.

Where Your Treasure Is

“Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth
and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and
steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where
neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not
break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will
your heart be also.” —Matthew 6:21

It’s Hannah. Judith, please unlock your door
And let me in! I”ve got to speak with you.
While Seth is counting wine-jugs at the store
I need a friend to talk to. Something new
Has greatly stirred my heart. May I share more?

It happened yesterday. I joined some mean
Yet bored and well-heeled matrons on the hill
Who, for amusement, mocked the Nazarene.
I cannot say what drew me even still.
In truth, our callous conduct was obscene.

We jeered as he proclaimed God loved the meek
And snickered when he said God blessed the poor.
But Judith! I then felt a pull to sneak
Away from those who mocked. When he spoke more
I felt such shame that scarlet burned my cheek.

He drew me to sit near him. O, his eyes
Pierced through me as he cut me to the quick.
I knew this man could see right through the lies
And boredom that defined our little clique
Which values only things that money buys.

He preached things I would once have heaped with scorn.
This rabbi… Judith, he was young and strange.
The more he spoke, the less that I felt torn
And started to believe that I could change.
Each shallow choice I’ve made now makes me mourn.

I’m stunned at how he grabbed me by the soul!
It was as if he shook me wide awake—
More than I’ve been in years! A deeper goal
Seems possible. To live for Heaven’s sake;
To stand with love; to be not rich but whole!

Still dazed, I entered town through our east gate
And met a woman begging in the cold.
Two days or more had passed since she last ate.
I had no coins to give… but I had gold.
My precious jewels now fill her empty plate!

I’ve flaunted wealth no better than a tart!
Forgive me, Judith. Though I’ve been a fool
My soul is called to make a fresh new start.
The gold I choose now is God’s golden rule—
For where your treasure is there beats your heart.

.

.

Lord of the Flies

“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.” The Tempest, Act I, scene 2.

Beware of all the places where you idle
For I shall find you. I shall sneak and sidle
Beside you—at the office, at the mall.
I’ll haunt you with my ghastly, ghostly pall
And dog you on the sidewalks, in the streets.
I’ll whisper hate in governmental seats
In cities, suburbs, villages and farms
I’ll muster up a myriad of harms.
The doubts I bring will torture, tempt and tickle
Men’s consciences (which are already fickle.)
You’ll never notice me. I wear no cape.
As Screwtape hints, I have a pleasing shape.
Don’t bother trying to hide—I’m everywhere
Promoting darkness, fostering despair.
I snort, I sniff, I snuff out morning light
And revel when you toss and turn at night.
My cunning ways will have you question love
As well as your Creator up above.
What little faith you have—I’ll make it waver.
Like sordid coins, I’ll make you count each favor.
And when you wonder how you could feel worse
I’ll make you certain living is a curse.
Then, once I’ve damaged you beyond repair,
I’ll make you think that I was never there.

.

.

Milton’s Secretary

“Where are you, Andrew? Veni, stulte vir!”
He bellows at me using Latin insults
And then demands my loyalty as if
He wore the Crown of our late headless King
Whose son, praise God, is soon to be restored.
A Crown, I say! The irony! This man
Who labored so with rhetoric and tract
To banish Monarchy and all our joy
In favor of a dour Commonwealth!
He thinks to hide on Charles’ coronation—
And should for his disservice to the State!
The Roundheads who still pay him their respects
Use lofty terms like poet, essayist,
Most civil servant, Cromwell’s brilliant minion
(The “Lord Protector” ever rot in Hell!)
I dare not whisper “traitor”—my employer
Who has been cursed to live with sightlessness
Can hear each breath I take, each muffled step.
He grieves a wife and babe dead these two years
But chants no dirge, not hymns nor lamentations.
He queries what I think of his Great Work
But I am dumb to all that he conceives
Concerning Eden and the Tree of Knowledge.
No marvel of poetic genius, I,
But just an underpaid amanuensis—
A servant to One vain as he is blind.
He rambles about Man’s First Disobedience,
And ruminates with over-pious droning
On Satan, Father Adam, Mother Eve
And all the Angels, those who fell and those
Who chose to stay aligned with our great Maker,
The World’s Creator, blessed Threefold God.
He wields such pride as would rewrite the Bible
And speaks of Jesus as if He were known!
Illumination despite loss of sight!
I have to wonder at such vanity.
He thinks himself a Samson, agonized,
Who sees God through the spending of his light.
Although I sometimes ponder if he’s right
To work for him is humorless and bleak.
But soft! He calls. I dare no longer speak.

