THREE KINDS OF MULTIVOCALITY: This post mentioned the idea of multivocality, and now I think maybe I should explain what I meant by it.
It's obvious that our world is characterized by conflict, by conflicting loves and loyalties and definitions and norms.
There are at least three ways to respond to that conflict.
#1: Heighten both sides as much as possible, and then reconcile them in some beloved. This is the basic philosophical movement of the Catholic Church. Everything gets raised to a fever pitch--reason is amazing! but so is mysticism! Celibacy is witness to Heaven--but so is marriage! The individual is so important that his life must be defended even before he has any self-consciousness; and yet the self must be offered up as a sacrifice. It's like everything in the world gets turned up to 11.
#2: Acknowledge conflicts, and reconcile them in the sovereign self. This is what I did back when I was a feminist. I loved all those "I wear makeup, but I'm totally a feminist!" anthologies which were such a hallmark of the 1990s. You could do whatever you wanted to do as long as you a) acknowledged that most of your persona was a subset of patriarchy and b) decided that a) was okay because you were a self-actualized self-esteeming Selfette.
#3: Just state completely conflicting personae and worldviews as compellingly as possible, and then stand back. This is the Shakespeare tactic. It's why he's raw material for philosophy, rather than himself being a philosopher--it's simply not true that Measure for Measure and Hamlet take place in the same universe, or Love's Labour's Lost and King Lear.
I think there are ways to get past this anatomy; Sexual Personae, for example, gets in on all three of these options, without (IMO) ever developing a viable fourth alternative. But I don't know... I wish leftists would acknowledge that almost all of their attempts to wrestle the past end up in option #2, and if I don't like that, I'm not some kind of simplistic moron who can't fathom more than one side of a fight.
"After all, I'm not a progressive," she said with a wry grin.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
CHASTE GIRLS ARE EASY: Some postscripts to my paean to chastity, below.
First: When I reflected, I found that the cruel intensifying of drama I associated with sex really only took place in heterosexual couples. Gay guys seemed to do okay. You all know that I don't recommend gay sex! But I need to be honest, and say that sex between gay guys didn't seem to ratchet up the melodrama nearly as much as sex between girls and guys.
...I don't, and I say this with a strong feeling of picked-last-in-volleyball, have a reading on how sex between dykes affected their worldviews.
Second: It's easy to mock Gilbert Chesterton's shtik about the people who say they disagree with the doctrine of the Trinity, but what they mean is that they're sleeping with their neighbors' wives.
But I think even people who disagree with me might be able to agree that if you're having sex out of wedlock, there are a lot of philosophical and religious traditions which say you're doing something wrong, and therefore you might be less open to those traditions.
Some people really love traditions that tell them, "You're wrong!" But others find it hard to say, "You know, we really need to stop doing this--I'm not sure if it's right, and I need to know what I'd think of [insert worldview here] if I weren't going against it every time you and I get in bed."
If you're going to seriously consider sacrificial worldviews at all, it might make sense to get away from the personal situations which would make those sacrifices harder. At least for a little while. A semester is not that long, you know? Ars longa vita brevis and all that--give up a semester of sex for a lifetime of knowing you weren't swayed away from the right philosophy by your hormones.
Third: You know, if you're a girl and you had sex in college and it didn't distort your experience, that's great. If you're all, "Hey, I had such great sex with my boyfriends, and now I'm a Sister of Life and they're rum-running anarchists and staid fathers of three respectively," keep in mind that all advice is based on desperately stupid generalities. The institution of the advice columnist is inherently flawed, inherently tuned toward the majority rather than toward the interesting. So if you think I'm not talking about you, maybe I'm not.
On the other hand, maybe I disagree with your self-assessment of your collegiate escapades. God knows I go back and forth about how I should talk about my own college years.
Fourth, and maybe most importantly: The Busted Halo guide is, I think, a guide to leaving college intact.
If you think maybe you need to leave college broken--like I did, although admittedly I entered it even less fruitfully broken--it won't help you.
First: When I reflected, I found that the cruel intensifying of drama I associated with sex really only took place in heterosexual couples. Gay guys seemed to do okay. You all know that I don't recommend gay sex! But I need to be honest, and say that sex between gay guys didn't seem to ratchet up the melodrama nearly as much as sex between girls and guys.
...I don't, and I say this with a strong feeling of picked-last-in-volleyball, have a reading on how sex between dykes affected their worldviews.
Second: It's easy to mock Gilbert Chesterton's shtik about the people who say they disagree with the doctrine of the Trinity, but what they mean is that they're sleeping with their neighbors' wives.
But I think even people who disagree with me might be able to agree that if you're having sex out of wedlock, there are a lot of philosophical and religious traditions which say you're doing something wrong, and therefore you might be less open to those traditions.
