A Light Exists in Spring

Claude Monet

Claude Monet, “Garden at Givenchy”

I’m a day late celebrating Earth Day but here’s a wonderful spring poem by Emily Dickinson. I love how she picks up on the magical lighting at this time of year—“It almost speaks to you”—and how she describes it passing away as horizons constrict and time moves on (“Noons report”). Perhaps the missing “Formula of sound” is bells tolling the death of the light’s passing.

In other words, she is describing an epiphanic moment, perhaps comparable to the holy moment of connection captured by Kenneth Grahame’s “The Piper at the Gates of Dawn” in The Wind in the Willows (which I’ve written about here). For a short time the world is appareled in celestial light, to quote Wordsworth, and indeed the poem seems shot through with allusions to  “Intimations of Immortality.” Then summer encroaches like business upon a holy sacrament. So enjoy the season while you can. 

A Light exists in Spring
Not present on the Year
At any other period –
When March is scarcely here

A Color stands abroad
On Solitary Fields
That Science cannot overtake
But Human Nature feels.

It waits upon the Lawn,
It shows the furthest Tree
Upon the furthest Slope you know
It almost speaks to you.

Then as Horizons step
Or Noons report away
Without the Formula of sound
It passes and we stay –

A quality of loss
Affecting our Content
As Trade had suddenly encroached
Upon a Sacrament.

Follow-up note: Here’s the most relevant passage from “Intimations of Immortality”:

I hear, I hear, with joy I hear! –
But there’s a tree, of many, one,
A single field which I have look’d upon,
Both of them speak of something that is gone:
The pansy at my feet
Doth the same tale repeat:
Whither is fled the visionary gleam?
Where is it now, the glory and the dream? 

Posted in Dickinson (Emily) | Tagged , , , , , | 1 Comment

Is Atwood’s Dystopia Coming True?

Handmaid's Tale

Can a novel cause one to panic prematurely? I’ve been wondering about this since teaching The Handmaid’s Tale at a time when we see the cultural battle against women’s reproductive rights picking up steam. How concerned should those of us be who believe that women should have control over their own reproductive choices, including whether or not to have an abortion? A number of my women students are very worried, and Atwood’s novel adds fuel to their fire.

In case you have missed it, Republican legislatures in North Dakota, Kansas, Alabama, Mississippi, and Arkansas seem to be competing about who can outdo the others. North Dakota’s new law limits forbids abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy, Arkansas’s new law after 12. North Dakota has also passed a law limiting drug-induced abortions while Kansas, apparently paving the way for a series of measures in the future, has just declared that “life” begins at fertilization. Mississippi and Alabama have passed so-called TRAP laws (Targeted Restrictions against Abortion Providers) designed to make it impossible for abortion clinics to stay open, and Indiana, Virginia, Texas, and North Carolina are considering the same. Many of these laws will be overruled by court order as being unconstitutional, given that Roe v. Wade is still the law of the land. But that isn’t stopping legislatures from passing laws.

There are other disturbing signals as well. GOP candidate Rick Santorum, who finished second to Mitt Romney, attacked birth control itself, not just abortion, and some of the agitation against Obamacare has focused on the way it pays for contraception.  In another area, Congress almost failed to renew the once uncontroversial Violence against Women Act. In fact most House Republicans voted against it.

In Atwood’s dystopian novel, anti-abortion agitation eventually leads to the oppressive Republic of Gilead, which the author modeled on the mullahs’ clamp down on women’s freedom following the Iranian Revolution. In Handmaid’s Tale, the repressive forces are Christian, and some of their new laws are motivated by a plummeting birth rate, brought about a series of ecological disasters. Women who haven’t been observant fundamentalist Christians can be forced to become handmaids (Swift’s word in “Modest Proposal” is “breeders”), where they service couples where the woman is sterile.

Atwood’s narrator, who is one of these handmaids, has always been apolitical and notes that, when the first worrisome attacks on abortion doctors began, they always seemed to be someone else’s problem. Only in retrospect does she realize that these attacks were only the first step towards the current police state. Should we be worried ourselves?

There’s no question that we should remain vigilant, which is one of the purposes of Atwood’s book. But Atwood also notes that extraordinary circumstances need to have occurred for her dystopia to come into being. In more moderate times, extreme voices get pushed to the fringes. In America today, it is true that what were once fringe voices are now becoming prominent in some legislatures. But there is not yet a state without at least one abortion clinic (we’ll see what happens in North Dakota, Mississippi, and Alabama), and there is a powerful constituency pushing back against the state legislatures. After all, around 1.3 million American women choose to have abortions every year. And Roe v Wade is still the law of the land.

Proponents of women’s reproductive rights will need to keep speaking out and applying political pressure. But I think we’re a long way from Gilead at the moment.

Posted in Atwood (Margaret) | Tagged , , , , , | 3 Comments

Finding Peace along with a Lost Goat

Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot, "The Goat Herd of Genzano" (1843)

Jean-Baptiste-Camille Corot, “The Goat Herd of Genzano” (1843)

Spiritual Sunday

My good friend Sue Schmidt, who I met through this blog and who now periodically writes Sunday posts for Better Living through Beowulf, was in town visiting us over the last couple of days, and we had extensive conversations about straying from God, justice vs. mercy, and other substantive topics. 

Knowing that I’m in the midst of end of the semester work, Sue offered to write today’s post as she’d discovered a fine poem by the great Israeli poet Yehuda Amichai. Here’s her reflection on that poem.

In addition to Sue’s observations about the poem captures our longing for God who is our home, I add that the poem also points to the work that must be done between Israelis and Palestinians if they are to find genuine peace (Amichai’s “new religion”). I learned from this post by American doctor Michael Cooper, who has worked in the region, that the “Had Gadya machine” is a reference to an old and playful Aramaic fable, sung at the end of the Passover seder, about a cascading series of disasters, each one leading to an even worse one. Cooper says that Amichai’s allusion is pitch perfect for the escalating tit for tat between Israelis and Palestinians. 

I also note that the poem reminds me of the beloved Robert McCloskey children’s story “Blueberries for Sal.”

By Sue Schmidt

Today’s scripture in the lectionary readings is from John 10. “I am the Good Shepherd,” says Jesus. “The Good Shepherd takes care of the sheep.” Jesus, well-versed in the Hebrew scriptures, is no doubt remembering Psalm 23. “The Lord is my shepherd,” sings David, “I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures, he leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul.”

This is not the first time that Jesus will use the image of shepherd. Earlier in his gospel, John gives a series of three parables in which Jesus talks about lost things. The third of these is the story of the “lost” son, who wanders back to his father after having spent all of his father’s inheritance. We know it as the story of the prodigal son.

But the first of these parables is one in which the lost is not able to come home One of 100 sheep has gone astray and the shepherd must go out into the wilderness to find him. Ninety-nine are safely in the sheep-pen, but one has wandered. The shepherd will not rest until the sheep is safely home, and he rejoices in the success of his mission. He is not unlike those seekers in this poem by Yehuda Amichai.

In “An Arab Shepherd Is Searching for His goat on Mt. Zion,” two “kids,” a boy and a goat, have wandered from places of safety. Were they distracted? Afraid? Confused? Tempted by a fresh blade of grass or an interesting rock? Did the father tell his son to stay nearby? Had the shepherd marked out suitable pasture? We don’t know and it doesn’t seem to matter. Something precious is lost, is in danger. Hearts stop, voices taut with worry cry out. And then the missing are found, releasing laughter and tears.

Being lost seems to be part of being human. And the searching to make things right is what Jesus comes to do. Sometimes we don’t even know how or why we left the flock. But when we’re lost, that’s not important. What matters is that someone is on the hunt to find us and bring us home.

An Arab Shepherd Is Searching for His Goat on Mount Zion

By Yehuda Amichai 

An Arab shepherd is searching for his goat on Mount Zion
And on the opposite hill I am searching for my little boy.
An Arab shepherd and a Jewish father
Both in their temporary failure.
Our two voices met above
The Sultan’s Pool in the valley between us.
Neither of us wants the boy or the goat
To get caught in the wheels
Of the “Had Gadya” machine.

Afterward we found them among the bushes,
And our voices came back inside us
Laughing and crying.

Searching for a goat or for a child has always been
The beginning of a new religion in these mountains. 

Posted in Amichai (Yehuda) | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Golf & the Farthest Reaches of the Soul

adam-scott-golf-2-w352

Adam Scott, 2103 Masters winner

Sports Saturday

I thought and thought but, for the life of me, I couldn’t come up with a literary work that did justice to the craziness of last weekend’s Masters Tournament. What I particularly have in mind is the sequence where Tiger hit a perfect shot onto the green, only to have it carom off the flag pole and go into the water. And then for him to drop the ball in the wrong place, be penalized two strokes, and go on to finish fourth. Without that, I am convinced he would have won the tournament.

Anyway, here’s a golf poem by Texas poet Larry D. Thomas that celebrates the drive and the mental fortitude it takes to compete at the highest levels of the sport:

The Golfer 

Daily at daybreak, even in the rain,
I see him in the distance
sinking his tee into the teeing ground,
centering his white ball
snugly in the circle of its cup,
clutching the grip of his driver,
and merging his body and mind
for the drive, a solitary man, who,
with but his clubs, tees, balls and game
of power, grace and touch so precise
he calculates the breath of crows,
plays the farthest reaches of his soul. 

Posted in Thomas (Larry) | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Erotic Call of the Pear Tree

wild_pear-tree_in_flower

At my Leonardtown Library book group last night we discussed Zora Neale Hurston’s Their Eyes Were Watching God, which has one of the most erotic descriptions of a blossoming tree found anywhere. Janie is 16 and feeling those hormonal rushes that cast a glow over everything. That same glow has enveloped our campus as well as spring has hit full force, and everywhere I see students holding hands. The world throbs with new life and new promise.

Here’s the passage. Note the allusion to panpipes:

It was a spring afternoon in West Florida. Janie had spent most of the day under a blossoming pear tree in the backyard. She had been spending every minute that she could steal from her chores under that tree for the last three days. That was to say, ever since the first tiny bloom had opened. It had called her to come and gaze on a mystery. From barren brown stems to glistening leaf-buds; from the leaf-buds to snowy virginity of bloom. It stirred her tremendously. How? Why? It was like a flute song forgotten in another existence and remembered again. What? How? Why? This singing she heard that had nothing to do with her ears. The rose of the world was breathing out smell. It followed her through all her waking moments and caressed her in her sleep. It connected itself with other vaguely felt matters that had struck her outside observation and buried themselves in her flesh. Now they emerged and quested about her consciousness.

She was stretched on her back beneath the pear tree soaking in the alto chant of the visiting bees, the gold of the sun and the panting breath of the breeze when the inaudible voice of it all came to her. She saw a dust-bearing bee sink into the sanctum of a bloom; the thousand sister-calyxes arch to meet the love embrace and the ecstatic shiver of the tree from root to tiniest branch creaming in every blossom and frothing with delight. So this was a marriage! She had been summoned to behold a revelation. Then Janie felt a pain remorseless sweet that left her limp and languid.

