Odes to Love: A Review of Blood Lyric

Rawness of intellection. Rawness of beauty. The rawness of a work planned to the finest detail. Do we call such planning heartfelt, spontaneous, and an outpouring from within, when, if looked at, it contains such complexity?

The answer is yes, we do. Blood Lyric, the self-published poetry of Louis Shikles (Monument Press, 2009) is just such a work of raw complexity. It is an outpouring of intellection from the heart. Blood Lyric is not to be taken lightly, or passed over with a cursory glance. The wisdom behind the words is profound. If not understood in its fullness by those who seek to master philosophy, then by a reading and rereading of the poems, the depth of knowledge, the artistry, is appreciated.

The dedication page states, "my samizdat [sic]." It is the first glimpse of the genius put into the publication of Blood Lyric. Samizdat, from a Russian word meaning, "self-published," is the term given to underground writings created during communist times in Russia. Blood Lyric, beyond bypassing the hypocrisy of entitling a book as a samizdat through a major publisher, continues with the authentic feel of a samizdat. It has grammar errors, it has typos-and that is what a samizdat is. It is a grass roots creation of imperfectly formatted intellection. Once understood that, as a samizdat, it is not the style that matters, just as in the underground of Communist Russia it was not the overtyping and errors that mattered, the work can be even more appreciated. Blood Lyric is a work of thoughtful planning, where every dot, dash, and typo has been planned down to the finest detail. Blood Lyric must be allowed to stand as a piece of art in its total creation, yet without overlooking the richness of the poetry.

In preparing to write this review, I asked myself, "Is a review of this book beyond me?" I had to ask that question. Blood Lyric is not for the faint hearted, nor is it for the philosophically challenged. Don't get me wrong-the poetry is great, and can pull the heartstrings and spur the mind to go from a slow jog to a sprint at the ideas presented. If you are a poetry connoisseur you will enjoy Blood Lyric.

Consider the following lines:

For I was nothing then something,
Your experience is my proof.

I did not make value.
I did not make existence.

But I can say these things are, and so they express a persistence.

So there is, an is,
regardless of you or me.

(from "The God of the machine-Tyrant")

In these lines I saw, within the context of the entire poem, an artistic rendering of philosophical genius. How is it that logic can be put into beauty, and rationally demonstrate eternity? But it was done, and the entire work is filled with such poetic work.

Ironically enough, the poem cited above ends with:

What story has worth
With no beauty?

Exactly. I wish I could have said it better, or had the depth of heart to create such a piece.

But what do I mean by the "philosophically challenged"?

In the first three poems of the book, the philosophy of the following great minds is artfully rendered: Origen, Evagrius, Camus, Ayn Rand, Marx, Nietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Adam Smith. Many of these intellectuals someone like myself has only heard of in passing: As a light speculation and discussion among friends, maybe a skimming over of their works while looking for something good to read. But it appears Shikles has read, reread, and conquered what, to many people, is the genius of philosophical thought.

In saying that these famous minds and their thoughts are artfully rendered, it should not be mistaken to mean Shikles made an ode to their genius. No, Shikles trounces their assumed genius in poetic fisticuffs. And what's more, he comes out on top as King of the Hill.

I wish I had the reading experience, and background of deep thinking over the philosophical issues of modern man, in order to analyze the poetry, and fully understand what is being said. Unfortunately, I am among those who are "philosophically challenged."

I ask myself, "Is Shikles another philosopher who is worthy of an audience?" I intimated as such to him in a written interview. His response was impressive.

"I am not a philosopher. Why? I don't think everything can be rationalized. Some things are beyond thought."

Are these the words of a Zen master of Western discourse? Or simply those of someone who has come to terms with his own humanity and finiteness, as he wrote in "Leviathan-The monster that you made":

For without suffering, one is not complete.

Louis Shikles would shy away from the idea of being compared to a Zen master. He is an Eastern Orthodox Christian, and Blood Lyric is his samizdat against the false theologies of juridical socialistic rationalism.

If a person is interested in some well thought out poetry, wonderfully expressed and pleasant to the mind, then Blood Lyric is a book worth having. However, if you are the type of person to yawn and clean your fingernails while debating without effort the merits of the best minds of modern thought-that is to say, if you think you are up to the challenge of having everything you assume about rational thinking put to the test, then acquire a copy of Blood Lyric. You will not be disappointed.