Chapter II of the Visitor starts with a smooth flowing sentence that is not so smoothly understood.   This simple sentence is instrumental to understanding The Visitor.

                                                                        In fact, this sentence is so essential to understanding The Visitor, that the earliest draft versions of the cover-page contained this quote.  This was actually one of the earliest lines of the novel which came into existence, and provides some insights into the mind of the author during the process of writing The Corvus Chronicles.

In this blog I am only going to focus on the first half of that first sentence..."In the midst of confusion and near the conclusion of where reason had stripped away truth,..." Those few words will be sufficient to provide an intermediate deep dive into interpreting The Visitor.

Warning: this interpretive dive is not for the faint of heart.  I highly recommend hyper-imbibing with a nice Merlot prior to attempting this dive.  To interpret this first half of the first sentence, it is helpful to break it into three separate “chunks”. 

1.      In the midst of confusion

2.      and near the conclusion,

3.      of where reason had stripped away truth.

• In the midst of confusion:

The Visitor itself is a story which starts near the end…(the eve of death of the Visitor). However, The Visitor is only one of the books in The Corvus Chronicles.  What the reader might not understand is that The Visitor, while released first, is not the first book of the Corvus Chronicles, but rather it is actually book VII.  Not quite near the end, not at the beginning, but rather in the midst (and near the conclusion) of the story. 

The reader is made aware there is more to the story from the quick glimpse of the life of the Visitor in the opening pages.  Fifty years are recapped in under two pages between pages 5 and 7.  To understand who the Visitor is, why the story is recorded, or even why it was important enough for the narrator to “record” the event is a little puzzling, or confusing. However, the reader should be aware, that to the narrator, the story was important enough to "write the story”.  The second paragraph of The Visitor makes this point very clear, where the narrator shares:

Again, I must stress that these words are not mine. I am a mere instrument of the message. I am attempting to tell the story and record the messages as I have witnessed. While I have tried to stay true to the message, I fear that in my own translation much of the understanding is lost. However, I take no small amount of comfort in knowing that it is not until we are lost that we begin to search for our way. 

What we can take from that, if we really try to understand the narrator, is that he is sharing a “message”.  In fact, he is telling the reader that he is trying his best to “stay true to the message” …” but the message is not his own, and he is even fearful that in his “translation” of the message, understanding may be lost”.

A strong hint to the feeling of “confusion and feelings of being lost” are found in the excerpt of the next novel which is shared at the end of The Visitor.  That excerpt is from a prequel to The Visitor - The Stranger. 

What the reader has no way of knowing at this time, is in The Stranger, (which is not just a prequel to The Visitor, but is actually book one of The Corvus Chronicles) the scene which is taking place is the coming to grips of a loved one who is suffering from medical trauma involving the brain (the organ of 'reason').  The confusion, and being in the midst of confusion is a real life event.  Here is a concrete example of where the story moves from fiction to non-fiction without notice or apology (as explained to the reader in the prologue of The Visitor).

The reader is literally being pulled through a story they are unaware of, a story which begins before the book they are reading.  This part is extremely literal to the process of the narrator, who after all is “recording the events”, which is a pretty strong hint that the narrator of The Visitor is in actuality “the author”.  

So the reality is, from the narrator/author point of view, the story is occurring in the midst of confusion – and the reality is that to the reader, while they may or may not be aware, the feeling of “confusion” is being placed upon them.  What is far too complex to get into in this “intermediate deep-dive” interpretation, is why has the sentence changed from the singularity into the plural.  Why has the narrator/author changed from using the word “I” to the words “we / our”.  That is for another day, but there is a very real change that again probably slips by most readers due to the smooth sound of the sentence.

• and near the conclusion:

As already shared, The Visitor is not the first book in The Corvus Chronicles.  The Corvus Chronicles are made up of eight separate “novellas”.  Although The Visitor is the first novella published, it is actually number seven of eight.  So The Visitor is near the conclusion, but is not the conclusion of the story.  The actual order of the novellas are:

1.      The Stranger,

2.      The Beloved

3.      The Crossing

4.      The Calm,

5.      The Storm

6.      The Awakening

7.      The Visitor

8.      ….and then the final Chapter... which cannot be named at this time without giving away the story prematurely, or prior to the reader having had the ability to discover the ending on their own.

However, for the purpose “within” the novella The Visitor, this part of The Corvus Chronicles is taking place on the last few hours before the death of the Visitor.  So, it is also very much taking place “near the conclusion” of the Visitor’s earthly visit. 

(Note:  instead of “death” I have used the term “earthly visit”… which is in line with the actual reason for the title of ‘The Visitor”.  Although the story takes place on the “eve of death”, the story is not about death at all.  In fact, it is quite the opposite,…but again, that is too deep for an intermediate deep-dive and will have to wait for another blog and much deeper interpretation to understand why the main character is only ever referenced as ‘the Visitor”.