After a while she got up from where she was and went over the little garden field entire. She was seeking confirmation of the voice and vision, and everywhere she found and acknowledged answers. A personal answer for all other creations except herself. She felt an answer seeking her, but where? When? How? She found herself at the kitchen door and stumbled inside. In the air of the room were flies tumbling and singing, marrying and giving in marriage. When she reached the narrow hallway she was reminded that her grandmother was home with a sick headache She was lying across the bed asleep so Janie tipped on out of the front door. Oh to be a pear tree—any tree in bloom! With kissing bees singing of the beginning of the world! She was sixteen. She had glossy leaves and bursting buds and she wanted to struggle with life but it seemed to elude her. Where were the singing bees for her? Nothing on the place nor in her grandma’s house answered her. She searched as much of the world as she could from the top of the front steps and then went on down to the front gate and leaned over to gaze up and down the road. Looking, waiting, breathing short with impatience. Waiting for the world to be made.

 The world lies all before her.

Posted in Hurston (Zora Neale) | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Faced with Bombs, Be Brutus, Not the Mob

Camuccini, "Death of Julius Caesar"

Camuccini, “Death of Julius Caesar”

Ideologues rush to judgment after every terrorist act where the criminal is unknown, and they are doing so again following the Boston Marathon bombing. In Julius Caesar Shakespeare has a powerful warning about the injustice we risk perpetrating when we do so. In the same play, he offers us a model for how we should behave.

One thinks we would have learned our lesson following the Oklahoma City bombing when a number of news organizations reported that the perpetrators were Islamic fundamentalists. (The act proved to be the work of a white American man sympathetic with rightwing militia movements.) Nevertheless, over the past couple of days The New York Post and Fox News both pointed at a Saudi spectator before retracting, and a number of Senators and Representatives have speculated irresponsibly and with no evidence. As Steven Benen notes,

 Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) wants to use Boston as an excuse to kill immigration reform, while Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) is arguing with a straight face, “We have people that are trained to act Hispanic when they are radical Islamists.”

Even Sen. Susan Collins of Maine, who as Benen points out is “supposed to know better,” has said,

“Whenever we have an attack like this it’s difficult not to think that it’s somehow involved in Islamic extremism. I don’t have evidence to back that up. That’s just based on previous attacks.”

Actually, more terrorist attacks in the United States have been perpetrated by Christians than by Muslims, but put that aside. Shakespeare warned us about such jumping to conclusions and targeting false suspects in Julius Caesar through the heartbreaking death of the poet Cinna.

In the mob riots that follow Caesar’s death, “Cinna the Poet” pays a price for sharing a name with “Cinna the conspirator”:

Third Citizen: 
Your name, sir, truly.


Cinna the Poet:
Truly, my name is Cinna.


First Citizen: 
Tear him to pieces; he’s a conspirator.


Cinna the Poet:
I am Cinna the poet, I am Cinna the poet.


Fourth Citizen 
Tear him for his bad verses, tear him for his bad verses.


Cinna the Poet: 
I am not Cinna the conspirator.


Fourth Citizen: It is no matter, his name’s Cinna; pluck but his
 name out of his heart, and turn him going.


Third Citizen: Tear him, tear him! Come, brands ho! fire-brands:
to Brutus’, to Cassius’; burn all: some to Decius’
house, and some to Casca’s; some to Ligarius’: away, go!


Against such mob behavior by ideological politicians and sensationalist media, it is our responsibility to stay principled and act with integrity. It is our responsibility to do what, to our best understanding, appears to be right:

This was the noblest Roman of them all:
All the conspirators save only he
Did that they did in envy of great Caesar;
He only, in a general honest thought
And common good to all, made one of them.
His life was gentle, and the elements
So mix’d in him that Nature might stand up
And say to all the world ‘This was a man!’

To put one’s country over one’s ego and selfish ambition. Think of the possibilities.

Posted in Shakespeare (William) | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Where Are the Toys of Yesteryear?

Brueghel, detail from "Children's Games"

Brueghel, detail from “Children’s Games”

Between my father’s declining mental condition, the loss of a good friend (Beth Reynolds, the mother of my colleague Kate Chandler), the horrific bombing in Boston, and the hectic end of the semester, I’m feeling emotionally wrung out. To cheer myself up, I went thumbing through some of my father’s unpublished poems and found this one, written for the family’s 1997 Christmas card.

As you will see, my father was old-fashioned when it came to toys. Of course, he got me and my brothers to fall in love with the most splendid toy of them all, which is books. Echoing François Villon’s famous “Ballad of the Ladies of Times Past” (with its haunting refrain, “Where are the snows of yesteryear?”), this poem has me reminiscing about the games we used to play with my father. As perhaps you have picked up from the light verse of his that I have regularly published, he has always had a child’s imagination. I sense the influence of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Child’s Garden of Verses in this poem:

Ballad of the Games of Yesteryear

By Scott Bates

Oh, tell me where, in what fair lands
Lie all the games we used to play,
The gliders launched with rubber bands,
Trucks, trains, and marbles, kites, croquet,
Diabolo and bilboquet,
Kick the Can and Ducks and Deer;
Where are the toys of yesterday?
Where are the games of yesteryear?

The stockings stuffed with jelly beans
We used to open starry-eyed
Now swell with murderous machines
Designed for kiddy fratricide;
Malevolent monsters lurk inside
The packages of Christmas cheer
Angrily waiting to get untied . . .
Where are the games of yesteryear?

Computer wars are grimly in
And guts and gore are all the go,
Death Stars invade the Planet Minh,
And cosmic killers run the show;
“As Barbie’s kissing G.I. Joe,
Six slimy aliens appear…”
(Which costs, of course, a lot of dough)–
Where are the games of yesteryear?

ENVOI

Consumer Parent, spare thy purse,
Waste not thy wealth on guns and gear;
Go buy a book—you could do worse—
And dream of games of yesteryear.

My parents have been among the most faithful readers of this blog, and I’ve always liked to surprise my father by publishing his poems. The fact that he will not be reading this one tears me apart.

Posted in Bates (Scott) | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

No Frigate Like a Liberal Arts Education

John Churchill, Phi Beta Kappa Secretary

John Churchill, Phi Beta Kappa Secretary

In our college’s recent Phi Beta Kappa induction ceremony, we heard a stirring address from John Churchill, the chapter’s national secretary. Speaking in the reconstruction of Maryland’s 1676 colonial state house where we hold our proceedings each year, Churchill cited a range of authors, from Plato to Emily Dickinson to Yogi Berra, as he made a passionate defense of the liberal arts.

Churchill is concerned that our society, rather than embracing the vision of a well-rounded education, is running frantically in the other direction. Such wrong-way running is captured by a number of thinkers:

Recently, I have been much taken with a thought expressed by Francis Bacon, who  wrote: When a man runs the wrong way, the more active and swift he is, the further he will go astray.” You can find much the same thought in Descartes, or in Lewis Carroll’s account of the exchange between Alice and the Cheshire Cat. But my favorite version belongs to Yogi Berra,  who is credited with having observed, “If you don’t know where you’re going, you’re likely to end up someplace else.” My worry is that American higher education may be headed down the wrong road.

Churchill labeled the wrong road in this case “First Job Syndrome.” Rather than thinking of education in the broadest sense, too many policymakers and pundits are trying to “vocationalize” it. Churchill mentioned the following examples:

–Kiplinger’s reports on the ten “worst” and ten “best” majors all favorable to vocationalism and hostile to the liberal arts and sciences.
–The recommendations in Florida about pricing differentials for academic programs in public universities based on “market-driven strategic demand.”
–The latest news from Coursera about how they intend to make credit possible.
–Pressures in California to use testing devices to reduce the backlog of students blocked from courses necessary to their degree programs.
–The erosion of teaching strength in the liberal arts and sciences.
–The retreat of states from the funding of public higher education.
–The threat that comes with the erosion of the economic standing of the middle class.
–An increasing stratification within higher education.
–The increasing income and wealth disparities of the American population.

“The consequence of this narrowed, short-sighted perspective,” Churchill said,

 is that the capacity of higher education to function, as it has for at least a century, as an agency of economic and social mobility, has been seriously damaged. That means the future of American democracy may well be at stake.

Churchill countered this vision of a wrong-way journey with the journey described by Emily Dickinson:

There is no Frigate like a Book
To take us Lands away
Nor any Coursers like a Page
Of prancing Poetry-
This Traverse may the poorest take
Without offense of Toll–
How frugal is the Chariot
That bears the Human Soul.

Here’s Churchill:

We’re going somewhere, not just messing about, and where we are going is connected with what in us is best and most worthy of cultivation.  The trip is good in itself;  it makes us better versions of ourselves;  it has side effects that make us more professionally and vocationally successful in life;  and it helps to make us better citizens of a participatory democracy.  Choose the argument you like best:  they all work.  The metaphorical travel that is the study of the liberal arts and sciences does these things.

Churchill even noted that Dickinson has good news for our cost-conscious society:

Now listen to Emily Dickinson again:  “How frugal is the Chariot/That bears the Human Soul.” We are not, in the Grand Scheme, talking about a lot of money here. The NEH has been starved and skimped on for decades. It operates now at 40% of its proven capacity–even less if you adjust for population growth since that high tide in–can you imagine–1979!  We have let these critically important, inexpensive studies languish in a crossfire of suspicion, to the detriment of our national health.  The programs that have suffered most are the research programs, the very ones that sustain the activity at the core of the humanities’ value.

Churchill told us that Phi Beta Kappa has decided to become a far more vocal advocate for the liberal arts than it has been for some time. If the liberal arts are under attack, then the organization must take advantage of its half a million members:

Our aim is to identify, recruit, equip, and organize for advocacy, some significant number of our half-million to carry our message to those who hold American higher education in stewardship.

Our intended audience comprises all decision-makers and opinion-shapers who hold America’s higher education infrastructure in trust.

This will include lawmakers at all levels, trustees, members of state boards of higher education, and others, similarly placed.  We will urge them to reframe their thinking about the purposes of higher education.

We aim to complement the current ruling ideas, narrowly focused on short-term job preparation, with a renewed awareness of the importance of higher education in 

(1) preparing people for whole careers, not just initial jobs,
(2) building the dispositions of citizenship essential to the maintenance of a democratic society,
(3) engaging students in issues and experiences that raise the level of American society as a whole toward fuller visions of human flourishing, and
(4) equipping individuals and society to deal responsibly with matters of meaning and value.

We want decision makers to be mindful of the liberal arts and sciences as vital, central elements of its mission, not frills or dispensable luxuries.  We accept the task of carrying that case to those whose decisions will shape that mission. We will marshal data.  We will collect and disseminate personal narratives.

Those in attendance were particularly appreciative of how Churchill emphasized that the liberal arts must reach out to all sectors of society. As a public liberal arts college, St. Mary’s is particularly concerned with how (in Churchill’s words) “students who would benefit most from immersion in the liberal arts and sciences will be increasingly less likely to encounter them.”

Being a public liberal arts college means that we model ourselves on small private colleges but charge state tuition. We’re still more expensive than we like, but we cost half of what the private colleges do, which gives us special opportunities to reach out to students who couldn’t normally afford such an education.  Churchill’s speech strengthened our resolve to continue recruiting lower income students in inner city Baltimore and Washington and in rural Eastern Shore Maryland.

I leave you with Churchill’s final words:

Phi Beta Kappa wants to advocate “Learning, for All of Life.”  Yoking learning and life calls forth our Greek origin: “philosophia biou kybernetes” means “Love of learning is the guide of life.” The word “all” is a critical addition. “All” means all of life in the chronological sense, but also in the sense of breadth–we think learning in the liberal arts and sciences, learning in college, pertains to the whole scope of human life, in its richness and reach, not just to, say, getting the first job. “Learning, for All of Life” reaches out deep and wide. It calls on our classical origins. It speaks to the need to raise the American conversation about college above short-sighted and confining notions of its purposes. It reaches toward the future. It may well become our rallying cry, and we hope you’ll help us try it out:  Learning, for All of Life!