Some people really love traditions that tell them, "You're wrong!" But others find it hard to say, "You know, we really need to stop doing this--I'm not sure if it's right, and I need to know what I'd think of [insert worldview here] if I weren't going against it every time you and I get in bed."
If you're going to seriously consider sacrificial worldviews at all, it might make sense to get away from the personal situations which would make those sacrifices harder. At least for a little while. A semester is not that long, you know? Ars longa vita brevis and all that--give up a semester of sex for a lifetime of knowing you weren't swayed away from the right philosophy by your hormones.
Third: You know, if you're a girl and you had sex in college and it didn't distort your experience, that's great. If you're all, "Hey, I had such great sex with my boyfriends, and now I'm a Sister of Life and they're rum-running anarchists and staid fathers of three respectively," keep in mind that all advice is based on desperately stupid generalities. The institution of the advice columnist is inherently flawed, inherently tuned toward the majority rather than toward the interesting. So if you think I'm not talking about you, maybe I'm not.
On the other hand, maybe I disagree with your self-assessment of your collegiate escapades. God knows I go back and forth about how I should talk about my own college years.
Fourth, and maybe most importantly: The Busted Halo guide is, I think, a guide to leaving college intact.
If you think maybe you need to leave college broken--like I did, although admittedly I entered it even less fruitfully broken--it won't help you.
Labels:
bright college days
This type of hope has been subjected to an increasingly harsh critique in modern times: it is dismissed as pure individualism, a way of abandoning the world to its misery and taking refuge in a private form of eternal salvation. Henri de Lubac, in the introduction to his seminal book Catholicisme: Aspects sociaux du dogme, assembled some characteristic articulations of this viewpoint, one of which is worth quoting: "Should I have found joy? No... only my joy, and taht is something wildly different.... The joy of Jesus can be personal. It can belong to a single man and he is saved. He is at peace... now and always, but he is alone. The isolation of this joy does not trouble him. On the contrary: he is the chosen one! In his blessedness he passes through the battlefields with a rose in his hand."
Against this, drawing upon the vast range of patristic theology, de Lubac was able to demonstrate that salvation has always been considered a "social" reality. Indeed, the Letter to the Hebrews speaks of a "city" (cf. 11:10, 16; 12:22; 13:14) and therefore of communal salvation. Consistently with this view, sin is understood by the Fathers as the destruction of the unity of the human race, as fragmentation and division. Babel, the place where languages were confused, the place of separation, is seen to be an expression of what sin fundamentally is.
--Benedict XVI, Spe Salvi
Against this, drawing upon the vast range of patristic theology, de Lubac was able to demonstrate that salvation has always been considered a "social" reality. Indeed, the Letter to the Hebrews speaks of a "city" (cf. 11:10, 16; 12:22; 13:14) and therefore of communal salvation. Consistently with this view, sin is understood by the Fathers as the destruction of the unity of the human race, as fragmentation and division. Babel, the place where languages were confused, the place of separation, is seen to be an expression of what sin fundamentally is.
--Benedict XVI, Spe Salvi
HOW TO GO TO COLLEGE. Busted Halo has a guide for freshmen here. It might not surprise you to learn that my own college experience is evidence against at least half the items on their list. I'd be pretty interested in other people's reactions to my reactions, since I know my college experience was weird.
That's due to my situation, and I know that. My impression is that Yale is (or was--I just turned thirty, and now I'm even older) much, much more lax about class attendance than many other universities. Yale is right, of course, but that doesn't mean you can get away with skipping classes at Doesn't Matter just because your administration has an awful educational philosophy. There are also obvious class issues; it's easier to do college the way I did if you're not work-study, although I saw a lot of people do it my way without the money, so don't assume that a radical reshaping of worldview is a luxury good. Beyond all that--the BH guide is completely right if you want to achieve the goals with which you entered college.
If the goals with which you entered college felt, even to yourself, hollow and inadequate; or if they were soon revealed to be so; and if you are able to find some other, intense, personal community in which to pursue truth... here are some additions and corrections to the BH guide.
They Say: 1. Be Generous With Your Friendship But Stingy With Your Trust
"The friends you have back home didn’t get to be your friends overnight. It took months — or, more likely, years — to establish those friendships."
I Say: Yeah, I agree with BH that colleges harbor their share of criminals, and far more than their share of drama queens. And I missed out on or lost time with some good friendships by trusting the wrong people. On the other hand, I don't know that "stinginess" is the right metaphor here, ever. You're dealing with people who are radically different from you, and if you're lucky, you'll reshape one another. Can you be stingy with yourself in philosophy?