• of where reason had stripped away truth:

This is where the "intermediate deep dive into interpretation needs to occur to start to understand what is really going on in the novel.  While the reader can relate to the story being confusing, and somewhat near the conclusion...the idea of "where reason had stripped away truth" is more challenging.  This concept is essential to understand or interpret “The Visitor”.   If you have been following the blogs in an attempt to understand The Visitor and the message within the story, then you know a few things that will help you:

1.      The Visitor is more than a Love story, it is a story of Love.  There are two separate stories occurring parallel with one another at the exact same time.  You will also understand that to the Visitor, "Love" is a sacred term, and whenever it is used it is in contrast to the mundane connotations of common usage.

2.      The Visitor as a character within the story is described very deliberately as “dualistic”.  He sees the world in black or white, in or out, right or wrong, sacred or mundane”.  (In fact it is argued that any essence of things in between he is only able to perceive by his Beloved)

3.      The Visitor is never referenced by name.  Even though this story takes place in the hours before his death, he is not referenced by any name or by any other term such as “The Departed” or anything like that.  In fact, the poetic parables talk about “the procession of life” and about the similarity between death and birth.  The Visitor himself references himself simply as “a guest” who’s time it is “to leave”.  

4.      There are total chapters and poetic parables devoted to the notions of “Knowledge” and “Truth”.  These are concepts important enough and intrinsic enough to the understanding of the story that they have their own chapters devoted to them.  

If you are aware of these few things, then you might be ready to tackle the interpretation of, “where reason had stripped away truth”.  This is best done by understanding that the two main terms, “reason” and “truth” are set as “counterpoints” to each other.  The terms as used within the story and this sentence are not interchangeable.

For the purpose of interpretation,  "reason" is the rationale mind which draws conclusions based by observable experience.  It is akin to understanding the relationship between "cause and effect".  It is in essence the human mind (ie., fleshy brain).   At the beginning of The Visitor, we are exposed to this notion of "cause and effect" as shared by the narrator when describing an early experience of the Visitor. 

Though unable to understand why the birds behaved in this way, he was aware they were responding to his acknowledgement. His choice determined which bird came closer. His actions had consequence,even if he did not understand what the consequence meant or why
the birds behaved as they did.

This is the narrator explaining the nature of "understanding, awareness, consequences", basically "reasoning".  The Visitor was aware or understood his actions had consequences - even though he did not understand "why".  This is the nature of reasoning (or reason). 

Towards the end of The Visitor in the poetic parable on Faith this acknowledgment of the limitations of reason becomes evident.  In this section the Visitor shares the following:

Faith is not exclusive to any one church.
Faith is relentless - beyond reason or belief,
Believing in more than can be found in the search
Accepting what is without proof of relief.

Simply put, the difference between reason and Faith is spelled out clearly.  Faith is relentless - beyond reason or belief.  This is in direct contrast to Truth, which is not bound by limits or understanding.

Reason is often seen as a "rationale" argument, cause and effect, understanding, logic, even common-sense.  It is effective for successful protection of the material, of the flesh, of everything physical.  In essence, the mundane or carnal.

Truth, to the dualistic view and nature of the Visitor is the polar opposite.  Truth does not require argument, logic or common sense.  It exists beyond the material, the flesh or the physical.  It is in essence, the sacred.  Belief or proof or argument does not change the Truth. The truth simply is.  

This distinction is made very clear at the outset of The Visitor, in page ix, before the story begins where the author shares, It is never about being ‘right’; but rather, about uncovering the ‘truth’.  This idea is so central to the novel that it is repeated right after the prologue on pg 3 of The Visitor; To him it was never a matter of being right, but rather of uncovering the truth.

There is a distinct difference between what we see or argue as right, to what we may or may not see but is True.  This is the dualistic view of the Visitor.  It is the physical against the spiritual. It is the carnal against the sacred.  It is the conflict between the push of the flesh and the pull of the Spirit.  And it is something which the Visitor see's no value in arguing.  For example, see page 2 of the novel:

He would not have been keen to entertain arguments with others on whether life was a series of events open to arbitrary choice or a matter of predetermined fate. Such arguments he felt were fruitless and without consequence. Instead, he was more prone to admire a perfectly designed system of ordered chaos constantly in flux with individual human choice. He felt there was something beautiful in the concept of unpredictable chaos within an intentional master design: a duality, like body and spirit.

If you were able to follow this last part then you are ready to understand the sentiment, "...where reason had stripped away truth..."

The arguments, the understanding, the acceptance, the reason of everything makes no sense.  Why be born to die?  Why find joy just to suffer?  Why anything?  

This is the message. This is the central point of why the Visitor leaves his home to gather with those he Love's prior to leaving.  This is the reason why the story is important enough to be transcribed by the narrator.  

To understand the story, you must enter it where reason had stripped away Truth, and find that all reason really did in it's stripping of the Truth, was "uncover the Truth". 

Hence: 

In the midst of confusion and near the conclusion of where reason had stripped away truth, the Visitor walked towards a familiar hill in the city closest to his home.

Remember from the earlier blogs,  the beginning is always somewhat vague, and it is only at the end that clarity begins.  So here...near the conclusion, amidst the confusion, where reason has stripped away - and uncovered the Truth...here begins "clarity".

Until next time, Journey in Love

Michael Paul