This is exactly what I wanted our students to hear.

Posted in Dickinson (Emily) | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Brothers Bonding over a Father’s Illness

James Baldwin

James Baldwin

Last week my Faculty Reading Group, which has been focusing on the issue of human suffering this semester, discussed “Sonny’s Blues” by James Baldwin. I’d suggested the story in part because it is helping me appreciate my younger brother Jonathan, the second of the four Bates boys, as we figure out how to support my mother and our ailing father.

“Sonny’s Blues” is about two brothers, and my love for the story undoubtedly stems from the fact that I identity with the older brother, who is the narrator. Older siblings often adopt, wholesale, the parents’ values, their reasoning process, and their agenda, and that’s both what I did and what the narrator does. The elder siblings are often expected to stand in for the parents when the parents are gone, and at one point Baldwin’s narrator finds himself, just prior to leaving for the army, promising his mother that he will take care of his younger brother Sonny if anything ever happens to her:

“You got to hold on to your brother,” she said, “and don’t let him fall, no matter what it looks like is happening to him and no matter how evil you gets with him. You going to be evil with him many a time. But don’t you forget what I told you, you hear?”

“I won’t forget,” I said. “Don’t you worry, I won’t forget. I won’t let nothing happen to Sonny.”

My mother smiled as though she was amused at something she saw in my face. Then, “You may not be able to stop nothing from happening. But you got to let him know you’s there.”

As it turns out, when the mother dies the narrator can’t do what he promised he would do—keep Sonny safe—and he doesn’t do what his mother asked him: he doesn’t always let Sonny know he’s there. That’s because Sonny refuses to follow his brother’s career advice and instead becomes a jazz pianist. Then he is arrested for heroine possession, and the narrator is so upset that, for a long time, he refuses to reach out to Sonny in prison. Only after his little daughter dies of polio does he do so.

If older siblings are their parents’ surrogates, second children are often the sensitive ones, picking up on family tensions that the older ones refuse to see. Not committed to the parents’ agenda, they look for other ways of being and can become rebels. Just as Sonny becomes a jazz pianist, so my brother Jonathan was far more into the 1970s counterculture than I was. We sparred a lot over the years, especially as children.

But it is often the sensitive ones who have something very special to communicate. Sonny finally is able to shake his older brother out of his prideful belief that he has to have everything under control, including his own feelings, and that he has to keep everyone safe. In fact, no one can keep anyone safe, and the more important thing may be to acknowledge our love for each other in an unsafe world. Sonny uses his music to communicate this message to his older brother at the end of the story:

Sonny’s fingers filled the air with life, his life. But that life contained so many others. And Sonny went all the way back, he really began with the spare, flat statement of the opening phrase of the song. Then he began to make it his. It was very beautiful because it wasn’t hurried and it was no longer a lament. I seemed to hear with what burning he had made it his, and what burning we had yet to make it ours, how we could cease lamenting. Freedom lurked around us and I understood, at last, that he could help us to be free if we would listen, that he would never be free until we did. Yet, there was no battle in his face now, I heard what he had gone through, and would continue to go through until he came to rest in earth. He had made it his: that long line, of which we knew only Mama and Daddy. And he was giving it back, as everything must be given back, so that, passing through death, it can live forever. I saw my mother’s face again, and felt, for the first time, how the stones of the road she had walked on must have bruised her feet. I saw the moonlit road where my father’s brother died. And it brought something else back to me, and carried me past it, I saw my little girl again and felt Isabel’s tears again, and I felt my own tears begin to rise. And I was yet aware that this was only a moment, that the world waited outside, as hungry as a tiger, and that trouble stretched above us, longer than the sky.

It’s not exactly this way in our family. But Jonathan is proving extraordinarily sensitive to the anxieties that are tearing at my mother and is communicating what he picks up to the rest of us. Just as the narrator and Sonny find a new bond after all that has passed between them, so I am finding a new bond with Jonathan as we worry together about our parents.

That’s the one silver lining in this whole affair.

Posted in Baldwin (James) | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Something Inside the Nothing

Caravaggio, "Conversion of St. Paul on the Road to Damascus"

Caravaggio, “Conversion of St. Paul on the Road to Damascus”

Spiritual Sunday

Today in church we hear the story of Paul’s famous “road to Damascus” conversion. Paul (at that point Saul) was persecuting followers of Christ but was suddenly blinded by a great light and heard Jesus calling out , “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” Paul was instructed to seek out Ananias, a Christian disciple, who restored his sight. Paul would go on to become Christianity’s greatest apostle.

Here’s a poem inspired by the story, by Delaware’s poet laureate Fleda Brown. It can also be read as a description of the poetic process or anything that involves inspiration. I love the way that Brown describes the initial moment of God’s call. At first we do not know what to make of it—a miracle has happened but all we see is darkness. Only upon later reflection do the scales fall from our eyes and we see “the something inside the nothing.”

And then, we subject ourselves to strict discipline in an attempt to recreate that moment of contact with divinity. Perhaps it requires becoming once again senseless and blind.

 The Road to Damascus

By Fleda Brown

Paul, dust flying, pretty sure of himself,

but beginning, say, to feel the possibility of change.

A swing vote. You know what’s coming:

the blinding light, angels sliding down,

scuffing their wings.

Megaphone voice, quotation marks.

But when he opens his eyes, nothing,

of course, because you have not come to the “inner

meaning.” Frazzled, irreversibly shot through

with someone or something’s idea

of the miraculous, he looks up where stars

used to be.



It’s later, when Ananias places his hands

on Paul’s eyes that the scales fall, translucent

as fish scales, fluttering and shimmering,

and behold: the something inside the nothing.

If life’s short, it’s just been doubled

by a before and an after.

What did you ever yearn for but to arrive

at a climax? Could be anything,

as long as it’s something. The world doesn’t

have to be footnoted with metaphor:

listen, the whole thing could be metaphor.

In any case, after that, you believe

something can happen. You try to reproduce it.

You try the same road, similar weather conditions,

you fix on the same thoughts. Pebbles

and sand again.

Anyone who needs food or drink

or encouragement, you think, okay, maybe

if I give up things, if I get down to nothing,

like being senseless and blind,

maybe then.

 

Posted in Brown (Fleda) | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Tiger on the Prowl Again

tiger

In the fabulous penultimate paragraph of the James Baldwin short story “Sonny’s Blues,” the up-tight narrator finally understands what his younger brother Sonny has been trying to communicate through his jazz piano. The world may be filled with pain and sorrow but art can give us momentary relief.

Last week I applied a passage from the story to the NCAA Men’s Basketball semi-finals. Today I turn to it to comment on the Masters Tournament.

I don’t know if Tiger Woods, back at #1, will win the tournament, but he is threatening to put a hurting on the rest of of the golf world. At the end of the second day he was three strokes back of the lead, and there’s a chance he could catch fire and dominate. In which case, his competitors would find  resonance in the following sentence:

And I was yet aware that this was only a moment, that the world waited outside, as hungry as a tiger, and that trouble stretched above us, longer than the sky.

Stay tuned.

Posted in Baldwin (James) | Tagged , , , | 1 Comment

Rand Paul’s Misadventures with Poetry

Senator Rand Paul

Senator Rand Paul

Normally you’ll find me celebrating when a politician quotes poetry in his or her speeches, but Kentucky Senator Rand Paul has recently had me shaking my head. That’s because of the way that he recently invoked Pablo Neruda (also Gabriel Garcia Marquez) in a speech before the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce and then T. S. Eliot in a speech before students at Howard University. In the first case, Rand was guilty of cultural stereotyping, in the second of whining.

After explaining his relative openness (by GOP standards) on immigration reform, in the first talk Rand went on to express his admiration for “the romance of the Latin culture.” Given how he used an excerpt from the Chilean poet’s “If You Forget Me” to characterize said culture, I take it that Rand sees everyone from the Rio Grande to Tierro del Fuego as a hot blooded Latin. Although his thinking is a bit confused, he seems to be suggesting that white America will benefit from an infusion of Latin passion.  Here’s Rand and the poem. Note how he is vaguely aware that he is entering treacherous waters:

So it is with trepidation that I express my admiration for the romance of the Latin culture. I am a fan of Gabriel Garcia Marquez.
 In Love in the Time of Cholera, Marquez gives some advice that Republicans might consider,

 “. . . human beings are not born once and for all on the day their mothers give birth to them, . . . life obliges them over and over again to give birth to themselves.” 

Likewise, Republicans need to give birth to a new attitude toward immigrants, an attitude that sees immigrants as assets not liabilities. No one captures the romance of the Latin culture more than Pablo Neruda. I love how Neruda in “Si tu me Olvidas”[“If You Forget Me”] issues a passionate threat but ends by saying,



Pero
si cada día,
cada hora,
sientes que a mí estás destinada
con dulzura implacable,
si cada día sube
una flor a tus labios a buscarme,
ay amor mío, ay mía,
en mí todo ese fuego se repite,
en mí nada se apaga ni se olvida . . .

[But
if each day,
each hour,
you feel that you are destined for me
with implacable sweetness,
if each day a flower
climbs up to your lips to seek me,
ah my love, ah my own,
in me all that fire is repeated,
in me nothing is extinguished or forgotten. . .]

How can we not embrace such passion? How can we not want that culture to merge with and infuse the American spirit? They are not called the romance languages for no reason.

To be strictly correct, they are called romance languages because they derive from the Roman language (i.e., Latin), but I’ll give Paul a pass there. After all, unlike former Vice President Dan Quayle, he is aware that they don’t speak Latin in Latin America. I also won’t tease the libertarian senator for speaking admiringly of two self-proclaimed Marxists. Poetry belongs to everyone and I think his application of the Garcia Marquez passage to the Republican party is actually rather smart. The GOP really does need to rebirth itself, including on immigration issues, if it wants to win national elections again.

But what is painful to see is how Rand tells a gathering of Hispanic businesspeople that he admires their fiery passion. It’s as though he were to tell a gathering of African American businesspeople that he admires their sense of rhythm. Which is not far from what he actually did tell the Howard University students.

Since this is a literature blog, however, I’m not going to dwell on how he lectured the students on African American history, only to discover that they knew more about it than he did. Instead, I focus on how he applied The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock:

Here’s Paul:

My wife, Kelley, asked me last week: “Do you ever have doubts about trying to advance a message for an entire country?”

The truth is, sometimes. when I do have doubts, I think of a line from T.S. Eliot:

Then how should I presume
To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?
And how should I presume?”

When I think of how political enemies often twist and distort my positions I think again of Eliot’s words:

When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall
How should I presume?”

And here I am today at Howard, a historically black college; here I am, a guy who once presumed to discuss a section of the Civil Rights Act. That didn’t always go so well for me. Some have said that I’m either brave or crazy to be here today.

Rand slightly misquotes Eliot’s poem, which actually goes as follows:

And I have known the eyes already, known them all—
The eyes that fix you in a formulated phrase,
And when I am formulated, sprawling on a pin,
When I am pinned and wriggling on the wall,
Then how should I begin
To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?
 And how should I presume?

As blogger Adele Stan has noted,

What Paul seems to be saying to his audience is that he feels misunderstood, having been fixed “in a formulated phrase.”

