Silence is Broken

“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.”

— The Visitor

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”.  

“BONUS INTERPRETATION POINTS!!!
If you’re really curious about the author/narrator and consistency...start to ponder the following;

If the narrator is the author, and if the author dedicates the novel to his Beloved, then how can someone else (The Visitor) be with the Beloved in the novel?  How, if The Visitor is not the narrator (which he isn’t) be with the Beloved and the story be consistent?”

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.

Michael Paul:

It is never about being ‘right’; but rather, about uncovering the ‘truth’. 

Michael Paul, The Visitor, pg ix

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

Beginnings are always somewhat vague...

“So how did he come to be here, at the beck of the crow and the call of the stars? If he had been asked, the Visitor would have simply smiled, knowing that beginnings are always somewhat vague, and it is only at the end that clarity begins. Today, things would become clear.                      
 Pg 6  The Visitor”

This blog picks up the narrator speaking on behalf of the Visitor on page 6, answering a question posed to the reader, but answered by the narrators interpretation of how the Visitor may have answered.  This is the first "intermediate" deep-dive of the blog interpretations.  The deep dives prior to this one have been beginner level.  Here, the reader will get the first taste of what The Visitor really is about.  There are clue's sprinkled throughout, but it will take a complete literary paradigm shift to understand, that on the many levels of this story; it is the duality of the Visitor's nature, and the duality of the chapter subject matter which frames the essence of understanding. 

Most readers who might try to ascertain the meaning behind the three sentences on page 6 might well focus on the crow, or the stars.  While the images of the crow and the stars are symbolic; the real meaning is to be found in the words which slip by unnoticed.

To be sure there is a lot happening here in these three sentences.  It is hard enough to wrap your mind around the idea of the various forms of communication that are happening.  The narrator asking the reader a question; the narrator claiming to know the answer asked to the reader by imposing thoughts onto the Visitor, and in the Visitor's assumed answer without a word from the Visitor, but rather an answer of silence portrayed by a smile assuming knowledge.  All this finally wrapped up by an assertion of the narrator that "Today, things would become clear".  But clear to who?  The Visitor, the reader, the narrator?  

At this point, most readers will actually have lost track of the question, which is simply..."So how did he (the Visitor) come to be here?"   It is the notion of "here" that will become clear.  

---

Remember that this novel takes place after the death of the Visitor.  So is here a geographical location?  No, that is explained in depth that the Visitor leaves the city with his Beloved and returns only the eve of his death.  We know geographically, more or less where he is.

So is the "here" being referenced something else? A state of mind, of peace, or awareness? Most readers will not even question this.  However from the perspective of the "author" the here being referenced is closer to a state of "awareness", but also one of acceptance (eve of death), but yet more to the point...a state of "Grace".

That is there "here" being referenced.  Remember, the Visitor already argues against the existence of "time" being anymore than a physical notion.  And time and space to the Visitor are relative.  What the Visitor talks about more is "the procession of life" from the body housing the seed of the Spirit - and about growth through Love.  The "here" is really referring to a "state of Grace".  

So the real question is..."How did he (the Visitor) arrive at a state of Grace (here)?.

---

From page 2 in the chapter Corvus we already are aware that the Visitor’s state of Grace is not due to any unearthly personal attributes.  The Visitor could have been anyone. In fact, he would have argued he was everyone…more or less. He was not extraordinary, he was certainly no angel, and he was far from a saint.

As such, any such state of Grace the Visitor is in would seem to be attainable to anyone or possibly even everyone. Perhaps a hint to how he came to this state of Grace may be found in the chapter on Prayer.  In that poetic parable (the story within the story) we hear the Visitor’s recorded words as:

Words are not required to speak to the spirit.

If you forget how to pray, then be still.

Stay silent and listen - and your soul - you may hear it

Faith like Grace, is more than free will. 

This idea that Grace is more than free will takes us to the notion that you can’t simply “want it” or “make it happen”.  It is more than free will.  So, this state requires something outside of personal control (or free will).  If the reader can hold the entire context of the novel at once, then within the idea of “Grace, and awareness, and acceptance” you might refer to the poetic parable on Knowledge, where the Visitor shares:

That being said, understand what I say

Your prayers - they are still being heard.

So, let no man ever stand in your way

Of accepting or rejecting the word. 