I also agree, actually, that you can have a friend you don't trust in every situation, but I'd like more clarity on what that means.
They Say: 2. Go to Class!
"Seems obvious—it IS why you’re at college—but you wouldn’t believe how many freshmen skip their way out of school. Do a little math and figure out how much it costs for you to have your butt in that chair per hour."
I could not agree less. Look, it obviously depends. If you will flunk out unless you go to class, go to class! (Unless you and those to whom you're responsible will benefit from whatever you do when you flunk out, in which case, talk to other people who have taken the collegeless route and then if it really seems like it might work, I won't say you nay.) Apparently schools which aren't Yale are really hardcore about class attendance, for some creepy high-school reason I can't fathom. But if that's how your school is, obviously, don't get kicked out, and try not to skate. If you try to skate you will fall, because undergraduates can't gauge how thin the ice is underneath them; if you try not to skate, you might skate.
If you can't follow the material without going to class, go to class. The only class for which I had perfect attendance and for which I always did the reading was my freshman year class in "Plato's metaphysics"--it was so ridiculously over my head that the only way I could manage "...decent work for a freshman" was to work my tail off.
Otherwise, go to class when it interests you. But seriously, if you're at a college with Yale's relative (and late-90s--again, I'm older than I've ever been) insouciance toward attendance, and Yale's intense focus on extracurriculars, then you're wasting the money that sent you there if you don't take advantage of the amazing extracurricular opportunities you've been given. Know the policies that will affect your student career. But also know that, to use the cliche, the most important lessons are usually learned outside the classroom. Don't waste your extracurricular time.
They Say: 3. For the First Few Weeks Live Like a Monk
This I actually think is decentish advice, not that I ever took it. Chastity, poverty, and obedience are very, very worthwhile ways to begin your college career.
About chastity, by the way, though: Look, you're an American undergrad in 2008. You will have drama. Chastity will make that drama much, much more fruitful for you.
No joke: If you are hardcore about chastity, you can fall in love with your professors much more fruitfully. You can have all kinds of ridiculous, hurtful interpersonal drama, which I guarantee you'll have anyway, but without the pregnancy scares and with a less-awful emotional intensity (it'll still be sufficiently awful) and with a much larger range of possible objects of drama. You can get ridiculous about someone else with a much lesser chance of tanking your academic performance.
...I know you won't believe me, but I'm totally right. Chastity means that when you fall hard for somebody you're likelier to come out without horror on the other side of heartbreak. And if there's no heartbreak, well--then you all can get frisky when you graduate.
They Say: 4. Sleep is Good
I Say: You know your own body best. If you're so anxious, mind racing, that you can't work when you don't sleep, then yeah, BH's advice is right. If you're me, then you can get six hours a night at best through the semester, then spend the break with your face planted firmly in a pillow. You're young and all-nighters may be totally available to you--they were to me--but do try to understand your own rhythms and needs. Know yourself, keep an eye on your moods and your relative energy/listlessness levels, and try not to rely solely on fried food and coffee for sustenance.
They Say: 5. Get Involved…but Not Too Involved
"The college experience is about so much more than classes. Campus activities and organizations are a great way to expand your horizons and connect with other students who share your interests. Every club, activity and association will be vying for your time. Be choosey. If you tend to be a 'joiner,' be careful not to over-commit yourself."
I don't even know what to say. Sure, most extracurrics are as pointless as most classes. But if you find something worth diving into headfirst, and you can still be a student (see above re: don't get kicked out), why not do it? Extracurrics are likely closer to what you'll be doing in the so-called Real World than your classes are, anyway.
They Say: 7. Fight Homesickness Without Going Home
This is the first of several BH bits of advice with which I agree wholeheartedly. I wish I'd been more homesick as a freshman. I was much too callow to understand what my home and my family meant to me. Homesickness is a sign of genuine, if conflicted, self-understanding; but I agree that going home in response to it is more likely to exacerbate it than to help you reconcile your past and future.
I also agree that you should ask for help. Don't assume it's hopeless, whatever "it" is. Your dean, your RA, your health department, your mental health counselors--seriously, if you think you need them, talk to them.
And yeah, some people at your college will steal your stuff if you let them. Don't let them.
They Say: 12. Too Much of a Dangerous Thing
"You might be tempted to tune this advice out because you’ve heard it so many times but…DON’T! I can’t tell you how many kids I’ve known who’ve bombed out because they drank too much! ... Underage drinking is a bad idea. Don’t do it."
Yeah, I can't agree with this even one little bit. Again, pay attention to yourself, your patterns. Don't flunk out! But... man, I'd be lyin' like a rug if I said I regretted drinking underage. Drinking underage led me to do some very stupid things, and some things I genuinely regret. It also led me to do some fairly awesome things, and to do and say some things I needed to do and say. I guess what I'd say instead of "don't!" is, "Read The Secret History, and keep in mind that there's always death under Dionysos' ecstasy." And pay close attention to how your words and actions affect others.