In the poem, Prufrock is frustrated that he can’t say what he really means to a woman because of a social environment that reduces male-female conversation to meaningless banalities. By contrast, as Stan points out, Rand’s formulated phrase is something he himself chose to say: that private businesses shouldn’t be forced to integrate, at least if they receive no federal money. Prufrock at least can blame social propriety for the way that it forces men and women into empty small talk. Paul can’t blame anyone but his libertarian principles.

If you look at how Paul responds to interviewers Keith Runyon of the Louisville Courier Journal and Rachel Maddow of MSNBC, you will indeed see him wriggling as he is pressed. (Stan includes the Runyon interview in his blog post if you want to see it up close.) After all, Paul doesn’t like to be associated with the segregated establishments whose rights he is defending, and Runyon and Maddow, doing what good journalists should do, don’t stop pressing him. I can understand why the “pinned and wriggling” image would strike him in a deep way.

Prufrock is filled with self pity and at times is rather pathetic. Rand quoting Prufrock to complain about how the media misunderstands him exposes his own whining disposition.

Stan’s blog post concludes with a very imaginative application of another Prufrock stanza to Rand:

There will be time, there will be time
To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet;
There will be time to murder and create,
And time for all the works and days of hands
That lift and drop a question on your plate;
Time for you and time for me,
And time yet for a hundred indecisions,
And for a hundred visions and revisions,
Before the taking of a toast and tea.

“I’ve never wavered in my support for civil rights or the Civil Rights Act,” Rand Paul told the students of Howard University.

Ninety-nine revisions yet to go.

I’m not displeased that Paul turns to poets. I’d love to see poetry as part of our daily discourse. But politicians should be aware that, when they use good poetry to justify themselves, those poems have a way of twisting around and biting them in the butt-end.

Added note: Here’s a total digression spurred by the references to butt ends, at least when they are attached to cigarettes. My father once told me about the time he met T. S. Eliot. He was a grad student at the University of Wisconsin and was interviewing Eliot for the Daily Cardinal. Apparently Eliot was a very nervous man and also a chain smoker, and at one point during the interview he stuck a cigarette the wrong way into his mouth. The member of the English Department who was squiring Eliot around reached over without hesitation, took the cigarette out of his mouth, turned it around, and stuck the butt end right back in. Perhaps this had happened before.

The other story from that interview is that my father asked Eliot if he intended a certain literary allusion in, I think, The Waste Land. Eliot said that he didn’t but added, “But it’s there!” I now realize that I need to get the details of that story right away–which will be difficult as my father is currently hospitalized and struggling to hold on to his memory.

Posted in Eliot (T.S.), Garcia Marquez (Gabriel), Neruda (Pablo) | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Fielding’s Satire Applied to the 1%

William Hogarth, "Rake's Progress: Prison Scene"

William Hogarth’s satire of the profligate rake

I recently taught Tom Jones in my 18th Century Couples Comedy class and have been asking myself whether I should continue to assign it in the future, even though Fielding’s masterpiece is the work that convinced me to specialize in 18th Century British literature in graduate school. I’m in love with Fielding’s urbane humor, his love of life, and his colorful characters, especially Tom and Sophia.

But the work is almost 900 pages and is difficult to read, consuming a fourth of the course. Perhaps more seriously, it now seems dated in ways that it didn’t when I first read it in 1973. Fielding directs a few too many barbs at older women, and while I fell in love with his idealized depiction of Sophia at 22, my students don’t find her three-dimensional enough. Furthermore, the novel’s sexual innuendo, delivered with a sly nod and wink, no longer seems daring. When film director Tony Richardson won the “Best Film” Oscar in 1963 with his version of the novel, it seemed the perfect work to usher in the sexual revolution. Now that we are more permissive, the jokes don’t have the same punch.

But no sooner was I second guessing my choice than I reread the novel and found myself falling in love once again with the deft way that Fielding satirically carves up the world’s knaves and fools. From the first he promises he shall be serving one dish in his novel—human nature—and his observations about people are still on target.  In today’s post I share three passages that could be applied to America’s wealthy in this age of increasing income disparity.

As we learned in the last election (if we didn’t know it before), a number of America’s one percent complain about entitled “takers” (the “47%”), even as they themselves benefit from governmental contracts, payouts, tax breaks, and the like. Likewise, in the novel no one complains about freeloaders and cheats as much as the usurer Mr. Nightingale. Here’s what he has to say about Black George, who Squire Allworthy discovers has stolen from Tom:

As there are no Men who complain more of the Frauds of Business than Highwaymen, Gamesters, and other Thieves of that Kind; so there are none who so bitterly exclaim against the Frauds of Gamesters, &c. as Usurers, Brokers, and other Thieves of this Kind; whether it be that the one Way of cheating is a Discountenance or Reflection upon the other, or that Money, which is the common Mistress of all Cheats, makes them regard each other in the Light of Rivals; but Nightingale no sooner heard the Story, than he exclaimed against the Fellow in Terms much severer than the Justice and Honesty of Allworthy had bestowed on him.

We have seen our biggest financiers, not to mention those politicians who protected them, appear to get away scot-free since sending the world into economic freefall in 2008. How do they always avoid being held accountable? Fielding has an answer:

I look upon the vulgar observation, “That the devil often deserts his friends, and leaves them in the lurch,” to be a great abuse on that gentleman’s character. Perhaps he may sometimes desert those who are only his cup acquaintance; or who, at most, are but half his; but he generally stands by those who are thoroughly his servants, and helps them off in all extremities, till their bargain expires.

And finally, how responsible are the wealthy for using their money on behalf of society? Fielding notes that there are two different views on the matter:

[T]he world are in general divided into two opinions concerning charity, which are the very reverse of each other. One party seems to hold, that all acts of this kind are to be esteemed as voluntary gifts, and, however little you give (if indeed no more than your good wishes), you acquire a great degree of merit in so doing. Others, on the contrary, appear to be as firmly persuaded, that beneficence is a positive duty, and that whenever the rich fall greatly short of their ability in relieving the distresses of the poor, their pitiful largesses are so far from being meritorious, that they have only performed their duty by halves, and are in some sense more contemptible than those who have entirely neglected it.

To reconcile these different opinions is not in my power. I shall only add, that the givers are generally of the former sentiment, and the receivers are almost universally inclined to the latter.

That’s just a taste of what Fielding offers us. The book is also filled with observations about lawyers, doctors, priests, squires, justices of the peace, innkeepers, soldiers, wives…indeed, pretty much everybody.

So I’ll probably keep teaching Tom Jones. Humor like this is a gift to humanity.

Posted in Fielding (Henry) | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Women, You Don’t Have to Do It All

wonder-woman

Last week, as part of our college’s distinguished Margaret Brent Lecture series, we heard a lecture from Elsa Walsh, former writer for The Washington Post and The New Yorker and author of the bestselling Divided Lives: The Public and Private Struggles of Three American Women. The inspiration for the lecture series, Margaret Brent, was southern Maryland’s most famous woman in colonial times—she agitated for the vote in the 1640s—and Walsh was here to advise young women on what to strive for in the 21st century.

Previous speakers in the series have included Betty Friedan, Toni Morrison, Rosa Park, Rigoberta Menchu, Maureen Dowd, and Eleanor Smeal, so she was in distinguished company in giving advice.

Always attuned to how speakers draw on literature to help them with their issues, I perked up when Walsh began her talk quoting a Kurt Vonnegut poem written after the death of fellow author Joseph Heller. It set the tone for the advice she would give in her talk:

True story, Word of Honor:

Joseph Heller, an important and funny writer
now dead,
and I were at a party given by a billionaire
on Shelter island.

I said, “Joe, how does it make you feel
to know that our host only yesterday
may have made more money
than your novel ‘Catch-22′
has earned in its entire history?”
And Joe said, “I’ve got something he can never have.”
And I said, “What on earth could that be, Joe?”
And Joe said, “The knowledge that I’ve got enough.”
Not bad! Rest in peace!

Born in 1957, Walsh told us that that, when she was growing up, she was inspired by the women’s movement and was prepared to put career above everything and was sure that she would have neither a relationship nor children. Now married and the mother of a 16-year-old daughter, she framed her talk as a “love letter to my daughter.” Her talk spoke directly to our women students.

Walsh used, as a foil, Leaning In, the advice book by Facebook CEO Sheryl Sandberg. Sandberg argues that, if only 4% of America’s CEOs are female, it is because women are less likely to “lean in” to their jobs. While admiring certain aspects of Sandberg’s book, Walsh voiced three objections: (1) that it’s very difficult to lean into your job if you don’t have a lot of money; (2) that it’s easier to deal with children (Sandberg’s current situation in life) than with adolescents; and (3) Sandberg doesn’t talk much about life and pleasure and doesn’t appear to know that she’s going to die one day.

Full time work is often not compatible with family life, Walsh said. She also noted how, since they started sharing child care, men’s stress levels have started to go up.

Her advice to our students was to look for a “good enough life,” the emphasis being on Heller’s word “enough.” The perfect is the enemy of the good, she said, and counseled young people to set their sights on finding what they really wanted out of life by age 40. She added that, in the end, relationships rather than work are the greatest predictors of happiness (or the lack thereof) in a life.

One of our English majors, a member of a panel that followed the talk, described the pressure she felt under as a young woman to “have it all.” Walsh’s talk had clearly struck a chord.

My student Carolyn Zerhusen, whose senior project on Jane Austen I have described, asked Walsh the question she has been asking of Austen: how has feminism shaped Walsh’s writing. Walsh responded that she has always been interested in the intersection of women’s personal lives and their professional lives.

She also left us with a Henry James quote that I didn’t know: ‘Three things in human life are important: the first is to be kind; the second is to be kind; and the third is to be kind.’

May this advice buoy up my students when they enter a world that isn’t always kind.

Posted in James (Henry), Vonnegut (Kurt) | Tagged , , , , , | 6 Comments

God Does Not Leave Us Comfortless

Egbert Van der Poel, "Cottage"

Egbert Van der Poel, “Cottage”

A number of you have asked about my father, whose poems I have featured regularly on this blog and who is currently in the hospital after having suffered (we think) from a TIA or mini-stroke. He is having trouble with his memory and we are very worried. I am haunted by Jonathan Swift’s comments to Thomas Archer upon observing a tree whose upper branches had been struck my lighting.

“I shall be like that tree,” Swift is reported to have said. “I shall die at the top.” And indeed, Swift would go on to suffer from a stroke and lose his wits.

On a more positive note, my brother reports that my father yesterday remembered names and recognized faces that he didn’t remember and recognize the day before. We live upon hope.

Farida Bag of Uganda, a regular reader of this blog who is extraordinarily sensitive in picking the right poems for difficult times, e-mailed me this Jane Kenyon poem. I was comforted by its reminder that the onset of darkness does not have to be seen as a cataclysm:

Let Evening Come

by Jane Kenyon

Let the light of late afternoon
shine through chinks in the barn, moving
up the bales as the sun moves down.

Let the cricket take up chafing
as a woman takes up her needles
and her yarn. Let evening come.

Let dew collect on the hoe abandoned
in long grass. Let the stars appear
and the moon disclose her silver horn. 

Let the fox go back to its sandy den.
Let the wind die down. Let the shed
go black inside. Let evening come. 

To the bottle in the ditch, to the scoop
in the oats, to air in the lung
let evening come. 

Let it come, as it will, and don’t
be afraid. God does not leave us
comfortless, so let evening come.