Simply put…the idea that your prayers are being heard (even if your may wonder if that is the case) is contrasted with the idea of never letting any man stand in your way of accepting or rejecting.  So the idea of knowledge, attached to prayer, being heard is outside the realm and control of others… if you don’t allow others to interfere.   This is reinforced again in the central message when you take stanza six on the poetic parable on Prayer into consideration.

I wish I could teach you how to pray in words,

But God listens not to your muttering,

Except for the times He Himself can be heard

Through your lips at the time of His choosing. 

Here is the connection the “your prayers being heard”…but now the tricky part in describing “the state of Grace”.   Here the Visitor states that God listens not to your mutterings…except when He Himself (capitalized therefore referencing God) utters them through your lips at the time of His choosing. So it’s more than freewill.  There is intervention to attain this “state of Grace”.  You can’t simply choose it to happen.  Yet, your prayers are being heard…but not necessarily through your words or at the time of your choosing. Sound familiar?

Romans 8:26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words;

So all that said...we might now understand that what becomes "clear" is "how the Visitor arrived at this state of Grace"...but we still don't know how he actually arrives there.  Even with this interpretation, we only understand the question - not the answer.

To understand the answer requires the reader to digest the full Corvus Chronicles. Remember, The Visitor is only the beginning of the Corvus Chronicles - and as already stated clearly...'Beginnings are always somewhat vague".  So while the answer may not yet be revealed, at least now you understand the question.

Until next time...Journey in Love

Michael Paul

The Truth is Out There

I could never quite figure out if he was admiring the night skies, or if he was just deep in thought or prayer. I asked him once, and his answer was simply, "Is there a difference"?

Today's blog is looking at one simple sentence on page 5 of The Visitor.  In this sentence, the narrator is providing the reader a glimpse into the thoughts of the Visitor.  But it is more complex than that.  Ready for the next deep dive into interpretation?

First off, I know that currently there are less than 75 people following this blog on and off.  And I am more than pleased with that.  If there is one person who one night finds something within this blog, than that is success.  And I can guarantee you that there is at least one person, even if that one person is me, the author of The Visitor and The Corvus Chronicles.

As I have explained to my wife, I am constantly struggling to interpret what I have written.  Over the 18 months it took to draft the first 90 pages which makes up The Visitor (one of the eight books which together make up The Corvus Chronicles) I tried to come to grips with a story that is much bigger than myself.  The story folds in on itself and has very many layers.  The easy part is understanding there are two separate stories which run parallel to each other at the same time.  A Love Story, and a Story of Love.  

The book itself is set up to deal with a procession of Life.  From basic needs, to family, to society, to values, to Faith and beyond this fleshy existence.  But even within the various sections, poetic parables, paragraphs and individual sentences there are interactions which are occurring which the reader will not notice.  Some are cryptic (such as actual names), some are illustrated by a change in font, some by a misspelling, some by a change in language or pattern of expected rhyme.  All those are the more apparent stumbling blocks which are meant to trip the reader up, to slow the reader down and to take note.

However, just as many instances occur that run so smooth they will not be noticed.  This is the case with the simple sentence - I could never quite figure out if he was admiring the night skies, or if he was just deep in thought or prayer. I asked him once, and his answer was simply, "Is there a difference"?

In this exchange, there are two people who are both in active in their own experiences.  The exchange of the question tells us they are "together", but prior to the exchange (the question and answer), both are in their own space.  We can assume that if the narrator is thinking, and the Visitor is in thought or prayer that prior to the exchange their is silence.

In the void of silence we are witness to what we all experience daily.  Our thoughts, and how they can be consumed by thinking about someone else, while someone else is not necessarily thinking about us.  In this case, the narrator is wondering what the Visitor is thinking about, (or even if the Visitor is thinking).  The Visitor while answering the question does not provide a direct or maybe even expected answer.  We know that it was never fully answered, since the entire novel is written after the passing of the Visitor, yet the fact is that the narrator is still saying, "I could never quite figure out.." 

Two different experiences, yet a shared experience.  To different perspectives yielded in one exchange.  How can we be so close as to have an intimate exchange yet still at the exact same moment be so alone that our interpretations of the event are not the same, nor even necessarily understood?

Even when we think communication and a shared understanding has been achieved, we are witness to the way the narrator tells the story that it wasn't.  Even after the death of the Visitor, he had still not figured out whether the Visitor was just admiring the stars, in thought, or in prayer.  Yet most readers will not notice this exchange is not complete, no common understanding is arrived at, and we really only get insights into what the narrator is thinking.  The Visitor's response is "assumed" to mean something, but what that means can differ greatly between different people.