They Say: "Just because you’re not a good arguer that doesn’t make you a bad Christian (or Jew or Muslim or Buddhist)!"
That's definitely true. Again, this comes down to who you are, and to what extent you perceive your preexisting beliefs to be adequate. It's ridiculous to say that every person in the world, regardless of educational background or intellectual capacity or vocation, should be able to win a debate with Richard Dawkins.
On the other hand, if you are drawn to intellectual discussion of your faith, maybe there's a reason. If you're troubled by the questions people around you raise, maybe that's something you need to investigate. If you can be humble about your own ability to discern the truth, while still being valiant and ardent in your pursuit of truth, then I think you might have eros for truth, and that is a terrific thing.
Mistrust yourself. Pursue truth and beauty (and, because I'm me, I need to tell you to pursue sublimity). That is the very best way to go to college.
That's due to my situation, and I know that. My impression is that Yale is (or was--I just turned thirty, and now I'm even older) much, much more lax about class attendance than many other universities. Yale is right, of course, but that doesn't mean you can get away with skipping classes at Doesn't Matter just because your administration has an awful educational philosophy. There are also obvious class issues; it's easier to do college the way I did if you're not work-study, although I saw a lot of people do it my way without the money, so don't assume that a radical reshaping of worldview is a luxury good. Beyond all that--the BH guide is completely right if you want to achieve the goals with which you entered college.
If the goals with which you entered college felt, even to yourself, hollow and inadequate; or if they were soon revealed to be so; and if you are able to find some other, intense, personal community in which to pursue truth... here are some additions and corrections to the BH guide.
They Say: 1. Be Generous With Your Friendship But Stingy With Your Trust
"The friends you have back home didn’t get to be your friends overnight. It took months — or, more likely, years — to establish those friendships."
I Say: Yeah, I agree with BH that colleges harbor their share of criminals, and far more than their share of drama queens. And I missed out on or lost time with some good friendships by trusting the wrong people. On the other hand, I don't know that "stinginess" is the right metaphor here, ever. You're dealing with people who are radically different from you, and if you're lucky, you'll reshape one another. Can you be stingy with yourself in philosophy?
I also agree, actually, that you can have a friend you don't trust in every situation, but I'd like more clarity on what that means.
They Say: 2. Go to Class!
"Seems obvious—it IS why you’re at college—but you wouldn’t believe how many freshmen skip their way out of school. Do a little math and figure out how much it costs for you to have your butt in that chair per hour."
I could not agree less. Look, it obviously depends. If you will flunk out unless you go to class, go to class! (Unless you and those to whom you're responsible will benefit from whatever you do when you flunk out, in which case, talk to other people who have taken the collegeless route and then if it really seems like it might work, I won't say you nay.) Apparently schools which aren't Yale are really hardcore about class attendance, for some creepy high-school reason I can't fathom. But if that's how your school is, obviously, don't get kicked out, and try not to skate. If you try to skate you will fall, because undergraduates can't gauge how thin the ice is underneath them; if you try not to skate, you might skate.
If you can't follow the material without going to class, go to class. The only class for which I had perfect attendance and for which I always did the reading was my freshman year class in "Plato's metaphysics"--it was so ridiculously over my head that the only way I could manage "...decent work for a freshman" was to work my tail off.
Otherwise, go to class when it interests you. But seriously, if you're at a college with Yale's relative (and late-90s--again, I'm older than I've ever been) insouciance toward attendance, and Yale's intense focus on extracurriculars, then you're wasting the money that sent you there if you don't take advantage of the amazing extracurricular opportunities you've been given. Know the policies that will affect your student career. But also know that, to use the cliche, the most important lessons are usually learned outside the classroom. Don't waste your extracurricular time.
They Say: 3. For the First Few Weeks Live Like a Monk
This I actually think is decentish advice, not that I ever took it. Chastity, poverty, and obedience are very, very worthwhile ways to begin your college career.
About chastity, by the way, though: Look, you're an American undergrad in 2008. You will have drama. Chastity will make that drama much, much more fruitful for you.
No joke: If you are hardcore about chastity, you can fall in love with your professors much more fruitfully. You can have all kinds of ridiculous, hurtful interpersonal drama, which I guarantee you'll have anyway, but without the pregnancy scares and with a less-awful emotional intensity (it'll still be sufficiently awful) and with a much larger range of possible objects of drama. You can get ridiculous about someone else with a much lesser chance of tanking your academic performance.