Posted in Kenyon (Jane), Swift (Jonathan) | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Roger Ebert’s Kinship with Whitman

Ebert

As someone who teaches film courses, I found the late Roger Ebert to be an indispensable resource and often turned to his film reviews several times a day. Above all, I loved his enthusiasm, his wise insights, and his generosity of spirit. Knowing that he had contracted cancer, I was amazed that he kept on writing for as long as he did and regarded every new review as a gift snatched from the grave.

After he died last week, Salon.com reprinted a chapter from his memoir on why he did not fear death. What struck me about Ebert’s musings is that, while there are many magnificent films about death, he didn’t mention any of them. Instead of talking about a film like, say, Kurosawa’s Ikiru (the greatest film I know of a man dying of cancer), he instead cited passages from literature.

I wasn’t surprised to see him quoting Whitman since the poet shared Ebert’s enthusiasm for life and his generosity of spirit. Here’s Ebert on how his “faith” is not in a heaven but in a connection with life:

Many readers have informed me that it is a tragic and dreary business to go into death without faith. I don’t feel that way. “Faith” is neutral. All depends on what is believed in. I have no desire to live forever. The concept frightens me. I am 69, have had cancer, will die sooner than most of those reading this. That is in the nature of things. In my plans for life after death, I say, again with Whitman:

I bequeath myself to the dirt to grow from the grass I love,
If you want me again look for me under your boot-soles.

And with Will, the brother in Saul Bellow’s “Herzog,” I say, “Look for me in the weather reports.”

Ebert also quotes Irish dramatist Brendan Behan:

I respect kindness in human beings first of all, and kindness to animals. I don’t respect the law; I have a total irreverence for anything connected with society except that which makes the roads safer, the beer stronger, the food cheaper and the old men and old women warmer in the winter and happier in the summer.

About which Ebert says,

That does a pretty good job of summing it up. “Kindness” covers all of my political beliefs. No need to spell them out. I believe that if, at the end, according to our abilities, we have done something to make others a little happier, and something to make ourselves a little happier, that is about the best we can do. To make others less happy is a crime. To make ourselves unhappy is where all crime starts. We must try to contribute joy to the world. That is true no matter what our problems, our health, our circumstances. We must try. I didn’t always know this and am happy I lived long enough to find it out.

At another point I suspect he is quoting Kurt Vonnegut’s Slaughterhouse Five:

After a lifetime of writing, teaching, broadcasting and telling too many jokes, I will leave behind more memes than many. They will all also eventually die, but so it goes.

And then there is Henry James:

 One of these days I will encounter what Henry James called on his deathbed “the distinguished thing.”

Ebert ends the excerpt quoting one of my favorite characters from when I was a child. After citing a lovely Vincent Van Gogh passage about how dying early of an illness is to go by means of a “celestial means of locomotion” (as opposed to old age, which is going to death “by foot”), Ebert turns to Tintin’s dog Milou (Snowy in the English translation):

That [Van Gogh’s passage] is a lovely thing to read, and a relief to find I will probably take the celestial locomotive. Or, as his little dog, Milou, says whenever Tintin proposes a journey, “Pas à pied, j’ espère!” Not by foot, I hope!

The credits have rolled on the movie that was Roger Ebert and all we can do now is lean back, shake our heads admiringly, and say, “What a show that was!”

Posted in Behan (Brendan), Bellow (Saul), James (Henry), Remi (Georges), Whitman (Walt) | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Yielding the Heart to an Easter Lily

Georgia O'Keefe Single-Calla-Lily-(Red)

Georgia O’Keeffe, “Single Calla Lily (Red)”

Spiritual Sunday 

April is the season of flowers. Here’s a lovely Easter poem by the African American poet Claude McKay. Note how his worship is marked more by sensuous immersion than reflective theology. Faith works at deep levels.

The Easter Flower

By Claude McKay

Far from this foreign Easter damp and chilly
My soul steals to a pear-shaped plot of ground,
Where gleamed the lilac-tinted Easter lily
Soft-scented in the air for yards around;

Alone, without a hint of guardian leaf!
Just like a fragile bell of silver rime,
It burst the tomb for freedom sweet and brief
In the young pregnant year at Eastertime;

And many thought it was a sacred sign,
And some called it the resurrection flower;
And I, a pagan, worshiped at its shrine,
Yielding my heart unto its perfumed power.

Posted in McKay (Claude) | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Horror Steps onto the Court

Louisville players react to Kevin Ware injury

Louisville players react to Kevin Ware injury

Sports Saturday 

Occasionally something happens in sports that is so memorable that we replay it in our heads for years. Sometimes it’s an amazing play, such as, say, Michael Jordan’s switch-hands lay-up against the Lakers in the 1991 NBA finals. Sometimes it’s something awful, such as the Louisville player Kevin Ware breaking his leg in the quarterfinals of March Madness last weekend.

In case you missed it, Ware contested a three-pointer by Duke player Tyler Thornton and, when he came down, his leg fractured so badly that the bone was sticking out of his skin.. Some of his teammaters crumpled to the court in horror.

There is a scene in James Baldwin’s “Sonny’s Blues” that captures a related feeling of horror. The narrator remembers the moment when his little girl experienced a sudden attack of polio and went down:

Then, one day, she was up, playing. Isabel was in the kitchen fixing lunch for the two boys when they’d come in from school, and she heard Grace fall down in the living room. When you have a lot of children you don’t always start running when one of them falls, unless they start screaming or something. And, this time, Gracie was quiet. Yet, Isabel says that when she heard that thump and then that silence, something happened in her to make her afraid. And she ran to the living room and there was little Grace on the floor, all twisted up, and the reason she hadn’t screamed was that she couldn’t get her breath. And when she did scream, it was the worst sound, Isabel says, that she’d ever heard in all her life., and she still hears it sometimes in her dreams. Isabel will sometimes wake me up with a low, moaning strangled sound and I have to quick to awaken her and hold her to me and where Isabel is weeping against me seems a mortal wound.

Of course there’s a major difference since Kevin Ware will recover and perhaps will even go on to play basketball again. But that instant of horror when one is sickened to the very core of one’s being—that’s what it felt like to watch him go down.

Posted in Baldwin (James) | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

My Father in the Hospital

Sewanee trees

Sewanee trees

Here’s a Mary Oliver hospital poem that I’ve always appreciated but that has never been as relevant as it is right now. That’s because my 89-year-old father has suddenly come down with something—they’re not entirely sure what the problem is—and is struggling to regain health and coherence in the Sewanee Hospital. We are very worried.

I think of the speaker in the poem as my mother visiting him. My parents have had a long and deep marriage—65 years, during which time they have been lovers and best friends—and life without him would indeed be “a place of parched and broken trees.” (The friend’s illness stands in ironic contrast with the flourishing trees outside the hospital, foliage into which dying Civil War soldiers once peered.) I am trying not to surrender to “despair of the mind,” but I can’t help but fear that the man who has been my model and my guide is dying.

The speaker voices the possibility of such an outcome through indirection. Walking down a hospital corridor, she looks into a room that the day before held someone “with a gasping face.” Now she sees that “the bed is made all new,/the machines have been rolled away.” In other words, she foresees the day when she too will experience the emptiness of that room, a future she has been trying to deny (“I tell myself, you are better”). Gazing into the continuing “deep and neutral” silence, she is overwhelmed with love.

University Hospital, Boston

By Mary Oliver


The trees on the hospital lawn

are lush and thriving. They too

are getting the best of care,

like you, and the anonymous many,

in the clean rooms high above this city,

where day and night the doctors keep

arriving, where intricate machines

chart with cool devotion

the murmur of the blood,

the slow patching-up of bone,

the despair of the mind.



When I come to visit and we walk out

into the light of a summer day,

we sit under the trees —

buckeyes, a sycamore, and one

black walnut brooding

high over a hedge of lilacs

as old as the red-brick building

behind them, the original

hospital built before the Civil War.


We sit on the lawn together, holding hands

while you tell me: you are better.


How many young men, I wonder,

came here, wheeled on cots off the slow trains

from the red and hideous battlefields

to lie all summer in the small and stuffy chambers

while doctors did what they could, longing

for tools still unimagined, medicines still unfound,

wisdoms still unguessed at, and how many died

staring at the leaves of the trees, blind

to the terrible effort around them to keep them alive?

I look into your eyes



which are sometimes green and sometimes gray,

and sometimes full of humor, but often not,

and tell myself, you are better,

because my life without you would be

a place of parched and broken trees.

Later walking the corridors down to the street,

I turn and step inside an empty room.

Yesterday someone was here with a gasping face.

Now the bed is made all new,

the machines have been rolled away. The silence

continues, deep and neutral,

as I stand there, loving you.

 Papa, I stand here in Maryland loving you.

 

“University Hospital, Boston,” American Primitive (Back Bay Books, 1983)

Posted in Oliver (Mary) | Tagged , , , | 6 Comments

Rise Up, Plain Bellied Sneetches!

sneetches11

Dr. Seuss, “The Sneetches”

A recent paper in the New York Law School Review applies Dr. Seuss’s The Sneetches to the debate over same-sex marriage. (Thanks to this article in the Washington Post for alerting me to it.) As the paper notes, Seuss’s story is amazingly versatile.

Sneetches is about those with stars discriminating against those without:

When the Star-Belly children went out to play ball,
Could a Plain Belly get in the game? Not at all.
You only could play if your bellies had stars
And the Plain-Belly children had none upon thars.

When the Star Belly Sneetches had frankfurter roasts
Or picnics or parties or marshmallow toasts,
They never invited the Plain-Belly Sneetches
They left them out cold, in the dark of the beaches.
They kept them away. Never let them come near.
And that’s how they treated them year after year.  
 

The arc of history bends towards justice, however, and the sneetches without stars begin acquiring them. To maintain their distinctiveness, however, the privileged sneetches begin removing their stars (cosmetic surgery?). Then the Sneeches with newly acquired stars begin removing theirs, prompting the now starless Sneeches to acquire new stars. After a while, the situation becomes so confused that everyone gives up and decides to accept everyone else, with or without stars.

Here’s the Post’s description of the law paper’s thesis:

Nicolas compares the Sneetches’ dilemma not only to the gay minority seeking marriage recognition from the heterosexual majority but to African Americans who resist linking the civil rights movement and the same-sex-marriage movement. In addition, he thinks Seuss’s morality tale speaks to battles between “assimilationist” gays and “non-conformists,” who criticize those “seeking mere formal equality by erasing valuable differences that set gays and lesbians apart from heterosexuals.”

Niicholas is right to expand the drama to African Americans. I have been recently teaching exactly this drama in Toni Morrison’s Song of Solomon. On the one hand, there is a savvy black businessman, Macon Dead, who wants exactly what the whites have and distances himself from the black community as he seeks to get it. Perhaps our own best case of this is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who has turned his back on traditional black concerns such as affirmative action, voting rights, and social safety nets.

On the other hand, there is Morrison’s figure of Guitar, who defines himself firmly against all whites. (His equivalent doesn’t show up in Sneetches.) Indeed, Guitar belongs to an organization that kills an innocent white for every innocent black that is killed by whites. The book sets up the twin poles of black assimilation and black separatism, and the hero must find a place for himself in the middle. Which is to say, he must figure how to get along with whites even as he claims his black identity.

Comedian Larry Wilmore, “Senior Black Correspondent” on the Daily Show, once noted that, if America is a melting pot/Irish stew, then that stew is getting browner. Something along these lines occurs in Sneetches. I guess we could also add that our stew is getting gayer.