Is there a difference between admiring the skies or praying?  Does it depend on the person and the situation? Can both be done at the same time?  Is there a difference between being deep in thought and praying?  Is there always a difference?  Can you be deep in thought while admiring the skies?

What is the connection, even symbolically speaking between using the term "the heavens" to describe the starry skies and "heaven" as it is used in religious dialogue?  

Stars themselves are referenced numerous times in the Bible, for example: Ishaiah 40:26

Lift your eyes and look to the heavens: Who created all these? He who brings out the starry host one by one, and calls them each by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing.

This line makes it pretty obvious that you can do all three things at the same time.  "Lift your eyes and look at the heavens (so looking at the stars).  Who created all these? (thought). Recognizing the power and the might and the strenghth (prayer).

“The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world…
— PSALM 19:1-4”

To the Visitor, it may very well be that there is no difference.  Admiring the beauty of the heavens, to think about the world, the universe and beyond, and to be amazed and in awe can all be the same thing as prayer, thought and admiration occurring simultaneously.  To the Visitor, it may very well be hard not to entertain all these things at once in almost a gestalt manner.

Can you separate the thoughts?  Can you separate your actions?  From the context of the Visitor, the argument would probably be no.  Proof for this comes in the poetic parable on Religion where the Visitor is quoted as having said -

Who can be true in their words and their ways
And separate their Faith from their actions?
Who can divide the moments of their day:
“This be for God, and this for my passions?”

The Visitor would argue that you can't separate Faith from your actions, and does not limit what those actions are.  Therefor those actions would include both thought and prayer.  This is one of the defining differences between "hope" and "Faith".  Faith is all consuming and cannot be divided between the moments of the day.  It is constant. 

If the narrator actually understood the Visitor's answer, he would have been able to understand, that to the Visitor, there is no difference, and if he truly understood what that meant, he would not still be wondering (or even have asked the question in the first place).

This explains part of the reason the Visitor questions whether he can be an instrument of the message, and whether anyone would ever understand what he is saying.  His doubt in relaying a message that people cannot hear is shared many times within the 90 pages of The Visitor.

Even as the author I still struggle with the simple exchange, so the narrator as a character of the story can hardly be blamed for not being able to fully understand.  As such, it may be even harder for the reader to fully comprehend this exchange.  Words are simply inadequate.  

But Faith is that someone, somewhere, someday will understand.  As Mulder would have said while looking up at the skys, "The truth is out there...or...I want to Believe."

---

There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars…”— LUKE 21:25

Until next time....Journey In Love

Michael Paul

Consensus of the Majority

While the Visitor knew he constantly suffered his sanity in a disconnected
world, he believed he was at times uncomfortably grounded
due to his unwillingness to be swayed by the consensus of the majority. - The Visitor pg 4.

As promised in the last blog, the blogs moving forward are all "deeper dives" into possible interpretations of The Visitor.   For today's deep dive we are still on page 4 and reflecting on the narrator's assertion that the Visitor knew he was on a different page than a lot of other people.   

It is important to note, that the assertion is not that the Visitor "felt" disconnected or in the minority, but rather he "knew".  This distinction makes it clear the Visitor had self-awareness.  

This self-awareness goes so far as to say that the Visitor was also aware (knew) he "constantly suffered his sanity"  This statement could be interpreted in many different ways, except when the reader considers that the lines which follow this section clarify that the Visitor was aware he was not "insane" but rather felt quite clear not only in his unconventional minority views but took some comfort with them.  He knew his outlook was different, yet he would not have changed his outlook for anything, as illustrated earlier on (pg 3) when the narrator states:  The Visitor was aware of his shortcomings in not being able to see the middle between extremes; however, he would not have changed his understandings for anything.

From this we can see the Visitor has an acute awareness of his shortcomings.  He is blind to aspects outside of his dualistic nature. However, he is not just aware of and comfortable of his shortcomings, he would not change his understandings for anything.  In other words, he is committed to his positions and insights and awareness regardless of the impact or suffering this causes him.  He constantly suffered his sanity.  He knows he sees things differently, he knows his views are in the minority and he is aware this makes life difficult for him.  

