Skip to main content

If I Were a Bridge

for albert




Do not burn bridges. Friendship is a bridge.

Initially, when we think of a bridge, we imagine a constructed artifice which serves man by delivering him from one point to another in convenience. In convenience because a bridge is built to strategically connect two points at the shortest possible distance; it does not make sense to make a longer bridge when you can make a shorter one. Sensibly, a bridge is a practical innovation for people whose feet are always moving and whose eyes are always looking beyond what is near and into what is on the horizon. A bridge is man's wish to solidify what he walks on knowing that he cannot walk on water. To a certain extent, by building a bridge you are already flying.

But what essentially is a bridge? Is it merely a connection or a transition from one point to another? If I were a bridge, I wouldn't feel that. To be sure, humans would walk on me with the intention of reaching the other end; but when they walk on me, from end to end, they walk on me and not on the two distant points. True, I recognize that I have ends--those two points--but those ends are not only for me the two places I connect but those ends constitute me essentially; they make me what I am. What being does not have an end? Those very limits define me; they are mine and not of the two places I connect. In short, I am my own man. I exist not as an extension of two points; but I am a line which coincidentally ends on those two points. Those two points, as it were, remain themselves even if I touch them. Conversely, I remain a bridge by myself even if I am touched by those two points. To me, it does not matter what points I connect (two cliffs, two banks, two streets, etc.) because I have my own being. Technically speaking, I am a subsistent relation between two points. Relation because I bring two distant and different points together (I make them meet) and subsistent because I am not an accidental feature of the two points but I make the relation by virtue of my own being, that is, by being a bridge.

If it were not for me, the two points I bring together would not be related to each other. They have no way of extending themselves to other points by virtue of their definition of being a point: they have to stay there, stay put in their location, in their simple indivisibility without
extension. My miracle of miracles is my ability to gather these two points. But it is important to mention here that I do not dissolve those two points into a unity or an identity; they remain themselves, distant to each other yet now nearer to each other because of me. I preserve their distance and actually distance is what essentially constitutes me; if those two points were already co-incidental and not only near but are already the same (same point with no difference), they would not only have no need of me but they would also no longer have a relation to each other. Because remember, I am the relation itself. And I would need distance and difference as requirements before I come into the picture. I may gather two points together but I do not dissolve them into a unity. Actually, I make them more different, farther from each other even if I bring them together. Why?

Because I am the sadness of two points that will never be together in each other's arms. But I am also the joy of two people who need not meet but now call themselves friends.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Fields of Amorsolo

The first National Artist in Philippine history, referred to warmly as the “Grand Old Man of Philippine Art,” Fernando Amorsolo (1892–1972) still stands today as a looming figure in Philippine art responsible for being one of the artists who helped define what we up to now visually imagine as essentially Filipino. The images of rural life, of golden fields below clear blue, blue skies; the smiles of farmers which diminish their weariness as they plant, harvest, and winnow rice;most especially the iconic figure of the Filipina maiden working in the fields—the beloved dalagang bukid--; these, I believe, even after generations of Filipino painters since Amorsolo, have remained in our hearts and memory. Amorsolo did what great masters do for their country: bestow upon it its own icons, represent its native beauty, that is, to give its people and lands an identity and a face. There are, however, as many intentions for art as there are works of art. And these intentions will always remain in…

[Payapang Daigdig]

Written by Pat Nogoy, S.J.

Payapang Daigdig Felipe de Leon, Sr. 
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik  Pati mga tala      Sa bughaw na langit 

Kay hinhin ng hangin Waring umiibig          Sa kapayapaan          Ng buong daigdig     
Payapang panahon    Ay diwa ng buhay Biyaya ng Diyos       Sa sangkatauhan
Ang gabi'y payapa Lahat ay tahimik Pati mga tala Sa bughaw na langit  
Pati mga tala           Sa bughaw na langit


The gift delivers Being/being Jean Luc Marion

There is something about the night.
The blanket of darkness hovering the other half of the day sparks ambivalence. Everything is the same in darkness—fear, joy, pain, triumph, doubt, glory, sorrow. Identities recede unto the vast anonymity. There is a pervading anxiety where existence slips into nothingness. One is never certain what to make out of darkness; maybe that is why the night shakes us because we never know. One cannot avoid imagining a something that is greater, higher, mightier, (even sinister) that lurks (hence the power of ghos…

Without Why (The Rose) II

Lifetime is a child at play; moving pieces in a game.
Kingship belongs to the child.

Heraclitus, Fragment 52


The child at play never asks itself why it plays. The child just plays; and if it could, it will play as long as possible, it will play throughout its life. See its delight and witness its smile.

If it would never go hungry or if the sun would never set it too will never leave its playmates and playthings. Time flies at play because it stops or suspends time. Time -- as we grownups only know too well -- is the culprit for order, schedules and priorities; yet for the child, there is no time, there is only bottomless play. It is we who impose that this or that should be done at this or that time. We stop the absurd and supposedly endless play ("He does nothing but play") because we insist that discipline, order and priorities be instilled in the child at an early age ("He needs to learn other things beside playing"). So that the child will become like us one da…