home for the majority of the time. Consistent with Mexican ideals, Maria LeBlanc was incredibly religious and very strict. Kaley grew to resent her mom for dragging her to church and making her obey without question. Kaley saw her father as the stark opposite. In coherence with Western ideals, David LeBlanc was independent and not religious. Whenever Kaley showed a struggle in school, her father advised her to control her emotions and use reason to bare through it. Kaley’s admiration for her father’s emotional stoicism, caused her to scoff at her mother’s lively emotions and tender care. Tension grew so high between the mother and daughter that when the opportunity arose, Kaley, as advised by her father, went to boarding school at 15. This time away from her parents made her question what she previously knew about her mom and dad. The isolation and confusion from being independent caused her to question why she had been so belittling of her mother. Kaley realized that she needed faith in the future and in the process to be able to get through these difficult moments. It became clear to her that the literal concepts of love and reason did not have to exist as opposites but in conjunction. Kaley became incredibly grateful for both the love that her mom established within her and for her ability to use reason that her dad taught her.

Growing up, I watched Love and Reason fight. Who was right?

Who was wrong?

Whose side was I on

What Does This Mean?

Title

Kaley deemed her work a meditation after reading those of René Descartes and getting exposure to those of Teresa of Avila. Kaley used the method as a vessel to get from a place of doubt to one of understanding. Terrible Archer came from a class discussion where she learned that an archer missing the mark is a metaphor for a sinner. In an attempt to embrace Christian realism, Kaley deems herself a sinner. Not in a demoralizing manner, Kaley, instead, uses it to embrace hope and accept her imperfections. Yes, she has, at times, missed the mark of understanding. Yet, she is still capable and worthy of being loved in the agape sense.

Lines 1-5

Who is right and who is wrong is a question in pursuit of the truth that defines love and reason as opposites. As many early philosophers aimed to have a clean theory of the universal free from particularities, so did Kaley when deciding if she sided with her mom or dad.

Growing up, Love commanded me to love, But without any reasons, I refused.

Igniting a fuse.

Growing up, Love forbade me to doubt. I stood stout, And vehemently began to question. This raised the tension.

Lines 6-15

Søren Kierkegaard writes, “to love is duty…You shall love” and he also mentions that God and love are one and the same(40). Through these two thoughts, Love commanded me to love gains two meanings. In the first case, one can see love, as Kaley uses it in the rest of the poem, to represent her mom. Her mom, commanding [her] to love, meant Maria was telling Kaley to have faith and believe in the great Good. In the second case, love can be a proxy for God. The sentence then becomes God commanded me to love referencing Kierkegaard’s acknowledgment of God’s commandment to “Love your Neighbour as yourself” (34). When Kaley questioned her mom, she replied, like Kierkegaard, to not question or doubt her faith so that she did not weaken it, “he forfeits by his curiosity” (27).

I arrogantly renounced my minority. As I had refused to forfeit my curiosity, In doing so, I scoffingly dared, To mock Love’s care

Lines 16-19

I arrogantly renounced my minority occurs at the beginning of the stanza where Kaley previously used the phrase growing up and where she proceeds to use the word enlightened. This draws an explicit connection between Kant’s meaning of enlightenment as a “Human being’s emergence from his self-incurred minority” and her understanding of it as growing up (17). Here, Kaley criticizes the arrogance of modern philosophers in thinking people can be fully independent deeming dependency as a juvenile state. This critique is supported by Adriana Cavarero’s, “Kant and the Newborn”, where she pokes fun at Kant’s radical idea of independence.

Enlightened, Alas I was so crass

That I left in accordance with Reason! Love watched me commit treason.

Lines 20-23

In this stanza, where Kaley sees herself as enlightened, she becomes crass. While she argued vehemently or passionately in the past, Kaley had now become cold, distant, and insensitive. This relation of words is an attempt to convey that love is filled with emotions while reason is void of them. Thus as Kaley ran to reason (her dad), she “locked [herself] out from love” and lost an emotional connection (Kierkegaard, 24).