“Now I think I know what you tried to say to me,
How you suffered for your sanity,
How you tried to set them free.
They would not listen, they’re not listening still.
Perhaps they never will... ”

— Don Maclean's Starry Starry Night

These words are actually influenced by Don Maclean's song, Starry Starry Night.  For the few who followed the temporary web-site during the writing of The Visitor they would have seen various musical videos which I credited for inspiration.  As strange as it may have been to anyone following the temporary website, one of the video's was Don Maclean's song Starry Starry Night.  Anyone familiar with the song would understand it is about Vincent Van Gogh.  An artist who expressed the world he saw in a very unique style.  The song is influenced by one of the most recognizable pieces of art in the world, Van Gogh's Starry Night.   Van Gogh actually painted Starry Night while in as asylum.  Yet, that piece of work has remained both timeless and universal.  As such, it is an apt influence on The Visitor.  The picture itself is abstract not only in style, but in the fact that the scene itself only exists in Van Gogh's eyes.  It is created.  Yet, his insights have been influenced.  

Note the following potential influence Genesis 37:9,  “And he dreamed yet another dream, and told it his brethren, and said, Behold, I have dreamed a dream more; and behold the sun and the moon and the eleven stars made obeisance to me.” 

Note the picture - The sun and the moon (imposed together) and eleven stars.  Coincidence?  Perhaps.  What we do know about Van Gogh was he was acutely aware and worried about his sanity (which was why he checked himself into an asylum).  What many do not realize is that besides being an artist trying to express something; he was also a protestant missionary.  Being a protestant missionary; it is not then a far stretch to think the influence of Starry Night may be in fact derived from Genesis 37.  

The other interesting point is that Van Gogh was never successful during his life and only became well known and appreciated after his death, (tragically in his case by suicide).  He was considered basically a "madman who drank a lot".  

Here we can see a bit of the influence on the Visitor.  Someone who sees the world differently, someone who try's to share insights via art (in the case of the Visitor - poetic parables) and someone who we don't get to know until after his death.  Afterall, The Visitor is a story told by the narrator after the death of the Visitor.  The references of the Visitor's like of alcohol is also found throughout the book, from the drinking of the flask to references of the narrator having spent evenings with the Visitor drinking wine.  The fact that people thought he was a bit of a madman is easily picked up early on page 10;

The rumours of who he was were not the reality, but rumours in time became the accepted version of the truth. Depending on who you talked to he was either a mystic, an intellect or just a crazy old man with a bad temper who had chosen to become a bit of a recluse.

So here we see insights into the character of the Visitor.  Someone who does not see the world as others, is aware that others see him differently, who struggles with his own sanity constantly due to seeing the world differently, and shares his insights through art (poetic parables).  The fact that his words (art/poetic parables) do not reach a wider audience until after his death through the recording and telling of the story by the narrator completes some of the influence on the character of the Visitor.

As in Don Maclean's song Starry Starry Night, the Visitor is also acutely aware that people do not understand what he is saying, and aware that they very well may never understand, but yet it is important enough for him to share his view of the world that he travels outside of his recluse to share his message and understandings on the eve of his death.

The last part of the deeper dive on this blog is regarding what drives the Visitor to his suffering - being "uncomfortably grounded due to his unwillingness to be swayed by the consensus of the majority.

This central theme is played again and again throughout The Visitor.  Early on page ix of the prologue this is made clear.  The novel suggests that ethics and laws are merely manmade rules to protect us from ourselves, the vested interests of those in power, or the ever-changing fabricated social norms put into place by a consensus of the majority with no real regard as to what may or may not be “right”.

Another example is found on page 40 in the poetic parable regarding Laws:

The system designed is by design adversarial
It requires little of truth to succeed.
It lets guilty go free to attend innocent burials
As the majority are appeased in their greed.

The Visitor's position about right and wrong and truth are clearly differentiated from what the majority may declare as right and wrong and true.  To the Visitor, it is about individual accountability, and he shows little regard for human law to dictate appropriate action or inaction.  This is patently clear in the following stanzas.

And following a law which is inherently wrong
Does little to lessen your crime.
And no matter how good and no matter how strong
We all must account in due time.

And while you say punishment equals the crime
And justify - In fact, fear, and Love
A greater law will judge each in their time
And restore a fair balance; which no man’s above

These two stanzas together explain how the Visitor is "grounded and unwilling to be swayed by the consensus of the majority.  Regardless of what human laws allow, or don't allow, we are not excused from our own actions and that each one of us is accountable.  

