|
If Ever There Were To Be A Sentence...
Samantha.
A strong word in itself. To me, it is one of those everyday names that still carry a tinge of the past on it. You say "Samantha" and I hear "Constantinople". I'm not arguing the actual history of the name itself; I am merely telling you how I feel when I hear it. Samantha. Can you see it?
Samantha
Another thing I love is the letters. A perfect amount, tucked away right in the Goldilocks Zone. Not too many, not too little either; Just Right. When you read it, I admit, the first few letters are boring. S-a-m...not the hottest lineup on the stage..But then you add the "antha", suddenly it becomes mystical. Alphabetical Alchemy, I say. There could be fewer potions set so sweet in mixture as that.
The crazy thing is that the name is dwarfed compared to whom it refers to. Samantha (still awesome) is a true to life reflection of what it means to be strong. As strong as your own name. Maybe.Even.Stronger.
It should come as no small surprise to you that I love Samantha. Now I understand love in a different way than most, so I feel it is important to discuss that first, so as to better understand the nature of my own affection.
Love is, first of all, just a word. The letters in themselves can inspire feelings (like the name Samantha, remember!) , but they are just words. And a little outside the Goldilocks Zone too. Four letters...the word would fail utterly if it wern't for the "v" stuck in there to pep it up some. Everyone knows words that use any of the last six or so letters in the alphabet are just fantastic.
Love describes the closeness of a bond between things. The same closeness we find, say, between the letters "Q" and "U". Everybody knows those two are practically attached at the hip. Love is like that. "U" knows she can go off and make all manner of fun and Unique words on her own. Unicorn,Uranus, Ultimatum, Uncle....all fabulous words. I imagine "Q" feels the same as well. He knows, much like his older sister "X", that he brings a certain individuality that very few other letters can offer. And he is especially exciting in lowercase.
But see, "Q" can't do it alone. Sure, every once in a while he can do words by himself (he is a little more famous in the eastern hemishpere), but he knows there's something missing. You see, "Q" needs "U", and for so many more reasons than Quick, Quadruple, Quest and Quaker. The togetherness and inherent beauty that they share together is, of course, Quintessential to "love".
My point is that love is just a word that describes a feeling. That feeling, however, is something that is beyond explanation of the word "love", tucked away secretly in the curve and arch of every letter. The untold centuries of work that we just fling onto the paper without much thought or respect at all. The word is merely a small blanket that leaves your feet hanging out the end. It doesn't cover it. Nothing can. Not four words or a million. Every sentence ever written about love combined does nothing to explain the feeling. Only through the genetic emotional DNA left by the author behind the words do we get an encompassing peek at what love can be.
There are volumes of books on words. The dictionary is a pretty good one I hear. The sequel, Thesaurus, was also pretty well accepted. But think of this fact. If you took every word in the dictionary and set them up accordingly, you still could find no proper way of expressing the true nature of what we tag as "love". And that is a lot of words to play with.
So we obviously know by now that love cannot be properly communicated through means of words. As I have shown, the word "love" is hardly acceptable. So what about physically? Can I express the fullness of my love through body language and gesture, or sex? Can I prove myself and reveal my feelings with actions, maybe instead of words?
I find it an interesting question in regards to complexity. After all of our achievements as humans, our bodies may very well send and receive more complex questions and answers than ever could our alphabets and books.
I don't know if it is really possible in a physical sense either. A kiss for example; it may cause what your mind visualizes as a "spark", but is it really total? I imagine that at the very best, the combination of that second from both people would bring us closer than any word or sentence could ever hope.
Maybe we should kiss WHILE we read Shakespeare.
I guess my point is that "love" is all encompassing. It is the total collection of not just how I feel about the word "Samantha" when I hear it, but the total collection of humanity’s response through all of time echoing down in the best (and fragmented) ways that it can. "Love" is the oral history of the rapidly repeating moments in our lives that free us from everything except the closest we could ever get to innocence.
So you see now why the four letters L-O-V-E fall so incredibly short in my mind now. Perhaps that is why "Samantha" appeals to me so much more. More room to spread yourself around in. More vowels and syllables to give your mind a second to blossom with truth. When I hear "Love", I think "Samantha". The reverse is certainly true as well.
So, now I have fully set my dilemma before you. How can I tell you properly just how much I love you if I can't find a full way of doing it? There is no kiss or sentence strong enough to get across just how I feel about you. No book or hand signal to express how I feel. There is only one thing I can offer; one picture I can paint for you.
Everything.
All of it. Every sentence professing the feelings of love. Every play or dance sending emotions flinging from the twirl. Every poem and sonnet, novel or proposal. Everything compiling on the back of one another, creating a towering spyre of all the world has ever offered to describe how I feel when I hear your name. "Samantha" is the same word that inspired the hand of Michealangelo; the same as it brought Ghandi closer to peace.
I myself can never match those who came before me, the ones who experienced the raw materials. All I have seen in my life is the finished product. The stone tablet polished and tucked away behind glass at the museum. All I can do is read lines a lifetime removed from the author or speaker.
And yet, when I hear your name, I can put myself in the moments of creation. When I am with you, I can be as Shakespeare when he first put the words to the paper. I can channel the tenacity and storminess of the moment. Being with you makes me Beethoven, Tolkien, Shakespeare, Michelangelo, Wells.
. If ever there were to be a sentence or word that could take us as close to the majesty of what "love" really is as we could go, it would be your name. Samantha.
I have found no greater peace than in loving you with all I am
Thank You for That
R. Eric Ellison
12/21/08
|
|