.

Poet notes: In Latin “veni, stulte vir” means “come, you stupid man.”

The “Roundheads” were the anti-Monarchist/pro-Parliament faction which caused Charles I to be beheaded in 1649 and Oliver Cromwell to be placed in power as England’s “Lord Protector.”

The Stuart monarchy was restored in 1660 when Charles II was crowned king. The Restoration occurred midway through Milton’s composition of Paradise Lost (1658-1664.)

As a point of trivia, Andrew Marvell was once an amanuensis to John Milton.

.

.

Brian Yapko is a lawyer who also writes poetry. He lives in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

NOTE TO READERS: If you enjoyed this poem or other content, please consider making a donation to the Society of Classical Poets.

The Society of Classical Poets does not endorse any views expressed in individual poems or commentary.


CODEC Stories:

20 Responses

  1. Julian D. Woodruff

    These are great, Brian–a lot of both in- and per-spiration. The alliteration in Flies give the devil an appropriately sly, self-satisfied aspect.
    I was caught (predictably) in the Marvell plaint by the line “He rambles …” The line indeed rambles, as you probably intend, but in view of the regularity of line length elsewhere, this moment seems more a jolt than an illustration,
    Nonetheless, thanks for 3 fine pieces.

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thank you for your comment, Julian! I’m glad you liked my work — especially my “Lord of the Flies” poem — the devil is very much at work these days and I’m all for anything that will expose him.

      On the “ramble” line — unless I’m much mistaken, I think what creates the feeling of being disjointed is the word “disobedience’.” Counting syllables is problematic here — and so it was for John Milton in the first line of Paradise Lost! His first line states “Of Man’s first disobedience and the fruit…” Yet is it presented as perfect iambic pentameter. The reader of Paradise Lost has no choice but to read the word “disobedience” as four syllables instead of five. And so, alas, I feel poetically bound to follow his choice wherever it may lead! While on the subject of Miltonic style, I also capitalize certain nouns that would not normally be capitalized in modern usage in homage to his work.

      Thank you very much for reading and for letting me explain my thinking.

      Reply
      • Julian D. Woodruff

        I overlooked your capitalization completely, it seemed so natural and proper to the period and style.
        “Disobedience” is easily understood as a 4-syllable word in M’s metrical context–as “dour,” as you use it somewhere in the poem, is easily understood as being 2 syllables rather than 1.
        But Brian, I don’t see how to scan the “He rambles …” as a 5-foot line congruent with its surroundings.

      • Brian Yapko

        Julian, would it scan better for you if I inverted the sentence so that “disobedience” appears in the middle, as in Paradise Lost and then eliminated the word “ramble?” The sentence would then read “Of Man’s First Disobedience he declaims…” I rather like this alteration because it echoes very directly the first line of Paradise Lost. What do you think?

  2. Paul Freeman

    ‘to be not rich but whole’ – love it! A Life-affirming observation.

    I really enjoyed the rich use of alliteration in ‘Lord of the Flies’.

    I’m a great fan of Shakespeare-esque soliloquies like ‘Milton’s Secretary’.

    All three deserve returning to. Thanks for the reads, Brian.

