I enjoyed my internet sabbath immensely. I posted around 11:00 p.m. Saturday night,

and did not log back onto the internet again until about 30 minutes ago. Laura and I

enjoyed our Lord’s Day together, working together in the yard, eating well and reading by

the fire.



That said, here is a poem I wrote, called “Liars”:



Love’s supposed sages –

the poets and the novelists –

have bastardized what they grasp for;

making it into, or, more

correctly, defining it as

as a mystical instant, an ethereal haze

of indescribable “know it

when you feel it” something which

exists only within their pages.

They are liars.


For: love exists; but not

as they say, because it can be defined,

closely and concretely;

verbalized in the strictest sense—


In specific ways, which, simply, are love itself

with, or without, the instability of butterflied emotion.


About Danny Slavich

I am a Christian husband, father, pastor, and poet. I lead Pembroke Road Baptist Church a multi-cultural, multi-generational church in urban South Florida.
This entry was posted in Poetry. Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Liars

  1. Ben says:

    I have no idea what this means. You are so postmodern. Just kidding.

    I like the underlying idea. Kind of the opposite of “Love is a verb”, eh? That is, love consists not in what you do and feel, but rather in your nature itself.

  2. Lee says:

    Hmm… I read it as the opposite – love is not what you feel, but what you do. Concrete specifics – not ethereal, lepidopterous feelings.

  3. Lee says:

    But that appears to be par for the course for us, Ben 😉

  4. Ben says:

    Haha. Unfortunately, yes.

    You definitely get extra points for “lepidopterous” though … it seems like Danny could be saying either of our points; that is,

    1) could be nature rather than specifics (not because it can be defined, not activity)

    2) or it could be specifics, as opposed to instable feelings and outward show (lepidopterous)

  5. Lee says:

    Woohoo! Extra points! 🙂

    Oh – I guess I did mix both (of Danny’s) definitions when I said “concrete specifics”, didn’t I?

    What say ye, Danny?

  6. dslavich says:

    This poem was a reaction the flighty and emotive definitions of love assumed in so much literature (and pop culture).

    My point is that love is objective, more than it is subjective (though it is also subjective). And the objectivity of love can be seen in specific and concrete ways — such as the Father sending the Son. Love is an aboslute, objective thing, defined by specific parameters, especially, in action.

    So, I would say you both caught one of the sides of the coin I was tossing up. 🙂

  7. Lee says:

    So where does the “more than it is subjective” part come in? In

    In specific ways, which, simply, are love itself

    with, or without, the instability of butterflied emotion.


  8. Sarah says:

    This is a great poem. You’re really talented with words and it’s awesome to be able read your art, especially because of the Truth in it’s message. Good Job C-Dan!
    I’m glad we were able to chat today.

  9. Lee says:

    Why did Sarah just call you a sedan?

  10. dslavich says:

    Yeah, that’s where I wanted to acknowledge that there is a subjective side, but that it is much more than that.

    C-Dan is short for “Christmas Dan” a nickname Sarah gave me last year when I wore a green sweater to a Christmas dinner.


    Thanks. You obviously have amazing perception skills.

  11. Lee says:

    Then I must admit that I missed it in the first few passes!

    Ah, the Christmas jumper 😉

  12. Pingback: Lies about Love « almanac of captivity

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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