In the Wilmore sketch, John Stewart, playing the embattled white man, asks whether the stew can be a white bean Tuscan stew, to which Wilmore delivers a firm negative. As America grows more diverse, older white Americans might cling to their white identity, but the next generation is mixing it up, whether through interracial marriage, interracial adoption, or simply borrowing each other’s traits.  I myself now have two mixed-race grandchildren, Alban being half Asian, Esmé being part Carib, part African. Starred Sneetches are throwing off their stars, non-starred Sneetches are acquiring them, and everything is becoming a jumble.

Is this a great country or what?

Posted in Dr. Seuss | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Our Dogs Ground Us in the Now

Niels Aagaard Lytzen, "Golden Retriever on a Path"

Niels Aagaard Lytzen, “Golden Retriever on a Path” (1853)

Here’s a Mark Doty dog poem to help usher in the smells, sounds, and textures of spring. Are your thoughts tangled up in past regrets or daily worries? Your dog will bring you back to earth with its “Zen master’s bronzy gong” (a.k.a. barking).

What do golden retrievers retrieve? Us to ourselves.

Golden Retrievals

Fetch? Balls and sticks capture my attention
seconds at a time. Catch? I don’t think so.
Bunny, tumbling leaf, a squirrel who’s—oh
joy—actually scared. Sniff the wind, then

I’m off again: muck, pond, ditch, residue
of any thrillingly dead thing. And you?
Either you’re sunk in the past, half our walk,
thinking of what you can never bring back,

or else you’re off in some fog concerning
–tomorrow, is that what you call it? My work:
to unsnare time’s warp (and woof!), retrieving,
my haze-headed friends, you. This shining bark,

a Zen master’s bronzy gong, calls you here,
entirely, now: bow-wow, bow-wow, bow-wow.

 

From Sweet Machines (NY: HarperFlamingo, 1998)

Posted in Doty (Mark) | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

The Right Wing’s War on Science

Scene from "Fahrenheit 451"

Scene from “Fahrenheit 451″

As an intellectual, I find one of the most disturbing developments of recent years to be right wing attacks on science. I’m not only thinking of the attacks on evolutionary science and climate science, although these have been particularly egregious. There have also been attacks on sociology, political science, economics, psychology, history—anything, indeed, that stands in the way of what ideologues proclaim as truth.

I remember first noticing this tendency when the Reagan administration commissioned a study designed to show that bringing a pregnancy to term was safer than aborting a fetus. Unfortunately for Reagan, the study showed that abortions are safer than pregnancies. That’s because there is always a significant risk in giving birth. Denied the talking point it desired, the Reagan administration simply suppressed the study.

These days we see this everywhere. Social scientists are attacked when they demonstrate that abstinence education doesn’t work. Economists are attacked when they show that trickle down economics and large tax breaks don’t stimulate the economy. North Carolina bans the state “from basing coastal policies on the latest scientific predictions of how much the sea level will rise.”

Of course, scientists seldom arrive at complete consensus, and they seldom speak with the certainty of ideologues. Rhetorically they are at a disadvantage because science is a rigorous, peer-reviewed process that must always be open to changing its theories if new countervailing data is discovered. Scientists generally come down hard on colleague who they feel are stretching the facts to fit their political predilections. Cooking the data violates what we are about.

In the eyes of ideologues, by contrast, policy comes first and science either gets in line or is dismissed. Increasingly, it seems, right wing politicians and “fair and balanced” Fox News feel free to make things up as it suits them. If proved wrong, they either ignore their critics or, if they can’t, simply move on to other talking points.

Liberals have their share of faults but they don’t have this one. The number of left-of-center columnists who have recently been writing “mea culpas” for their support of the Iraq War ten years ago suggests that the facts matter more to them than to, say, “I wouldn’t do anything differently” Cheney.

In the past, I’ve turned to Pope’s Dunciad to express my despair. (“And universal darkness covers all.”) Yesterday I found another useful passage in Tim O’Brien’s The Things They Carried, which I’m teaching at the moment. A description of Vietnam soldier Rat Kiley’s handling of truth describes fairly well much of current day right wing discourse. It also instructs us in how to be skeptical:

Among the men in Alpha Company, Rat had a reputation for exaggeration and overstatement, a compulsion to rev up the facts, and for most of us it was normal procedure to discount sixty or seventy percent of anything he had to say. If Rat told you, for example that he’d slept with four girls one night, you could figure it was about a girl and a half. It wasn’t a question of deceit. Just the opposite: he wanted to heat up the truth, to make it burn so hot that you would feel exactly what he felt. For Rat Kiley, I think, facts were formed by sensation, not the other way around, and when you listened to one of his stories, you’d find yourself performing rapid calculations in your head, subtracting superlatives, figuring the square root of an absolute and then multiplying by maybe.

“Facts were formed by sensation, not the other way around.” Yes, that pretty much sums up right wing ideologues these days.

Posted in O'Brien (Tim), Pope (Alexander) | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Swift’s Spectacular April Fool’s Joke

Isaac Bickerstaff, editor of "The Tatler"

Isaac Bickerstaff, editor of “The Tatler”

April Fool’s Day

Today being April 1, I take the occasion to tell the story of one of the greatest April Fool’s Day pranks ever. Jonathan Swift set this one up months in advance.

Astrologers were popular in the early 18th century, as they are now, and Swift considered them all frauds and the people who believed them fools. The most prominent astrologer of his day, the 18th century’s Jean Dixon, was one John Partridge, who published a yearly almanac of predictions. In January of 1708 Swift, under the pseudonym of Issac Bickerstaff, called out Partridge in his own set of “Predictions for the Year 1708.”

Among his predictions—in fact, the prediction which was the whole purpose of his pamphlet—was the following:

My first prediction is but a trifle, yet I will mention it, to show how ignorant those sottish pretenders to astrology are in their own concerns: It relates to Partridge the almanack-maker; I have consulted the stars of his nativity by my own rules, and find he will infallibly die upon the 29th of March next, about eleven at night, of a raging fever; therefore I advise him to consider of it, and settle his affairs in time.

Literary scholars believe that Swift chose the March 29 date so that he could then publish “The Accomplishment of the First of Mr. Bickerstaff’s Predictions” as close to April 1 as possible. (April 1 itself was out because it was a Sunday.) In any event, a follow-up letter–someone supposedly reporting to a nobleman–announced the death of Partridge. Here’s how it begins:

In obedience to your lordship’s commands, as well as to satisfy my own curiosity, I have for some days past inquired constantly after Partridge the almanack-maker, of whom it was foretold in Mr. Bickerstaff’s predictions, published about a month ago, that he should die the 29th instant, about eleven at night, of a raging fever. I had some sort of knowledge of him when I was employed in the Revenue, because he used every year to present me with his almanack, as he did other gentlemen, upon the score of some little gratuity we gave him. I saw him accidentally once or twice about ten days before he died, and observed he began very much to droop and languish, though I hear his friends did not seem to apprehend him in any danger. About two or three days ago he grew ill, was confined first to his chamber, and in a few hours after to his bed, where Dr. Case and Mrs. Kirleus were sent for, to visit and to prescribe to him.

The observer goes on to describe Partridge’s final hours, including his final death bed retraction where he admits to being a fraud:

“By what I can gather from you,” said I, “the observations and predictions you printed with your almanacks were mere impositions on the people.” He replied, “If it were otherwise I should have the less to answer for. We have a common form for all those things; as to foretelling the weather, we never meddle with that, but leave it to the printer, who takes it out of any old almanack as he thinks fit; the rest was my own invention, to make my almanack sell, having a wife to maintain, and no other way to get my bread; for mending old shoes is a poor livelihood; and,” added he, sighing, “I wish I may not have done more mischief by my physic than my astrology; though I had some good receipts from my grandmother, and my own compositions were such as I thought could at least do no hurt.” 

An elegy about Partridge also appeared. Here’s the first stanza:

Well, ’tis as Bickerstaff has guess’d,
Tho’ we all took it for a jest;
Partridge is dead, nay more, he dy’d
E’re he could prove the good ‘Squire ly’d.
Strange, an Astrologer shou’d die,
Without one Wonder in the Sky!

Needless to say, Partridge was still very much alive and in his almanac the following year unwisely published a rebuttal claiming that he was still alive. In other words, he didn’t realize that only a humorous response would have been effective. Instead, his title seems to indicate that he thought Bickerstaff was an actual person who could be exposed by the mere fact that he mispredicted Partridge’s death. The rebuttal carried the title, Squire Bickerstaff detected; or, the astrological impostor convicted.

In addition to asserting that he has not died, Partridge also reveals how he has become the butt of jokes:

I could not stir out of doors for the space of three months after this, but presently one comes up to me in the street; Mr Partridge, that coffin you was last buried in I have not been yet paid for: Doctor, cries another dog, How d’ye think people can live by making of graves for nothing? Next time you die, you may e’en toll out the bell yourself for Ned. A third rogue tips me by the elbow, and wonders how I have the conscience to sneak abroad without paying my funeral expences. Lord, says one, I durst have swore that was honest Dr. Partridge, my old friend; but poor man, he is gone. I beg your pardon, says another, you look so like my old acquaintance that I used to consult on some private occasions; but, alack, he’s gone the way of all flesh —- Look, look, look, cries a third, after a competent space of staring at me, would not one think our neighbour the almanack-maker, was crept out of his grave to take t’other peep at the stars in this world, and shew how much he is improv’d in fortune-telling by having taken a journey to the other?

Of course, Partridge’s claim that he was still alive was too delicious an opportunity for Swift to pass up. Therefore Bickerstaff defended himself in A vindication of Isaac Bickerstaff, Esq; against what is objected to him by Mr. Partridge in his almanack for the present year 1709. In it Bickerstaff/Swift is righteously indignant for being so roughly handled:

Mr. Partridge hath been lately pleased to treat me after a very rough manner, in that which is called, his almanack for the present year: Such usage is very undecent from one gentleman to another, and does not at all contribute to the discovery of truth, which ought to be the great end in all disputes of the learned. To call a man fool and villain, and impudent fellow, only for differing from him in a point meer speculative, is, in my humble opinion, a very improper style for a person of his education.

Bickerstaff then goes on to prove that, despite Partridge’s assertions to the contrary, he is in fact dead. Here is Bickerstaff’s proof:

[My vindication] relates to an article in my predictions, which foretold the death of Mr. Partridge, to happen on March 29, 1708. This he is pleased to contradict absolutely in the almanack he has published for the present year, and in that ungentlemanly manner (pardon the expression) as I have above related. In that work he very roundly asserts, That he is not only now alive, but was likewise alive upon that very 29th of March, when I had foretold he should die. This is the subject of the present controversy between us; which I design to handle with all brevity, perspicuity, and calmness: In this dispute, I am sensible the eyes not only of England, but of all Europe, will be upon us; and the learned in every country will, I doubt not, take part on that side, where they find most appearance of reason and truth.

Without entering into criticisms of chronology about the hour of his death, I shall only prove that Mr. Partridge is not alive. And my first argument is thus: Above a thousand gentlemen having bought his almanacks for this year, merely to find what he said against me; at every line they read, they would lift up their eyes, and cry out, betwixt rage and laughter, “They were sure no man alive ever writ such damn’d stuff as this.” Neither did I ever hear that opinion disputed: So that Mr. Partridge lies under a dilemma, either of disowning his almanack, or allowing himself to be “no man alive”. But now if an uninformed carcase walks still about, and is pleased to call itself Partridge, Mr. Bickerstaff does not think himself any way answerable for that. Neither had the said carcase any right to beat the poor boy who happen’d to pass by it in the street, crying, “A full and true account of Dr. Partridge’s death, etc.”