    Reply
  3. Jeremiah Johnson

    Hi Brian,

    So, as a fan of Milton’s PL, and having just read Lewis’s “Preface to Paradise Lost” and finding it profound, and therefore being bothered by your poem yet not knowing much about M personally, I sent your poem off to a friend who’s better informed. My friend’s response was a bit heated, so I hope you don’t take it too personally (as he certainly didn’t ask me to forward it to you), but I thought I would share his thoughts:

    “Milton was highly aware of his talents, and this could make him proud. But Milton was not the only person in seventeenth-century England who had a strong religious zeal, so it seems in poor taste to single him out for that. Milton was far more cultured and rational in his approach to Christianity than many of his more zealous contemporaries.

    It also seems strange to me that the speaker of the poem would be a royalist, as if the Commonwealth had been forced on the nation and hadn’t been at least strongly supported by a wide variety of people. I don’t know why Milton would employ a royalist as an amanuensis — or why a royalist would wish to be associated with him. Milton was actually highly courageous and kept fighting the restoration right until the moment it happened.

    But he gives himself away with the line “rambles on.” No one who knew Milton thought that his poetry was “rambling,” everyone knew it was genius. If Yapko thinks that those opening lines of PL — which are some of the greatest poetry every written in the English language — are “over-pious droning,” then that says more about him than it does Milton. Even Milton’s royalist enemies immediately recognized the value of PL when it first came out.”

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thank you for your very rich comment, Jeremiah. And for caring enough to show the poem to a friend. However, I think you’re not quite getting what I’m aiming for in this poem. It’s not a character study of Milton. It’s a character study of his rather shallow amanuensis, in a Browning-style dramatic monologue. My God — I love Paradise Lost! I took an entire course on Milton as an undergrad and I think he’s one of the most profound writers in English literature. However, this poem is set at a very specific time and place — it’s early 1660 and he’s at a low point in his popularity. Cromwell has just died, the Commonwealth is being regarded as a huge mistake, Charles has just been invited back to restore the monarchy and Milton’s works are being burned. My poem is not trying to give an English major’s account of who Milton was in literature. I’m trying to show the great man through the narrow (and narrow-minded) eyes of an amanuensis who doesn’t have a clue what all this “Paradise Lost” stuff means, and for whom it’s simply pious, incomprehensible droning (believe him when he self-describes as “No marvel of poetic genius I…”!) And he keeps his royalist sentiments secret. (“I dare not whisper traitor…” and “I dare no longer speak.” But to bring the eyes of how history regards Milton into the poem, I tucked in the line towards the end “Although I sometimes ponder if he’s right” — because of course Milton’s right in the sense that he was indeed divinely inspired!

      Jeremiah, I hope this clarifies my poetic intent and the difference between the speaker and his subject. This poem is rather similar to my “Salieri on Mozart” poem in which the speaker, Salieri, is an antihero and trashes Mozart. Understand, please, that Mozart is my favorite of all composers! And so it is here. If I personally didn’t admire Milton I wouldn’t waste the time drafting an homage.

      Thank you again for your interest and your loyalty to one of the great poets in English literature!

      Reply
  4. Julian D. Woodruff

    Brian,
    Your suggested revision works metrically, but do you miss Marvell’s disenchantment? (I admit, “Declaims,” intoned facetiously, might be effective in an oral reading.) At any rate, all the possibilities I was mulling earlier today stretch “disobedience” into a clear 5 syllables; none of the verbs I came up with were especially apt. Maybe your rambling line is the best, but I think I’d speak it deliberately, letting the momentary extra “footage” shine out in all its glory.

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thanks, Julian. I’ll leave the line alone then, proving that the speaker is “no marvel of poetic genius…” By the way, I’m not convinced the speaker actually is Andrew Marvell. I threw that trivia into the mix for fun but the speaker denies actually being a (if not THE) marvel and the characterization does not align well with the poet Marvell. Either he’s not Marvell at all or he’s a heavily fictionalized version. But I did want the reader to wonder…

      Reply
  5. Susan Jarvis Bryant

    Brian, you have an admirable knack of taking on characters and bringing them to life through magnificently observed points of view, and this trio of delights shines with your skill.

