The Mystery of Blue

Blue and Yellow Flowers

All I know seems here right now.
So much I have forgot.
So much I also learned somehow.
Deep blue deceives me not.

Linked to Jilly’s 28 Days of Unreason, Day Eleven wondering if all of me returned.
Photo: “Blue and Yellow Flowers” by the author linked to Nick V’s Friday Floral Fotos.

Author: Frank Hubeny

I enjoy walking, poetry and short prose as well as taking pictures with my phone.

29 thoughts on “The Mystery of Blue”

    1. I was thinking of that chess playing software as I wrote this and realize I need a different word than “deep” when I revise this. Maybe “dark”. That’s what I’ll change it to. Thanks, Charley!

      Liked by 1 person

        1. Ambiguity is good at times if the multiple meanings all apply. The “deep blue” association with the machine learning program wasn’t one I intended, although I can see how it might fit with the learning and forgetting in the poem. The machine doesn’t forget or “learn”. It optimizes based on modeled training data. Its result isn’t a choice. The flowers look bright against the dark background. So maybe it is “bright blue” that I want in the last line?

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Too technical…! Most of us non-techies fall back on the program “learning.” Deep blue also draws our attention to “deep,” which has a multiplicity of meanings, real and imagined. The “art” of poetry is choosing words that convey intended meaning, but at times allow for unintended meanings. It’s like improvisation in jazz… unscripted, but requiring a thorough knowledge of music, music theory, and the song in question. It sounds “seat-of-the-pants” but is anything but. My thought is stick with deep blue, and torpedoes be damned!

            Liked by 1 person

        2. I’ll change it back to “deep”. Thanks for confirming my concerns though that someone might have thought of that chess playing computer. I am all in favor of that technology. I just don’t think it captures our learning process which is more motivated than rational.

          Liked by 1 person

  1. Deceives me; deceives me not… I read this last night when I was too tired to do more than let it just be heard. I don’t have the chess association on this so I can only say I like both deep & dark, but deep blue means ocean for me and the depth of the poetry is ocean-like.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I was thinking more of the ocean with “deep blue”, but it is also the name of a computer that plays chess. I may change it back to “deep”. I don’t know what Harrison was referring to when he wondered if all of him did not return. I would think some of the memories might not, but then he also had new ones.


      1. I liked the connotation of ‘deep,’ but I’m not familiar with deep blue. All of my chess playing is against flesh & blood. I don’t know if you still the have the book, but the context is on page 82. He is talking about following bird calls that don’t exist into the wilds. I guess when someone goes into the wild, figuratively or literally, they feel that a part of them remains there. If you go into the deep blue of the ocean, the sky, or a flower, is that not the wilds? Even so, Deep Blue (chess) is all about logic and poetry defies logic. Irony.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. If he was following bird calls that don’t exist in the wild then that could be close to the forgetting and learning. It would be the wilds even if it is only our imagination. I suspect most of that may not be domesticated. Poetry does defy logic, so there is no problem with using “deep blue”. I switched it back.

          Liked by 1 person

  2. Frank, your verse is ever unique–no day the same–remarkable! I’m still hoping to get a decent minute poem done…but battling this cursed summer cold/virus monster 🙂 Once I have victory, I’ll be back to regularly scheduled blog reading/commenting…and writing 🙂

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Or see it but don’t realize it. The chess playing machine has no motivation. It optimizes unconsciously. Jonathan Haidt made me aware of the difference between being rational and rationalizing. Computers are rational. We humans rationalize because we are motivated and committed to results we believe in. Our subjectivity makes us better although a computer can beat us at chess. My daughters can beat me at chess but none of us are motivated to play that game anymore. Thanks, Fred!

      Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: