Wednesday, March 02, 2005

two children

It is human nature
to want attention
without showing it with others.
And how severe is this selfish nature
if we are civilized people?
Two children approach
the same wooden seat of a seesaw,
splintered and worn past the grain.
They fight for that sore seat
until someone gives up, (someone must always lose).

This may be innocent enough,
even a little childish, but
reconsider those two children
as siblings.
As time withers down, past its own grain,
the seesaw becomes unimportant.
Mom, who do you love the most?
Two siblings,
wearing down their poor mother
(who does it to herself sometimes)
until she is old and broken.
Even then, they compete
instead of time-share.

One child
now lives by the sea
and has forgotten poor mother;
one lives in the same old farmhouse,
harboring jealousy
over time less spent.

Both have memories,
polluted memories
reconstructed to include comparison, greed, jealousy.
Both, now, want their mother
close to them,
so that these ashen memories can be sealed tightly
in mother's urn.
To make room, they must split
between the two.
They divide her
because they love her.
But, they will never be satisfied.
One will always wonder which sibling
got mother's better half.


Sue's Express said...

This, I'll bet, strikes home for those siblings who have lost their parents and have to deal with real estate belongings and the fights and squabbles over who gets what (that go on between sibblings)....

I noticed a typo in the third stanza, fourth line...shouldn't it read...:

one lives into the same old farmhouse,

(instead of "one lives into he same old farmhouse")

PoeticMermaid said...

I'll have to agree with Sue. Caught the typo as well, as well as the tug of war between the siblings.

I like how the see saw symbolizes the highs and lows of sibling affection and rivalry, though I think you focused mainly on the rivalry aspect.

Blog Archive