This should not be surprising.  Again, on page ix of the prologue the author makes this distinction clear to the reader;    It is never about being ‘right’; but rather, about uncovering the ‘truth’.  And in the mind of the Visitor, the truth is not created by any majority consensus, but rather the truth "is what it is" and requires no defense.

Dishonesty appears as anything but
To shield it from what it’s concealing.
The truth will not change - no matter what,
No apologies and always unyielding.

And there my friends are some of the insights into the character development of the Visitor.    He is not in step with the majority and does not cling to what others, even the majority may espouse as "right".  He rather is grounded in what he sees as "truth".  He is aware that others see him as a bit "mad" or "crazy" and he is also aware that people cannot really understand what he is trying to share (or that he is even an instrument capable of sharing what he sees to be true).  However, he would not change this for anything.  He is grounded and unyielding regardless of the cost or the judgement.  And that is Faith.

Until next time, Journey In Love

Michael Paul

Universal Language of the Soul

1 Corinthians 14:10   There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning.

In part, this corruption of language spurred him towards a belief
in what he called “the universal language of the soul”, or language
with no spoken words. A language best heard (or felt) in silence.  Pg. 4 The Visitor

If you have had the patience and perseverance to follow all the blog entries in "The Visitor - Re-Visited" you would be aware that The Visitor is not a simple story.   You would also be aware it is a story that not even the author fully understands, and invites readers to search for their own interpretations.

That said, moving forward, these blogs will start to take a much deeper dive into possible interpretations.  Today's interpretation is focusing simply on a statement made by the narrator on page 4 of The Visitor about "corruption of language", and a belief in a universal understanding that requires no spoken words, no language and perhaps is best "felt" in silence.

However, now as a seasoned reader (if you have followed this far) you are going to start to see more of the influences on The Visitor and perhaps understand why it is not just a Love Story, but a Story of Love.  This deep dive is the beginning of truly understanding what The Visitor is about, and why individual interpretation is actively encouraged by the author.

The concepts of silence, universality, and language are central themes in The Visitor.  The previous blogs on Love explain how the Visitor believes sacred words like Love, Faith (and even hope) have been corrupted to the point the words are now meaningless.  

“Shared, but maybe not emphasized to the same degree, is the strong suggestion that deep within us, in the silence of our souls, we know intuitively the differences between what is right and what is wrong.”

Other sections of The Visitor talk about the need for Love, Empathy, Understanding, Judgement, Pain, Sorrow, Joy etc.  All these are claimed by the Visitor to be universally shared states of the human condition.  This idea of silence, and universal understanding is hinted to in the prologue (pg viii):

In fact, one of the pivotal contextual points in The Visitor is in his search for silence.  That is what partly drives him away to his home outside of the city prior to his death.  This is clear at the end of the section of Crime and Punishment (pg 43) when the narrator shares the following:

Although I still did not fully understand what he meant, he was passionate in his belief that the more he withdrew from everyone, the better he was able to connect with anyone. From his solitude and isolation, he could connect with everyone rather than be consumed by any one. His description of how we are all connected and of how we are all one was beyond a romantic notion. He believed the connection was beyond spiritual. Just as a high tide lifts all boats, the hurting of one hurts us all. He believed there was shared responsibility and accountability amongst everyone.

The idea that there are many languages in the world, each with meaning is not a novel idea.  We are more than aware we don't all speak the same language.  And while a foreign language may sound like gibberish to one not familiar, the support for something deeper is found within 1 Corinthians 14:10

There are, perhaps, a great many kinds of languages in the world, and no kind is without meaning.

In the eyes of the Visitor this concept is pushed to the idea that there is even meaning in a language without words.  Reference the poetic parable on Joy and Sorrow to understand at a minimum the Visitor sees "emotional states" as universally shared.

Your joy and sorrow are not yours alone
They are both universally shared states
Unless your heart is carved out of stone
Such feelings are our shared human fate.

The Visitor's assertion that you can "understand" or derive meaning from such universally shared states directly follows the stanza above in the chapter on Joy and Sorrow.

You may witness the pain in the eyes of a stranger
Or smile when someone else laughs.
Or feel the fear when someone’s in danger
As we all walk along a shared path.

The idea of witnessing pain in the eyes of a stranger is the idea that we can "understand" pain in someone without the need for words.  The fact that we may smile when someone else laughs invokes the idea of an innate ability to respond to an "emotional" stimuli.  This is again emphasized in that we can actually "feel fear" when someone else is in danger.