...I know you won't believe me, but I'm totally right. Chastity means that when you fall hard for somebody you're likelier to come out without horror on the other side of heartbreak. And if there's no heartbreak, well--then you all can get frisky when you graduate.
They Say: 4. Sleep is Good
I Say: You know your own body best. If you're so anxious, mind racing, that you can't work when you don't sleep, then yeah, BH's advice is right. If you're me, then you can get six hours a night at best through the semester, then spend the break with your face planted firmly in a pillow. You're young and all-nighters may be totally available to you--they were to me--but do try to understand your own rhythms and needs. Know yourself, keep an eye on your moods and your relative energy/listlessness levels, and try not to rely solely on fried food and coffee for sustenance.
They Say: 5. Get Involved…but Not Too Involved
"The college experience is about so much more than classes. Campus activities and organizations are a great way to expand your horizons and connect with other students who share your interests. Every club, activity and association will be vying for your time. Be choosey. If you tend to be a 'joiner,' be careful not to over-commit yourself."
I don't even know what to say. Sure, most extracurrics are as pointless as most classes. But if you find something worth diving into headfirst, and you can still be a student (see above re: don't get kicked out), why not do it? Extracurrics are likely closer to what you'll be doing in the so-called Real World than your classes are, anyway.
They Say: 7. Fight Homesickness Without Going Home
This is the first of several BH bits of advice with which I agree wholeheartedly. I wish I'd been more homesick as a freshman. I was much too callow to understand what my home and my family meant to me. Homesickness is a sign of genuine, if conflicted, self-understanding; but I agree that going home in response to it is more likely to exacerbate it than to help you reconcile your past and future.
I also agree that you should ask for help. Don't assume it's hopeless, whatever "it" is. Your dean, your RA, your health department, your mental health counselors--seriously, if you think you need them, talk to them.
And yeah, some people at your college will steal your stuff if you let them. Don't let them.
They Say: 12. Too Much of a Dangerous Thing
"You might be tempted to tune this advice out because you’ve heard it so many times but…DON’T! I can’t tell you how many kids I’ve known who’ve bombed out because they drank too much! ... Underage drinking is a bad idea. Don’t do it."
Yeah, I can't agree with this even one little bit. Again, pay attention to yourself, your patterns. Don't flunk out! But... man, I'd be lyin' like a rug if I said I regretted drinking underage. Drinking underage led me to do some very stupid things, and some things I genuinely regret. It also led me to do some fairly awesome things, and to do and say some things I needed to do and say. I guess what I'd say instead of "don't!" is, "Read The Secret History, and keep in mind that there's always death under Dionysos' ecstasy." And pay close attention to how your words and actions affect others.
They Say: "Just because you’re not a good arguer that doesn’t make you a bad Christian (or Jew or Muslim or Buddhist)!"
That's definitely true. Again, this comes down to who you are, and to what extent you perceive your preexisting beliefs to be adequate. It's ridiculous to say that every person in the world, regardless of educational background or intellectual capacity or vocation, should be able to win a debate with Richard Dawkins.
On the other hand, if you are drawn to intellectual discussion of your faith, maybe there's a reason. If you're troubled by the questions people around you raise, maybe that's something you need to investigate. If you can be humble about your own ability to discern the truth, while still being valiant and ardent in your pursuit of truth, then I think you might have eros for truth, and that is a terrific thing.
Mistrust yourself. Pursue truth and beauty (and, because I'm me, I need to tell you to pursue sublimity). That is the very best way to go to college.
Labels:
bright college days
RECONCILING THE SEEMINGLY DISPARATE: I posted a ton of links on MarriageDebate today, and I will feel bad if no one goes and checks them out. Don't make me emo! ;_; WOE.
No, actually, there's a lot of interesting stuff up today, all circling more or less silently around the question of sex differences. If you disagree with the links--or with my assessment of their underlying common theme--BLOG ABOUT IT, so I can link you on the site!
No, actually, there's a lot of interesting stuff up today, all circling more or less silently around the question of sex differences. If you disagree with the links--or with my assessment of their underlying common theme--BLOG ABOUT IT, so I can link you on the site!
THE SILLY PUTTY CHURCH: I guess you all already know exactly what I think of Nancy Pelosi's ardent-Catholic-abortion shtik. (more) It's "I'm a good person," it's We Are Church, and you know, if I'm church, I think maybe church isn't that great.
It's also how a nearly three-quarters majority of American Catholics (in that order, apparently) end up supporting torture.
I was once privileged to hear a discourse on the nature of conscience in the Church, in which the obvious righteousness of the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was marshaled to support the potential okayness of gay sex. The Magisterium: so inconvenient!