Secondly, Mr. Partridge pretends to tell fortunes, and recover stolen goods; which all the parish says he must do by conversing with the devil and other evil spirits: And no wise man will ever allow he could converse personally with either, till after he was dead. 

He gives a couple of other reasons but those two are the best. If you want to read the entire back and forth, you can go here for the complete Bickerstaff-Partridge papers.

Bickerstaff’s career didn’t end there. He would go on to become the fictional editor of The Tatler, Addison and Steele’s famous publication. Unfortunately for those who love truth, Patridge’s career didn’t end either. As Swift himself frequently lamented, satire isn’t very good at changing the world, and people continued to turn to astrologers, including to Partridge, for psychic information.

But affair, however, made for a spectacular April Fool’s joke.

Posted in Swift (Jonathan) | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

A Breathing Palace of Leaves

swamp

Spiritual Sunday – Easter

Last Easter is the first time I became fully aware of Mary Oliver’s spiritual vision. (Read my posts here and here.) Without ever mentioning religion, the beloved nature poet enacts enacy the bitter road to Calvary and the grace of the Resurrection in a number of her poems. In Oliver’s case, the painful trek often takes the form of an arduous hike, perhaps through a briar-tangled mosquito-infested dark wood, perhaps (as in the poem which I share today) through a swamp.

As an aside, I note that I sometimes think that the single most important image that Oliver owes to Robert Frost, obviously a major influence, is this passage from “Birches”:

It’s when I’m weary of considerations,
And life is too much like a pathless wood
Where your face burns and tickles with the cobwebs
Broken across it, and one eye is weeping
From a twig’s having lashed across it open.

In “Crossing the Swamp,” all is “struggle, closure,” and the poet’s bones “knock together at the pale joints, trying for foothold, fingerhold, mindhold.” It is an image of despair, swamp as spiritual wasteland.

And then, against all logic, she sees another future for herself. She may be “a poor dry stick,” but the stick still has the possibility to “make of its life a breathing palace of leaves.”

That is the Easter promise.

Crossing the Swamp

By Mary Oliver

Here is the endless
wet thick
cosmos, the center
of everything—the nugget
of dense sap, branching
vines, the dark burred
faintly belching
bogs. Here
is swamp, here
is struggle,
closure–
pathless, seamless,
peerless mud. My bones
knock together at the pale
joints, trying
for foothold, fingerhold,
mindhold over
such slick crossings, deep
hipholes, hummocks
that sink silently
into the black, slack
earthsoup. I feel
not wet so much as
painted and glittered
with the fat grassy
mires, the rich
and succulent marrows
of earth—a poor
dry stick given
one more chance by the whims
of swamp water—a bough
that still, after all these years,
could take root,
sprout, branch out, bud–
make of its life a breathing
palace of leaves

Apology: The blog formatting justified everything to the left, erasing Oliver’s marvelous formatting, which visually captures the experience of lumbering through the swamp. Do yourself a favor and buy Oliver’s Pulitzer Prize and National Book Award-winning book, American Primitive (Back Bay Books, 1983).

Further note: In today’s sunrise Easter Service, I was chosen to read Ezekiel’s vision about the valley of the dry bones and realized with a shock that Oliver is building her poem upon the passage, from the bones knocking together to its vision of the grave (in Oliver, the “black slack earthsoup”) to the final miraculous birth. Here’s the Biblical passage (Ezekiel 37:1-14):

37 The hand of the Lord was on me, and he brought me out by the Spirit of the Lord and set me in the middle of a valley; it was full of bones. He led me back and forth among them, and I saw a great many bones on the floor of the valley, bones that were very dry. He asked me, “Son of man, can these bones live?”

I said, “Sovereign Lord, you alone know.”

Then he said to me, “Prophesy to these bones and say to them, ‘Dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! This is what the Sovereign Lord says to these bones: I will make breath[a] enter you, and you will come to life. I will attach tendons to you and make flesh come upon you and cover you with skin; I will put breath in you, and you will come to life. Then you will know that I am the Lord.’”

So I prophesied as I was commanded. And as I was prophesying, there was a noise, a rattling sound, and the bones came together, bone to bone. I looked, and tendons and flesh appeared on them and skin covered them, but there was no breath in them.

Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and say to it, ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: Come, breath, from the four winds and breathe into these slain, that they may live.’” 10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and breath entered them; they came to life and stood up on their feet—a vast army.

11 Then he said to me: “Son of man, these bones are the people of Israel. They say, ‘Our bones are dried up and our hope is gone; we are cut off.’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them: ‘This is what the Sovereign Lord says: My people, I am going to open your graves and bring you up from them; I will bring you back to the land of Israel. 13 Then you, my people, will know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and bring you up from them. 14 I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the Lord have spoken, and I have done it, declares the Lord.’”

Posted in Oliver (Mary) | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments

Chicago’s Harpies Take Down LeBron

A battered LeBron James

A battered LeBron James

Sports Saturday

Is anyone else out there as angry as I am about how the Miami Heat’s second-longest-wining-streak-in-NBA-history came to an end? Miami had reached 27 games and was within seven of breaking the 1971-72 Lakers’ winning streak of 33 before getting mugged by a rough and tumble Chicago Bulls team.

The streak was altogether remarkable since, night after night, the sublime LeBron James had willed his team to come back from double digit deficits, including one of 27 points against his old team, the Cleveland Cavaliers. The Bulls decided their best way of stopping him was to turn the contest into a football game. They bumped, swatted, and sometimes even tackled James so that, in the end, they wore him down. It may have been a style only a Chicago fan could love but it worked. The other Heat players, except for Wade, failed to step up and Miami went down.

The poem that comes to mind is Oliver Wendell Holmes’s “Old Ironisides,” a reference to the legendary warship USS Constitution that was destined for the scrap heap until Holmes’ poem sparked popular protest and saved it. In this case, James was “the eagle of the sea” and the Chicago Bulls were “the harpies of the shore,” tearing down what they could not hope to equal.

In my application, however, it’s only the streak that has been torn down. James himself is still riding high. He will undoubtedly win another “Most Valuable Player” trophy by the end of the year and may well win another championship for Miami. But some of the sizzle has suddenly gone out of the season, and everyone is lamenting not being able to see Miami defending the streak against the San Antonio Spurs, who are an elegant team.

Here are the relevant stanzas:

Aye tear her tattered ensign down
Long has it waved on high,

And many an eye has danced to see

That banner in the sky;

Beneath it rung the battle shout,

And burst the cannon’s roar;–

The meteor of the ocean air

Shall sweep the clouds no more.



Her deck, once red with heroes’ blood,

Where knelt the vanquished foe,

When winds were hurrying o’er the flood,

And waves were white below,

No more shall feel the victor’s tread,

Or know the conquered knee;–

The harpies of the shore shall pluck

The eagle of the sea!

At least the Eagle of the Sea will be able to rest up for the playoffs since Miami has already all but clinched the top spot. But it means we now have to wait for the playoffs for any more real excitement this season.

Posted in Holmes (Oliver Wendell) | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

The Tragicomedy of High School Dating

SheStoopsToConquer

Sometimes one never knows where a literature seminar will end up. Yesterday, while teaching Oliver Goldsmith’s She Stoops to Conquer in my 18th Century Couples Comedy class, I found myself sharing a painful adolescent dating experience with my students. They responded with some of their own stories.

Among other things, I discovered why I had been so in love with the play when I read it at 16. It was the story of my dating life. Only my life, unfortunately, lacked its happy ending.

The play, as you may know, is the story of a young member of the gentry (Marlow) who becomes tongue-tied when talking to women of his own class but who has no difficulty engaging with chambermaids and servants. His father hopes that he will marry Kate Hardcastle and Mr. Hardcastle wants the same for his daughter, but Marlow’s shyness seems to be an insurmountable obstacle. Therefore, Kate “stoops to conquer,” passing herself off as a barmaid and winning him that way.

Before the happy ending, however, he undergoes some excruciating experiences. Due to a prank played on him, he mistakes his future father-in-law as an innkeeper and orders him around (an 18th century version of Meet the Parents). Also, Kate teases him mercilessly once he learns her true identity. By the end of the play, a man who has spent his entire life trying to avoid humiliation has been humiliated in every possible way.

The scenes led us all to recall times in our mortifying experiences when engaging with the opposite sex.

In my case it was attending a “sock hop” at Sewanee Military Academy and looking at my feet the entire time that I danced with the girlfriend of my squad leader, who had ordered me to go and have a good time. (She finally took pity on me and allowed me to leave.) My students remembered dances where guys lined up on one wall and girls on the other, with no one daring to pair off in the middle.

In some instances, their experiences were even closer to those of Marlow and Kate. Erika, for instance, talked about how she could joke around with her motorcycle riding buddies but how they would suddenly clam up when she brought along a girlfriend. They even retreated into themselves when she wore a skirt and let down her hair.

Marisa talked about guys who were comfortable only around girls who weren’t particularly attractive. We talked about how bringing romance into the picture instantly made relationships painfully complicated. Furthermore, if they weren’t complicated, it could be a bad sign: Jemarc explained how being relegated to a “friend zone” meant that, while one could now converse as a friend, one was no longer in the running for a date. I learned that “friend zoned” has become a verb.

I remembered a previous class discussion where I once mentioned that dating seems easier now because students often go about in groups—only to be told that the complications return when two members of the group decide to pair up.

In short, She Stoops to Conquer is as timely as it ever was. Like all comedy, it finds a way to laugh at those aspects of our lives that otherwise cause us to bury our heads in our hands.

To give you a chance to relive your own painful relationship moments, here is Marlow’s and Kate’s first conversation, conducted with him looking at his feet the entire time. Hastings is Marlow’s friend (or, as one of my students called him, his wingman), and he is secretly engaged to Kate’s friend Miss Neville. The conversation goes south when he leaves:

MISS HARDCASTLE. (Aside.) Now for meeting my modest gentleman with a demure face, and quite in his own manner. (After a pause, in which he appears very uneasy and disconcerted.) I’m glad of your safe arrival, sir. I’m told you had some accidents by the way.
MARLOW. Only a few, madam. Yes, we had some. Yes, madam, a good many accidents, but should be sorry—madam—or rather glad of any accidents—that are so agreeably concluded. Hem!
HASTINGS. (To him.) You never spoke better in your whole life. Keep it up, and I’ll insure you the victory.
MISS HARDCASTLE. I’m afraid you flatter, sir. You that have seen so much of the finest company, can find little entertainment in an obscure corner of the country.
MARLOW. (Gathering courage.) I have lived, indeed, in the world, madam; but I have kept very little company. I have been but an observer upon life, madam, while others were enjoying it.
MISS NEVILLE. But that, I am told, is the way to enjoy it at last.