Words are not required to share, in fact all of these examples are actually better "felt" than heard.  Words require translation, are open to misinterpretation and are filtered through a cognitive process.  We are much more in control of the words we utter.  And as such, we can intentionally confuse, manipulate, control and hurt others for whatever purpose we choose.

We are much more responsible for the words we say and the impact of those words.  Again, this concept is not new or unique.  See Ephesians 4:29

Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear.

In the extreme dualism that makes up the personality of the Visitor, it is not surprising that we can draw the conclusion that for the Visitor, words are not only "inadequate" but mundane; where as silence and prayer are sacred.  There are various examples of this duality to be found throughout The Visitor, but they will be highlighted in future blogs.

Quickly however, to understand the "sacredness" of silence to the Visitor we can refer to the poetic parable on Prayer (pg 71):

Prayer is the expansion of your inner self
In prayer, you rise in communion.
Prayer is not a deal you can barter or sell
It is a sacred, silent, union.

The idea of three simple words "sacred, silent, union" pretty much sums up the connections I am talking about.  Although silent - prayer is meaningful communication.  And although the action may be initiated individually, the concept of "rising in communion" shouts a universal connection shared within this act.  The Visitor would argue that we don't really "pray" alone.  This concept is reiterated in the poetic parable below:

Words are not required to speak to the spirit.
If you forget how to pray, then be still.
Stay silent and listen - and your soul - you may hear it
Faith like Grace, is more than free will.

When you can hear, the voices of others
And join in the suffering of what we’ve all done
Without a word, your doubt will be smothered
When you join prayer, with others; as one.

This poetic parable is unquestionably influenced by Romans 8:26 In the same way the Spirit also helps our weakness; for we do not know how to pray as we should, but the Spirit Himself intercedes for us with groanings too deep for words;

Again, concepts of communication requiring NO WORDS (in this case actually groanings too deep for words), but rather SILENCE.  The idea of "join in the suffering of what we've all done" found within the Visitor's poetic parable is another call to not only how we are all connected, but an understanding regarding judgement.  Whole sections of The Visitor are devoted to "taking care when to judge".  Words spoken carelessly and without Love are just part of the noise.  Again, this whole central concept sprinkled throughout The Visitor can be traced pretty easily to the Bible.  This time, 1 Corinthians 13:1

If I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, but do not have love, I have become a noisy gong or a clanging cymbal

As well as Colossians 4:6

Let your speech always be with grace, as though seasoned with salt, so that you will know how you should respond to each person.

Again we can see confluence of influence - Ephesians 4:29

Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear.

The idea of NO WORDS, but rather communication through a more adequate spiritual fashion (prayer being one example) is again influenced by another passage, this time 1 Corinthians 2:13

which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words.

One more example of the inadequacy of words is found in John 8:43

"Why do you not understand what I am saying? It is because you cannot hear My word.

It really should be no surprise by now as you are in the midst of the "first deep dive" into interpretation that when the Visitor does speak, (even though he finds words inadequate and would prefer silence) he speaks ONLY in poetic parables.  Influence for this type of speaking is found in John 16:25

"These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; an hour is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but will tell you plainly of the Father.

At this point you the reader might make the assumption that the Visitor is a literary personification of Jesus.  I can assure you as the author of The Visitor, this is not the case.  As clearly outlined in The Visitor, the Visitor is not Jesus or any other incarnation of a prophet.  

Page 2 of the chapter Corvus makes this clear:

The Visitor could have been anyone. In fact, he would have argued he was everyone…more or less. He was not extraordinary, he was certainly no angel, and he was far from a saint.

So, Who is the Visitor?  

There is an answer, but the answer cannot be given.  Words are inadequate. Be assured however, the Visitor does exist.  To actually find out who the Visitor is cannot be achieved without the background provided by the rest of the books within The Corvus Chronicles.  However, a very strong hint as to who the Visitor is is found on page 10 of the novel where the narrator shares, "If anyone had asked the Visitor who or what he was, he would have simply said:"
I am a part of you, just as you are part of me.
No more, no less; just another guest
Whose time has come to leave.