"The creatures outside looked from Giuliani to Biden, and from Biden to Giuliani, and from Giuliani to Biden again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
Me, I'm not devout. I have a rosary kicking around in my bookbag and daggone if I don't always find some excuse not to hike it out and spend twenty minutes fitfully contemplating my Lord. I'm not ardent. I am lucky if I pray twice in a day, not counting when the ambulances and the cop cars go by. I'm not a good Catholic. I don't say this with a kind of reverse pride. I think it's creepy, and you guys can point out that I've written for money about praying the rosary even though I do it much, much less than 99.99% of the people who do it for free. I say this as someone who needs to go to Confession, someone who (Ratty can attest) consistently puts off confessing until I've spiraled low enough that I can't ignore it anymore. I hang on by the fingernails and skate on thin ice and hope like hell--or, you know, I hope I hope like purgatory.
I'm completely convinced that the people who say they're good, they're ardent, they're devout, are people who try hard to do the right thing and believe what they say they believe and don't lie, and in many cases do a lot more concrete good in the world than I do. I just... I can't agree that what they support is Catholic--at least, not in the way that Morrissey is Catholic.
It's also how a nearly three-quarters majority of American Catholics (in that order, apparently) end up supporting torture.
I was once privileged to hear a discourse on the nature of conscience in the Church, in which the obvious righteousness of the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was marshaled to support the potential okayness of gay sex. The Magisterium: so inconvenient!
"The creatures outside looked from Giuliani to Biden, and from Biden to Giuliani, and from Giuliani to Biden again; but already it was impossible to say which was which."
Me, I'm not devout. I have a rosary kicking around in my bookbag and daggone if I don't always find some excuse not to hike it out and spend twenty minutes fitfully contemplating my Lord. I'm not ardent. I am lucky if I pray twice in a day, not counting when the ambulances and the cop cars go by. I'm not a good Catholic. I don't say this with a kind of reverse pride. I think it's creepy, and you guys can point out that I've written for money about praying the rosary even though I do it much, much less than 99.99% of the people who do it for free. I say this as someone who needs to go to Confession, someone who (Ratty can attest) consistently puts off confessing until I've spiraled low enough that I can't ignore it anymore. I hang on by the fingernails and skate on thin ice and hope like hell--or, you know, I hope I hope like purgatory.
I'm completely convinced that the people who say they're good, they're ardent, they're devout, are people who try hard to do the right thing and believe what they say they believe and don't lie, and in many cases do a lot more concrete good in the world than I do. I just... I can't agree that what they support is Catholic--at least, not in the way that Morrissey is Catholic.
Friday, August 29, 2008
WHAT A DIFFERENCE A DAY MAKES: This post reminds me that back in 2000, when Bush II was the candidate of a "humble foreign policy" (not that I entirely know what that would mean), some members of the Party of the Right kicked around "COME GET BOMBED AT OUR CLINTON FAREWELL PARTY" as an election-night boozefest slogan.
I TRUST YOU ARE ALL RECOVERED FROM YOUR HANGOVERS. Some things around the web about the Democratic convention, which I didn't watch.
Jesse Walker's Shorter Barack Obama.
Some notes on applause.
A libertarian video I can't watch on this computer... but it intrigues me: Dems back away from free trade.
The bits I liked from the Reactionary Epicurean's liveblogging:
scroll down (and if all the "they"s in the bits I quoted put you off, seriously, click--guy and I disagree on many a thing, but he's not a McCainiac by a long shot)
The bits I liked from the Democratic convention: the parts where they denounced torture. (and more) Seriously, since this has, horrifically, become a minority position in this country, the Dems win my admiration by not caving--at least, you know, in their rhetoric. More on this in a bit.
And Mickey Kaus notes Dems vs. teachers' unions. I do share the skepticism of... someone... some blogger... who?... of Kaus's "one size fits all" testing-based approach. But the Booker/Fenty stuff rings completely true.
Jesse Walker's Shorter Barack Obama.
Some notes on applause.
A libertarian video I can't watch on this computer... but it intrigues me: Dems back away from free trade.
The bits I liked from the Reactionary Epicurean's liveblogging:
8:16pm I'm amazed again by how perceptive Yuval Levin's aritcle on 'Science and the Left' is. They don't actually respect science, but it's an important part of their identity to believe that they do. ...
9:23pm "We are on the right side of history." I had no idea they were still into Hegel.
scroll down (and if all the "they"s in the bits I quoted put you off, seriously, click--guy and I disagree on many a thing, but he's not a McCainiac by a long shot)
The bits I liked from the Democratic convention: the parts where they denounced torture. (and more) Seriously, since this has, horrifically, become a minority position in this country, the Dems win my admiration by not caving--at least, you know, in their rhetoric. More on this in a bit.
