Where is it that the angels fly?

Where is it that the angels fly? Not here where the children cry.
Where is it that the angels flutter? Not here with all we can muster.
Where is it that the angels soar? Not here with the father’s closing of the door.
Where is it that the angels come? Not here where the girl cries for mum.
Where is it that the angels fly? Not here where the people die.





If anyone can suggest more, it would be appreciated. I want to make a vid of this poem, but it seems short. I'll give it a day or two to hear you guys before I record it. Thanks.

God abandoned earth, the guys who said he talked to Jesus lied. Jesus is an enlightened being (Buddha) not the son of a god.

Where is it that angels whisper? Not here where roars the twister.
Where is it that angels laugh? Not here as I read my friend's epitaph.
Where is it that angels walk? Not here beside the body delimited by chalk.
Where is it that angels dwell? No here close to this empty well.
Where is it that angels live? Not here in the cold street during New Year's Eve.

Just some thoughts...

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

Where is it that the angels fly? Not here where the people die.

Why wouldn't they fly where people die?

The point being the angels aren't there at all. Ever.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

The point being the angels aren't there at all. Ever.

I know, but I thought the places they didn't fly were supposed to be places where "bad things" were going on because, ideally, were such angels present, they would be preventing it.

And thus my point. There are no angels to EVER prevent it. Because they're not there. It's the point of the poem.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

And thus my point. There are no angels to EVER prevent it. Because they're not there. It's the point of the poem.

And then we come back to my question. Why prevent such a necessary inevitability such as death? By all means keep it, though. I've developed some weird views on death.

MightyObserver wrote:

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

And thus my point. There are no angels to EVER prevent it. Because they're not there. It's the point of the poem.

And then we come back to my question. Why prevent such a necessary inevitability such as death? By all means keep it, though. I've developed some weird views on death.

Yes people need to die. my point was that for all the suffering, where are these so called guardian angels? Taking a shit? Or simply not existing?

If people are dieing it is most probably of circumstances causing suffering and the deaths themselves are there causing suffering. Supposedly angels are celestial guardians which should be there to protect, yet, as we see they're not there at least to help.

So the poem is essentially a critique against the belief that supernatural entities, in this case angels, will come and soothe our pain or at least help us in need.

This also points out that, if they existed, they and/or their commander would be some sadistic bastards for not using their supernatural powers to prevent to much suffering they are aware of.

(Just repeating Tyrong's point)

No progress is being made here. I'm sure what has been said in the previous two posts will help someone who is confused about the point of the poem, later.

I was just talking about the last line.

MightyObserver wrote:

By all means keep it, though.

I meant go ahead and keep that in the poem. I was done discussing this.

MightyObserver wrote:

I know, but I thought the places they didn't fly were supposed to be places where "bad things" were going on because, ideally, were such angels present, they would be preventing it.

By explaining it to some extent, myself, I thought I had made it clear that I understood the point of the poem the first time I read it. Evidently, I did not make that clear.

Quote :

By explaining it to some extent, myself, I thought I had made it clear that I understood the point of the poem the first time I read it. Evidently, I did not make that clear.

Sorry, my bad. I thought you were asking me.

Liche wrote:

God abandoned earth, the guys who said he talked to Jesus lied. Jesus is an enlightened being (Buddha) not the son of a god.

Wut?

I am now begining recording. I'm using all of Zeal's but the last. Sorry Liche, but it wasn't with the theme and didn't really fit.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

I am now begining recording. I'm using all of Zeal's but the last. Sorry Liche, but it wasn't with the theme and didn't really fit.

I'm glad to have contributed.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

I am now begining recording. I'm using all of Zeal's but the last. Sorry Liche, but it wasn't with the theme and didn't really fit.

No problem, as long as it was acknowledged
(at first I thought you didnt see it now I feel included!)

I'm actually not sure about one line. Which sounds better?

Where is it that the angels soar? Not here with the father’s closing of the door.

OR

Where is it that the angels soar? Not here where rages the war.

War is more straightforward, and the father requires a bit more thinking to get it.

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

Where is it that the angels soar? Not here where rages the war.

This just sounds better. I'd consider it a bonus that it's a lot easier for people to understand.

Well... I guess the new line is better. I agree with MightyObserver's notion that people will get it more easily.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Well... I guess the new line is better. I agree with MightyObserver's notion that people will get it more easily.

Thirded(?) the first one makes you think more, where as this one kind of just flows.

So think more, or flow?

He said thirded. Flow.

War it is. Thanks guys.