    In ‘Where Your Treasure Is’, Hannah is utterly believable – the tale of her personal encounter with the Messiah is humbling, human, and oh so relatable. Her change in attitude and excitement is tangible, uplifting, and inspiring. Above all, I love the honesty you portray. You use poetry as an enticing medium for something greater – a message we need all to hear. In fact, your character portrayals are so real, it’s easy to mistake the snarky, contentious voice for that of your own, as is evident in ‘Milton’s Secretary’… the complexities of Andrew Marvell’s persona made me snigger.

    My favorite is ‘Lord of the Flies’ – you’ve done the devil so well, I’m beginning to worry. 😉 The rhyming couplets are delicious, and being a fan of The Screwtape Letters, I can hear Screwtape’s malfeasant, mellifluous tones throughout. An absolute triumph! I love the alliterative ‘… idle/sneak and sidle / Beside you…’ – just one of the many highlights in this masterly piece. Superb!

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thank you very much for your considered comment, Susan. I appreciate your careful reading of my work and that you understand what I’m doing so well. Of these three poems, if there’s one that comes closest to my own voice it would be “Where Your Treasure Is” because, as you know, I’m very much invested in taking biblical lessons and bringing them into real life situations. Hannah’s revelation in the light of the Sermon on the Mount is meant to show how Christ inspired an ordinary person with questionable values to follow Him.

      Thank you as well for explaining my “Milton’s Secretary” poem. I would have thought the level of snark and ignorance displayed within the poem would have clued a careful reader into realizing that this was irony. Alas, we bring ourselves into our reading just as much as we bring ourselves into the writing, even to the point of ignoring important tonal and linguistic clues. Did I not do the same with your “Ode to Spring” poem?

      I’m thrilled that you liked my “Lord of the Flies” poem. I just recently re-read The Screwtape Letters and found them to be more relevant than ever. Because C.S. Lewis is a special favorite of mine I’m also rereading the entire Narnia series. Concerning the prosody of this poem, I have a little secret to impart — I decided to see if I could bring some trademark Susan-Jarvis-Bryant-style alliteration and assonance into my poem — to “try it on” as it were — especially since this particular diabolic subject cries out for your phenomenal ability to weaponize alliteration. I’m pleased to see that it worked and served the subject well! I learn from you all the time and thank you for that!

      Reply
  6. Margaret Coats

    Three perceptive poems, Brian! You created a Hannah whose sudden change under the influence of Jesus is remarkable. Her thoughts still go in every direction, and she is still a woman with a desperate need to talk. Even her language bears the marks of someone converted yesterday, and unsure of what to say and how to say it, despite real, new happiness.

    I recognized the Susan Jarvis Bryant style as I was reading “Lord of the Flies”! You ended that on the right note, with the conviction of the proud sinner on his way to hell that the devil does not exist. Being away from home, I had to rush to an Ascension Day Mass where the priest gave a number of proofs that the event being celebrated today is illogical.

    “Milton’s Secretary” presents a view of Milton that I like as I remember many, many unpleasantly ponderous passages. One of my teachers said no wonder Milton favored divorce, after the wife broken by his strict scholarly lifestyle left him. You make the secretary a comparable character, but unlike the wife, one with literary and Biblical and political knowledge. And your blank verse is Shakespearean rather than Miltonic, as we see when the “aside” ends. The secretary may not be Marvell, but your poem contributes to the discussion over what Marvell’s real position may have been, if he had any view that was other than purely pragmatic.

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thank you for your comment, Margaret. I’m pleased that you liked my “Where Your Treasure Is” poem. Yes, Hannah’s change of character does come rather speedily and it’s 100% due to the influence of Christ. From what I’ve seen, such conversion experiences are often emotional rather than intellectual. In Hannah’s case she is experiencing something utterly novel which has indeed made her a bit giddy and which can only be attributed to her encounter with the Prince of Peace. I suspect she will backslide here and there, but that overall she will be a solid newly-minted First Century Christian.