And Mickey Kaus notes Dems vs. teachers' unions. I do share the skepticism of... someone... some blogger... who?... of Kaus's "one size fits all" testing-based approach. But the Booker/Fenty stuff rings completely true.
FAIRYTALE IN TOKYO: Recently watched Tokyo Godfathers, based on Claw of the Conciliator's 2006 recommendation. (And yes, now you know exactly how long it takes something to go from the bottom of my Netflix queue to the top.) It's about three homeless people who find an abandoned baby on Christmas Eve. I really, really liked it, despite its sentimentality--the particular combination of sentimentality and harshness and melodrama and gentleness reminded me oddly of Sullivan's Travels. An old-fashioned approach to moviemaking.
Also, the characters don't have those giant Hello Kitty anime eyes. They often looked, to my desperately uneducated eyes, somewhat like the uglier caricatures in ukiyo-e. So if the eyes creep you out, don't worry, Netflix this anyway.
Also, the characters don't have those giant Hello Kitty anime eyes. They often looked, to my desperately uneducated eyes, somewhat like the uglier caricatures in ukiyo-e. So if the eyes creep you out, don't worry, Netflix this anyway.
EROS AND EDUCATION: I know this is ridiculously late, but I've been distracted and all August humid-hazy in the brain. Here are some clarifying comments I made to X. Trapnel of Books Do Furnish a Room, about our brief dust-up. (Me, him, me.)
1) "I totally agree [that it's still possible for people with radically divergent premises and even languages/definitions to pursue truth together], and I'm sorry this particular approach to meta-discussion didn't highlight that agreement. BUT--and this is why so much philosophy goes so wrong--good debate on morals & politics (I still prefer 'virtue' as the word for this stuff) can only take place when there's a rich context of story and persona. If I want to talk about marriage (to use the easiest example to hand) I need to talk about the Song of Songs, not just more abstract nouns, and I need to create some sense of my persona in your mind.
"That's necessary b/c persuasion is leadership. We need to create some kind of relationship in order for you to understand what I'm saying. Huckabee (or the rhetorical strategy I'm calling 'Huckabee'!) fails here b/c he basically rejects any attempt to create a relationship with people who don't already share his conclusions. That's ridiculous, it's retreat, just the opposite of leadership.
"This is why a) good philosophical dialogues are superior to good philosophical treatises, and b) just about all of the work that has to be done to 'resurrect' virtue-talk must be done at the level of culture, not politics as such. (So Huckabee/'Huckabee' was already quite handicapped.)"
2) "I think we disagree on what aesthetics is, and where its limits are. Possibly I can clarify by saying that I'm talking about aesthetics as a philosophy of love, not a philosophy of taste? [edit: Should be, not solely as a philosophy of taste.] I mean, I disagree with you about 'de gustibus' anyway, but I think you can keep believing that and still end up on my side here."
[note: Of course it's possible to dispute taste! The guys at Project Rungay do it all the time, and often convince one another or their readers.]
[and here I say that leadership is not only about showing people something new to love, but also about revealing the secret identity of the beloved for whom they're already longing:] "I'm very OK with showing people how their own longings (aesthetic!) are answered by my worldview."
1) "I totally agree [that it's still possible for people with radically divergent premises and even languages/definitions to pursue truth together], and I'm sorry this particular approach to meta-discussion didn't highlight that agreement. BUT--and this is why so much philosophy goes so wrong--good debate on morals & politics (I still prefer 'virtue' as the word for this stuff) can only take place when there's a rich context of story and persona. If I want to talk about marriage (to use the easiest example to hand) I need to talk about the Song of Songs, not just more abstract nouns, and I need to create some sense of my persona in your mind.
"That's necessary b/c persuasion is leadership. We need to create some kind of relationship in order for you to understand what I'm saying. Huckabee (or the rhetorical strategy I'm calling 'Huckabee'!) fails here b/c he basically rejects any attempt to create a relationship with people who don't already share his conclusions. That's ridiculous, it's retreat, just the opposite of leadership.
"This is why a) good philosophical dialogues are superior to good philosophical treatises, and b) just about all of the work that has to be done to 'resurrect' virtue-talk must be done at the level of culture, not politics as such. (So Huckabee/'Huckabee' was already quite handicapped.)"
2) "I think we disagree on what aesthetics is, and where its limits are. Possibly I can clarify by saying that I'm talking about aesthetics as a philosophy of love, not a philosophy of taste? [edit: Should be, not solely as a philosophy of taste.] I mean, I disagree with you about 'de gustibus' anyway, but I think you can keep believing that and still end up on my side here."
[note: Of course it's possible to dispute taste! The guys at Project Rungay do it all the time, and often convince one another or their readers.]