The last part to touch briefly on in this deep dive before I let you up for air, is to be found within the intersection of these central themes of "universal, language, silence, Love" and the damage done by inadequate words is the idea of the strength and sacredness of silence, to let silence by your message or your last word.  This idea is found in the poetic parable on "Talking" (pg 62):

“Do not be tempted in your need to talk
When you’re driven too hard to be heard
Sometimes it’s wiser to get up and walk
And let silence be your last word. - The Visitor”

The power of silence as a response again is not a unique concept and heavily influenced from external sources.  For example Acts 8:32

 "HE WAS LED AS A SHEEP TO SLAUGHTER; AND AS A LAMB BEFORE ITS SHEARER IS SILENT, SO HE DOES NOT OPEN HIS MOUTH.

Luke 23:9

And he questioned Him at some length; but He answered him nothing.

Proverbs 10:19

When there are many words, transgression is unavoidable, But he who restrains his lips is wise.

Psalm 39:9

"I have become mute, I do not open my mouth, Because it is You who have done it.

1 Timothy 5:13

At the same time they also learn to be idle, as they go around from house to house; and not merely idle, but also gossips and busybodies, talking about things not proper to mention.

And finally: two of my personal favourites:

Proverbs 17:9

He who conceals a transgression seeks love, 

and

Proverbs 26:20

For lack of wood the fire goes out, And where there is no whisperer, contention quiets down.

As such, the Visitor is probably prone to not defend his positions.  Afterall, The Visitor takes place three hours before death.  There is nothing to be gained in attempting to defend.  It is not only a strong position, it is the only position.  Again support for this position can be found on page 43 of The Visitor:

He shared how he was no different and had spent far too many years justifying everything he did to others and himself. It took many years and many hard lessons to learn that justification was not called for nor required. If we acted in Faith, guided by Love, there was never a need to defend. In fact, he would contend that defending righteousness only diluted it.

So the message is to take care.  Care with your words.  Care not to defend as those who are asking you to defend are motivated by something you do not need to, and probably should not even entertain acknowledging.  Instead, hold to Faith, and be guided by Love.  And finally, take care when judging.

“John 8:3-11

The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court, they said to Him, “Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act. “Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?”
They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground. But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, “He who is without sin among you, let him be the first to throw a stone at her.” Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground. When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court. Straightening up, Jesus said to her, “Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?” She said, “No one, Lord.” And Jesus said, “I do not condemn you, either Go From now on sin no more.””

If you made it this far....congratulations.  Go up for some air, but as in any deep dive, take time resurfacing.  

Journey in Love

Michael Paul

Hope is the last resort of the Faithless

On page 3 of the prologue the reader is abruptly assaulted by the a contextual set-up from the narrator when he explains the Visitor having said; 

“Hope is the last resort of the Faithless.”

This single line on page 3 of the prologue is not only a contextual glimpse of who the visitor is, but is some very heavy foreshadowing of future books coming in The Corvus Chronicles.

Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

The visitor is even described "as hopeless" in the literal sense that he does not believe in hope.  The constant cascading disappointments carved out the need for the visitor to gravitate towards a stronger comfort, and that comfort is found in Faith.  In essence; the visitor replaced hope with Faith.

This concept can rightfully be unsettling.  People tend to think of hope as a good thing.  But the meanings of word have become so watered down that words can become useless.  This is a central theme spoken by the visitor in wishing that he could speak in a universal language requiring no words.  On the chapter on Love he describes how the word Love itself has become meaningless, as it no longer is used to describe a "sacred" relationship, but rather to describe mundane things, like how someone "loves chocolate or loves wine".  

Arguments about hope might start from a "sacred" source such as Corinthians 1:

As it is, these remain: faith, hope and love, the three of them; and the greatest of them is love, but the salient point that is missed by too many, is that in the Bible hope is used to convey a sacred concept.  It is not used in mundane connotations such as "hoping to win the lottery, or hoping to get a raise, or hoping my child gets better".   The hope which the visitor references is "hope" used in a non-sacred sense.

Notwithstanding how the visitor is described as hopeless, the visitor admits that he sees how hope may serve as "the seeds of Faith".  However, he also clarifies that hope is not Faith.  This distinction is pretty self-evident but can be illustrated even better by again turning towards the Bible; this time Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

In essence, the visitor trades hope for faith, because faith is the actual substance of things hoped for.  The evidence of things not seen is from the Visitor's perspective played out in the greatest of the three; that being Love.  - and that my friends is the essence of the book.  While The Visitor may be viewed by the reader as a Love story, the reality is, The Visitor is really a story about Love.