I generally like a little philosophical pondering. While in my own fiction I generally endeavour to write an engaging story before anything else, the odd bit of philosophical pondering and even metaphysical debate has been known to find its way in. The mysteries of existence have ever fascinated me, and I studied such for my degree. I am, technically at least, a philosopher, and have been known to read Nietzsche, Descartes, even Plato for fun. All of which would suggest that I should enjoy this, the second of a trio of dialogues our Dear Edgar wrote to engage in pondering upon matters of existence between spirits in the after life…

However, given the first of the trio was The Conversation of Eiros and Charmion which I found less than entirely engaging, I tempered my ardour somewhat in advance. The first of these tales earned a solitary raven with good reason. It was at best dull, at worst somewhat unreadable. More importantly it didn’t really have anything to say, instead the spirts in question discussed the end of the world, the inspiration for which was a doomsday cult for an Armageddon that never happened. The story of the inspiration was far more interesting that the dialogue Dear Edgar wrote.

This did not bode well… But I took an open mind into the story.

Unlike the previous dialogue this tale is acctually a philosophical and metaphysical dialogue between two characters. In this case the characters in question go by the names Monos and Una, which are in turn the Greek and Latin for one. Between them they, and by extension Poe, explore themes of life, death, the nature of existence, and the relationship between the mortal world and the spiritual.

One of the issues with this piece of philosophical meandering wrapped up and a dialogue between two spirits is however is it fails to do what the best philosophy almost always does, its fails to express anything with a succinct beauty. The quote up above ‘All that we see or seem is but a dram within a dream’ is not from this dialogue, it is from a poem Pow wrote nine years later. Yet in comparison it is a much better piece of philosophy than this laboured piece, at least in my opinion for whatever that may be worth.

Written on the footsteps of The Island of the Fay there is a general theme informed by Poe’s growing abhorrence of North Eastern states of America’s increasing drive in the 1840’s towards mechanization and a primally industrial culture. He had developed the opinion that there was a need to return to nature to redefine the soul of humanity. There is however more than a degree of hippie-dippieness going on here. There are broader themes in regards to life, death, the impermanence of existence, decay both moral and physical.

It really is a bundle of laughs….

I am in fairness doing this dialogue a disservice here, compared with its predecessors this conversation has a lot to say and explores several interesting themes. It does however suffer from the same issue as the first in that it is a conversation between two entities who have passed beyond and, importantly, not an actual story. Instead it is a frame work for our Dear Edgar to explore his idea’s and concepts. It is rich with imagery and somewhat beautiful if occasionally macabre prose. It isn’t however a narrative, which, to be fair, it was never intended to be. The characters of Monos and Una are sympathetic allegories of unity and loneliness. The conversation is interesting in the abstract, but a tad indulgent as philosophy.

The problem I have with it is it isn’t a story, and while philosophically it is interesting Poe is far better at expressing complex themes and idea through an actual narrative than in what is a forced and somewhat disappointing way.

TWO RAVENS EXPRESSING CONCEPTS OF IMORTALITY WHILE DEAD

Should you read it : If you enjoy a philosophical meander

Should you not read it: If you are looking for a story, just avoid this as there isn’t one here.

Bluffers fact: By the time this ‘story’ was published (September 1941) Poe was several months into his stint as editor of Graham’s Magazine. Of his time at the magazine he said this.

“Perhaps the editors of no magazine, either in America or in Europe, ever sat down, at the close of a year, to contemplate the progress of their work with more satisfaction than we do now. Our success has been unexampled, almost incredible. We may assert without fear of contradiction that no periodical ever witnessed the same increase during so short a period.”

So, he was not full of himself at the time at all….