[and here I say that leadership is not only about showing people something new to love, but also about revealing the secret identity of the beloved for whom they're already longing:] "I'm very OK with showing people how their own longings (aesthetic!) are answered by my worldview."
Labels:
Apollo and Dionysos,
eros,
Project Runway
A LINK FOR THE CIGARETTE SMOKING BLOGGER. And, really, for the cigarette-smoking blogger in us all. Via Sean Collins.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
VAMP: At Virginia Postrel's new blog "Deep Glamour: At the Intersection of Imagination and Desire," she muses:
(here)
To which a commenter acutely replies: "I don't think horror diminishes glamor, horror is a glamor of its own. Watch some vampire films if you doubt that."
Beyond the ordinary factors that give the Democrats an advantage this year, Barack Obama's glamour poses a huge problem for the McCain campaign. To destroy glamour, you have to change perceptions. You can try sober realism. But that lacks emotional punch. To strike at glamour's emotional core, horror and ridicule work better. Instead of telling the audience to ignore its desires and be rational, they replace desire with dread or derision. What was once inspirational becomes terrible or absurd.
(here)
To which a commenter acutely replies: "I don't think horror diminishes glamor, horror is a glamor of its own. Watch some vampire films if you doubt that."
"THE NIGHTMARE WORLD OF A VIRGIN'S DREAMS": I'll be posting every week at Ladyblog, a group blog at the newly-launched Culture11 site. Go check it out! A couple of the Yale Mafiosi are on board as well--Helen "Cigarette Smoking" Rittelmeyer and Nicola "Iqra'i" Karras.
My first post is about Repulsion.
My first post is about Repulsion.
Saturday, August 23, 2008
Since the end of the Middle Ages, intellectual life in Europe seems to have evolved along two major lines. The first of these was the liberation of thought and belief from the sway of all authority. In practice this meant the struggle of Reason, which at last felt it had come of age and won its independence, against the domination of the Roman Church. The second trend, on the other hand, was the covert but passionate search for a means to confer legitimacy on this freedom, for a new and sufficient authority arising out of Reason itself. We can probably generalize and say that Mind has by and large won this often strangely contradictory battle for two aims basically at odds with each other.
--The Glass Bead Game
--The Glass Bead Game
Thursday, August 21, 2008
HEARTS FULL OF YOUTH! HEARTS FULL OF TRUTH! SIX PARTS GIN TO ONE PART VERMOUTH! Megan McArdle on lowering the drinking age, and reducing DUIs.
THE VERY SHORT MIMES OF THE SNOW GODS DO NOT WISH AT ALL THAT THE VERY GREAT BURDEN OF DISTRIBUTING THE WINE OF THE WALLS WILL BE LIGHTENED IN THEIR LIFETIME.
Also, FKS is right that these recipes for happiness are worth reading (in order); and some of them would make nicely provocative debate resolutions....
Also, FKS is right that these recipes for happiness are worth reading (in order); and some of them would make nicely provocative debate resolutions....
Men like Abelard, Leibniz, and Hegel unquestionably were familiar with the dream of capturing the universe of the intellect in concentric systems, and pairing the living beauty of thought and art with the magical expressiveness of the exact sciences.
--Hermann Hesse, The Glass Bead Game, tr. Richard and Clara Winston
More from this later, but for now, I just liked the inversion of our--or my--expectations. I mostly hear "thought and art" praised for their "magical expressiveness," whereas when the sciences get praised on aesthetic grounds it's usually for their "living beauty".... I have no idea what this was in the German, and whether the connotations are carried over with any grace or fealty, but I like this sentence as translated.
--Hermann Hesse, The Glass Bead Game, tr. Richard and Clara Winston
More from this later, but for now, I just liked the inversion of our--or my--expectations. I mostly hear "thought and art" praised for their "magical expressiveness," whereas when the sciences get praised on aesthetic grounds it's usually for their "living beauty".... I have no idea what this was in the German, and whether the connotations are carried over with any grace or fealty, but I like this sentence as translated.
Tuesday, August 19, 2008
CAESURA: Radio silence will end either Friday or Saturday; I'll also reply to your emails then. Thanks so much to everyone who's written, esp. about the "How to Make Your Child a Gay Activist" piece! I'm sorry it's taking me so long to reply, but I will get to everyone this weekend.
Blog posts on deck: why I connect aesthetics and leadership; three kinds of multivocality; maybe some thoughts on "Project Runway." Probably some other stuff.
In the meantime, enjoy your respite from all things me!
Blog posts on deck: why I connect aesthetics and leadership; three kinds of multivocality; maybe some thoughts on "Project Runway." Probably some other stuff.
In the meantime, enjoy your respite from all things me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)