      I very much appreciate your approval of my “Lord of the Flies” poem. The wonderful thing about poetic devices such as alliteration and internal rhyme is they can suggest a level of intellectual heft and sophistication which can either be used for good or for evil. In this case, they fit the diabolism of the speaker. I am concerned, however, about the priest you encountered who gave proofs of the illogic of the Ascension. Is this what the church has come to?

      I also appreciate your comments on “Milton’s Secretary.” It may be less Milton than Shakespearian (“but soft” was an irresistible throw-in because it scanned and said “be quiet” in a nice 17th Century way.) I leave it to the reader to decide if the speaker is Marvell or not. There’s enough to suggest it could be, but I think the speaker is not sensitive enough to actually be the great poet, nor would he be insincere in his admiration for Milton, plus the real Marvell would have been too engaged in other activities to be an amanuensis at this time.

      Reply
  7. David Watt

    Brian, these three distinctive pieces are excellent. In particular, I enjoyed the devilishly detailed description in “Lord of the Flies”, sufficient to send a shiver up the spine.

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thank you very much, David. Then I accomplished what I set out to do!

      Reply
  8. Adam Wasem

    Thank you, Brian, for these. It’s so refreshing to see poets both writing in character and taking the Bible and classic poets seriously. I don’t recall if I’ve seen the rhyme scheme of “Where Your Treasure Is” before, and yet you pull it off so naturally it makes it seem like a canonical form–though, admittedly, my knowledge of classical rhyme schemes is far from comprehensive.

    Also, it’s both bracing and richly amusing to think about how a “stulte vir,” would perceive greatness like Milton’s, especially near the end of the Interregnum, and I enjoyed all the little nods to his works throughout your poem. My American bias toward Republican government was especially tickled by the declamation against a “dour Commonwealth.” As far as biases go, though, I have to register a personal one against such “misunderstood genius” accounts in fiction. I tend to believe that such conflicts with close associates of historical greats tend to be exaggerated for dramatic effect, and I personally find it difficult to believe a man of such intelligence and discernment as Milton would employ an obvious idiot as his literary secretary. On the other hand, admittedly, it has been known to happen–look at what happened to Frost with Lawrance Thompson. All in all, bravo.

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thank you very much for your rich comment, Adam. As for poetic taste, all of the above! I love writing in character and I take the Bible and classical poets very seriously indeed, occasionally writing an homage to some of my favorites, of whom Robert Browning looms particularly large. I’m not aware of any precedent for the use of my rhyme scheme. I just happen to like the way it’s subtle lack of symmetry supports a conversational tone.

      I love what you have to say about Milton’s Secretary. You’re so right. A man of Milton’s intelligence would never have hired let alone retained this particular secretary. But I took liberties with history and character just a little bit (think “Amadeus” and the fictionalizing of Salieri and Mozart) so that I could have some fun with so obviously a fictional situation. In my mind’s eye I saw Milton at a low point in his life, rejected and considered poison in the public eye yet slogging on. I imagined his difficulty in finding or retaining a secretary, being forced to scrape the bottom of the barrel a bit, and I imagined a reluctant scrivener working simply to hold onto a job he disliked as an “underpaid amanuensis.” I’m sure the reality was nothing like this.

      Thank you again for your kind words!

      Reply
  9. Alec Ream

    Brian: these works of yours happen to glow. If you, or your family, or people group lift up Jesus Christ? Know that He will return the favor. For example, I attended a “Kirking of the Tartans” service recently. To be sure, the Scots are just another tribe in the world. Just another exiled tribe enduring their scattered diaspora. However, for a long time en masse they lifted up the Son of God. As Tolkien wrote (much paraphrased / sry): after the elven have graced a land, the lingering blessing is measurable yet in the long leagues of years which follow.

    Reply
    • Brian Yapko

      Thank you very much for reading and commenting, Alec. I appreciate your kind sentiments.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Captcha loading...

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