To build a case
against insomnia
so as to enjoin it from
canceling you out
you may purchase drugs or
forget how it feels to be
awake long enough that
you trick yourself into
sleeping and thus render it
harmless. You will have to do this
often. Relentless and vigorous
defense is required.
To choose a tattoo
that will not be an
embarrassment shortly after
its application you may need
to look at how it feels to lack
a thing you’ve never had. It is
often difficult to imagine
how a patch of your hide could be
improved so deftly that such a lack
could be erased. Impulsive tattoos
may be representative of illusory
absence felt strongly but only for the time
it takes to nod your head at a stencil.
Their disappearance would reinforce
other moments of loss you’ve suffered
and it is therefore usually advisable to keep them.
To reject a parent
is to demonstrate a certain respect
for their historic presence or absence.
It is usually easier to maintain some contact
even if only on high holidays
so restraining yourself
from all touch
and declaring any bridging
of the distance between you unsafe
is a way to honor the place they have made in your
experience even when that place is a hole or a wound.
To own a life you have been given
is a rigorous responsibility
that demands a certain acceptance of folly
and exceptional flexibility in the areas
of communication and self-care. What may seem
on the surface to be various forms of harm
may in fact be completely logical
if not always comfortable adaptations
to facts and environmental factors.
You will choose often.
You may never choose wisely or consciously
but you will choose.
Dark Matter 
June 13th, 2009 at 11:16 am
Tony, this is a profound piece of writing. I can relate to it so strongly!
I do, however, have a question/edit with the bridging distance/unsafe part. Do you mean the restrain from touch allows a bridging of distance? Or that any contact (touch or otherwise) of any kind is unsafe but probably required? Just not clicking with exact wording for me right now. This very well could be (and probably is) my problem. 😉
Thank you for writing this.
S
June 13th, 2009 at 11:37 am
Well…it was neither entirely. Reading it again (for about the ten thousandth time), I understood what I meant to say, but as sometimes happens, it didn’t translate well.
So…edits have been made, there and elsewhere. See if that helps.
Part of the “problem” for me with writing this was the deliberate choice to eliminate the use of commas anywhere. I wanted a certain density to the piece, a deliberate difficulty in the reading. Apologies for that — it just seemed to demand it.
Thanks for the comment and the edit prompt…
June 13th, 2009 at 10:05 am
Your recent work here does seem to have a different vibe. If I might be so bold with a less-than-comprehensive knowledge of you work (though I have been reading it for a while), it simultaneously uses stricter devices while the content itself is less tethered to convention. Great work.
June 13th, 2009 at 10:19 am
Thanks, Louise. I think I’d characterize it similarly. It’s got this feel to it of being more rigorous in how it approaches topics. I’m exploring (successfully or no, not sure at this point) what I think of as less obvious truth, so the approach to the language used needs to be far more careful, if that makes any sense.