Independence tested my foundation. It left me in emotional isolation.

Afraid of my stability, I learned of my fragility.

Growing up, I hated Love because love justified terrible pain. Yet, I idolized Reason, who turns out, did just the same.

Lines 24-30

Independence tested my foundation references René Descartes’s “First Meditation: Concerning Those Things Which Can Be Called into Doubt”. In his meditation, Descartes questions everything he thought was true. His distrust of his senses causes Descartes deep confusion about reality. Kaley, too, became confused about the truth when she went to boarding school. Experiencing emotional panic, she needed to call her parents for help. She had a stark realization that she could not live without the support of her family. Furthermore, Johann Gottfried Von Herder points out in “This Too a Philosophy of History” that love, like reason, can be used to justify non-favorable decisions.

Growing up, Had I been wrong?

About who was right and who was not? I heard laughter from the top of the Hill, Obnoxiously pointing out, my division of the will.

Line 31- 34

I heard laughter from the top of the Hill refers to Herder when he writes in “On the Change of Taste’’ that “Nothing is pleasanter than to occupy a serene temple well fortified by the established doctrine of the wise, whence look down on others, and see them stray in every direction” (249). The phrase then connects to Harry Frankfurt’s idea of the division of the will. Kaley did not know what she wanted or could not decide what to do. Would Kaley choose to side with love or reason?

And then I got an inclination, A product of my decaying imagination, Could it be A frank theory, Of not sacrifice or mutuality, But love as the reason?

Of both capable of being understood by me! Of not exclusivity, But of radical unity Of Love and Reason.

Line 35-41

Decaying imagination is an explicit connection to Thomas Hobbes’s “Of Imagination”. Kaley’s decaying imagination refers to her memories and reflections. Once she was able to analyze her life with her parents and then without them, she learned that love and reason do not have to be opposites concepts in tension but rather in harmony. Not love as Kierkegaard’s sacrificial love, not love as Andolson’s love of mutuality, but love as Frankfurt’s frank theory of love giving one all the reasons to do. Kaley’s mom expressed her love through emotions and faith and Kaley’s dad expressed his love through doubt and reason.

I offer one amendment, To ease some discontentment. Of A fundamental pursuit, Of gratitude.

Line 42-48

The particularities of how love and reason work together, are still to be explored. However, Kaley has found one thing to be potentially true. To embrace love and reason in their totality, Kaley needed to be endlessly grateful for their presence.

Bibliography

Andolsen, Barbara Hilkert. “Agape in Feminist Ethics.” The Journal of Religious Ethics, vol. 9, no. 1, 1981, pp. 69–83. JSTOR.

Cavarero, Adriana. “Kant and the Newborn.” Inclinations: A Critique of Rectitude. Translated by Amanda Minervine and Adam Sitze, Stanford University Press, 2016.

Descarte, René. “First Meditation: Concerning Those Things Which Can Be Called into Doubt.” Descartes: Meditations on First Philosophy, Edited by John Cottingham, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996, pp. 12–15.

Frankfurt, Harry G. The Reasons of Love. Princeton University Press, 2009.

Gottfried Von Herder, Johann. “On the Change of Taste.” Philosophical Writing. Translated and edited by Micheal M. Forster, Cambridge University Press, 2002 (1766).

Hobbes, Thomas. “Of Imagination,” Leviathan. Edited by Richard Tuck, Cambridge University Press, 1651.

Kant, Immanuel. “What is Enlightenment?” Practical Philosophy. Translated and edited by Mary J, Gregor, Cambridge University Press, 1996 (1784).

Kierkegaard, Søren. Works of Love. Translated by Howard and Edna Hong, HarperPerennial: ModernThought, 1847, pp. 1-9, 35-57.

Kittay, Eva F.. “Love’s Labor.” Essays on Women, Equality, and Dependency, edited by Linda J. Nicholson, Routledge, 1999, pp. 1-19.