HASTINGS. (To him.) Cicero never spoke better. Once more, and you are confirmed in assurance for ever.
MARLOW. (To him.) Hem! Stand by me, then, and when I’m down, throw in a word or two, to set me up again.
MISS HARDCASTLE. An observer, like you, upon life were, I fear, disagreeably employed, since you must have had much more to censure than to approve.
MARLOW. Pardon me, madam. I was always willing to be amused. The folly of most people is rather an object of mirth than uneasiness.
HASTINGS. (To him.) Bravo, bravo. Never spoke so well in your whole life. Well, Miss Hardcastle, I see that you and Mr. Marlow are going to be very good company. I believe our being here will but embarrass the interview.
MARLOW. Not in the least, Mr. Hastings. We like your company of all things. (To him.) Zounds! George, sure you won’t go? how can you leave us?
HASTINGS. Our presence will but spoil conversation, so we’ll retire to the next room. (To him.) You don’t consider, man, that we are to manage a little tete-a-tete of our own. [Exeunt.]
MISS HARDCASTLE. (after a pause). But you have not been wholly an observer, I presume, sir: the ladies, I should hope, have employed some part of your addresses.
MARLOW. (Relapsing into timidity.) Pardon me, madam, I—I—I—as yet have studied—only—to—deserve them.
MISS HARDCASTLE. And that, some say, is the very worst way to obtain them.
MARLOW. Perhaps so, madam. But I love to converse only with the more grave and sensible part of the sex. But I’m afraid I grow tiresome.
MISS HARDCASTLE. Not at all, sir; there is nothing I like so much as grave conversation myself; I could hear it for ever. Indeed, I have often been surprised how a man of sentiment could ever admire those light airy pleasures, where nothing reaches the heart.
MARLOW. It’s——a disease——of the mind, madam. In the variety of tastes there must be some who, wanting a relish——for——um—a—um.
MISS HARDCASTLE. I understand you, sir. There must be some, who, wanting a relish for refined pleasures, pretend to despise what they are incapable of tasting.
MARLOW. My meaning, madam, but infinitely better expressed. And I can’t help observing——a——
MISS HARDCASTLE. (Aside.) Who could ever suppose this fellow impudent upon some occasions? (To him.) You were going to observe, sir——
MARLOW. I was observing, madam—I protest, madam, I forget what I was going to observe.
MISS HARDCASTLE. (Aside.) I vow and so do I. (To him.) You were observing, sir, that in this age of hypocrisy—something about hypocrisy, sir.
MARLOW. Yes, madam. In this age of hypocrisy there are few who upon strict inquiry do not—a—a—a—
MISS HARDCASTLE. I understand you perfectly, sir.
MARLOW. (Aside.) Egad! and that’s more than I do myself.
MISS HARDCASTLE. You mean that in this hypocritical age there are few that do not condemn in public what they practice in private, and think they pay every debt to virtue when they praise it.
MARLOW. True, madam; those who have most virtue in their mouths, have least of it in their bosoms. But I’m sure I tire you, madam.
MISS HARDCASTLE. Not in the least, sir; there’s something so agreeable and spirited in your manner, such life and force—pray, sir, go on.
MARLOW. Yes, madam. I was saying——that there are some occasions, when a total want of courage, madam, destroys all the——and puts us——upon a—a—a—
MISS HARDCASTLE. I agree with you entirely; a want of courage upon some occasions assumes the appearance of ignorance, and betrays us when we most want to excel. I beg you’ll proceed.
MARLOW. Yes, madam. Morally speaking, madam—But I see Miss Neville expecting us in the next room. I would not intrude for the world.
MISS HARDCASTLE. I protest, sir, I never was more agreeably entertained in all my life. Pray go on.
MARLOW. Yes, madam, I was——But she beckons us to join her. Madam, shall I do myself the honor to attend you?
MISS HARDCASTLE. Well, then, I’ll follow
MARLOW. (Aside.) This pretty smooth dialogue has done for me. [Exit.]

As I say, this was life in high school for me.

Posted in Goldsmith (Oliver) | Tagged , , , , | 3 Comments

Drones Put Heaven in a Rage

Winged Victory of Samothrace in the Louvre

Winged Victory of Samothrace in the Louvre

Recently there have been a couple of significant developments in America’s very troubling drone program. First, a judge has ruled that there must be more transparency about who is targeted for drone attacks and why. Then, the Obama administration said that it was moving drone operations from the CIA to the Pentagon, where the program will be more subject to oversight and military rules of engagement.

But regulated or not, we should not forget what drones represent, which is our unending development of evermore destructive weapons of war. Here’s an old poem by my father protesting machines that have been built “to climb and hover/Stoop and kill.” The poem begins with an allusion to William Blake’s “Auguries of Innocence”: “A robin redbreast in a cage/Puts all heaven in a rage.” (This is the poem that begins “To see a world in a grain of sand/And a heaven in a wild flower.”) My father is an ardent bird lover–thus his protest about what farmers sometimes do with hawks they fear are hunting their chickens–and his reference to “class of ’45” is to his being a World War II veteran who was appalled when the United Stated dropped the atom bomb. (Read my post about that here.)

The poem fantasizes bringing down a classic statue celebrating war.

Hawks
By Scott Bates

A hawk in a cage
Puts Heaven in a rage
Is a broken thing
A broken wing

A Hawk in the air
Is a kind of god
An upper edge
Of mind and wind

When I think of
All the Hawks that Men
Have jailed or
Crucified on barns

And of all the various
Machines they’ve built
To climb and hover
Stoop and kill

I Bird Watcher
Class of ’45
Watching here
Between death and love

With a Hawk’s shadow
On all I love
I am inclined
I say to move

To Paris with
An Anarchist
A small bomb
And two bottles of beer

And before the Guardians’
Caged eyes
Kick Winged Victory
Downstairs

Posted in Bates (Scott), Blake (William) | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Hell Comes in All Shapes and Sizes

Bosch, "Painting of Hell"

Bosch, “Painting of Hell”

I’ve always been fascinated by the Robert Frost poem “Fire and Ice,” where he imagines the hell awaiting us with a New England reserve that hides the horror he actually feels. Frost, like many of our great writers, realizes that the greatest hells are internal. Or put another way, hell is a metaphor for dark states of mind and for people’s tortured relationships:

Some say the world will end in fire,
Some say in ice.
From what I’ve tasted of desire,
I hold with those who favor fire.
But if it had to perish twice,
I think I know enough of hate
To say that for destruction ice
Is also great
And would suffice.

A New Yorker article by Brad Leithauser recently reflected on the hot and cold hells that various authors have conjured up, both literal (cold with Dante, hot with Milton) and metaphorical. I appreciate the list, especially since our library book group recently discussed the book that contains Leithauser’s nominee for the worst cold hell. At the end of Edith Wharton’s Ethan Frome, Frome must listen perpetually to the complaints of both his wife and of the the woman who survived their joint suicide attempt. Here’s Leithauser:

“Hell is other people,” Sartre advises us, though Wharton seems to be saying, “Hell is having to listen to others.” She takes a sort of malevolent relish in pointing out just how poisonous those female voices surrounding Ethan are: the “flat whine,” the “querulous drone,” the “monotonous mildness” of somebody who “spoke only to complain, and to complain of things not in his power to remedy.”

You’ll probably want to read the article but here’s Leithauser’s list of hot hells and cold hells. Feel free to add to the list:

Hot Hells

–Pap’s rages in Huckleberry Finn
–The Cyclops Polyphemus’s eating spree in The Odyssey
–The giant’s pursuit in “Jack and the Beanstalk”
–The protohuman giant confronting the men in Journey to the Center of the Earth
–Grendel’s attacks
–The crocodile chasing Hook in Peter Pan
–Henry James’s lurking beast in The Beast in the Jungle
–Aschenbach’s vision of a crouching tiger in Death in Venice
–The ghosts in Turn of the Screw about to possess the children
–Theodore Roethke’s drunk father “waltzing” with his small child

 Cold Hells

–Claggart’s treachery in Billy Budd
–The scheming Moriarty and Fu Manchu
–The Biblical serpent proffering the apple
–Snow White’s mother doing the same
–Catherine Sloper’s doomed spinsterhood in Washington Square
–Ethan Frome doomed to live forever with two miserable women
–Beatrice Trueblood in the Jean Stafford short story retreating into hysterical deafness
–Anthony Hecht gazing at a gas chamber just liberated by the allies

Here are a few of my own favorite literary hells:

John Wilmot, “The Fall”

How blest was the created state
Of man and woman, ere they fell,
Compared to our unhappy fate:
We need not fear another hell.

George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

As saith the poet, “Hell is a city much like Seville.”

Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus

Faustus: How comes it then that thou art out of hell?

Mephistophilis:Why this is hell, nor am I out of it:
Think’st thou that I, who saw the face of God,
And tasted the eternal joys of heaven,
Am not tormented with ten thousand hells,
In being depriv’d of everlasting bliss?

Doctor Faustus again

Mephistophilis: Hell hath no limits, nor is circumscribed
In one self place; for where we are is hell,
And where hell is, there must we ever be :
And, to conclude, when all the world dissolves,
And every creature shall be purified,
All places shall be hell that is not heaven. 

Milton, Paradise Lost

Horror and doubt distract
His [Satan’s] troubled thoughts, and from the bottom stir
The hell within him; for within him Hell
He brings, and round about him, nor from Hell
One step, no more than from Himself, can fly
By change of place.

Wordsworth, “Tintern Abbey”

…evil tongues,
Rash judgments, nor the sneers of selfish men,
Nor greetings where no kindness is, nor all
The dreary intercourse of daily life…

Wordsworth, Intimations of Immortality

Full soon thy Soul shall have her earthly freight,
And custom lie upon thee with a weight
Heavy as frost, and deep almost as life!

Eliot, Waste Land

Here is no water but only rock
Rock and no water and the sandy road
The road winding above among the mountains
Which are mountains of rock without water
If there were water we should stop and drink
Amongst the rock one cannot stop or think
Sweat is dry and feet are in the sand
If there were only water amongst the rock
Dead mountain mouth of carious teeth that cannot spit
Here one can neither stand nor lie nor sit
There is not even silence in the mountains
But dry sterile thunder without rain
There is not even solitude in the mountains
But red sullen faces sneer and snarl
From doors of mud-cracked houses

Send in your own favorites.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Same Sex Marriage–Good but Not Enough

Hendricks-leboeuf

Almost three and a half years ago I ran the following post about what Rachel Kranz’s novel 2000 novel Leaps of Faith has to say about same sex marriage. At the time of the post, same-sex marriage was just about to be defeated in a Maine referendum so the story of two men wrestling with whether to have a commitment ceremony was very timely.

Since then, of course, things have changed dramatically. America’s sentiments towards same sex marriage have shifted dramatically and now nine states allow it. Furthermore, many anticipate favorable rulings from the Supreme Court, which is hearing a pair of cases this week, including one today. Will progress render Rachel’s book irrelevant on this subject?

I don’t think so. That’s because there are issues that the marriage debate have swept aside which are still very much alive. I was reminded of this recently while listening to MSNBC talk show host Melissa Harris-Perry wonder why we are so focused on same sex marriage when there are seemingly more pressing matters to attend to. After all, members of the GLBT community still experience blatant, and legal, discrimination in much of the country.

Rachel’s book also questions why we are prioritizing same sex marriage. Her novel does what a good novel does,which is put the issues in play rather than seeking to resolve them.

Same Sex Marriage, a Leap of Faith (originally posted 11/2/09)

My novelist friend Rachel Kranz is currently in Maine campaigning with gay friends to save same-sex marriage against attempts to ban it. I mention this because her first novel, Leaps of Faith, is the most intelligent fictional exploration of same-sex marriage that I know.

Among the differences between politics and fiction is the fact that fiction can acknowledge the complexity of an issue whereas politics must reduce the issue to a specific set of actions. In Leaps of Faith one sees two gay men debating the worth of marriage and whether one should push for it and (since they can’t legally get married) come up with one’s own version of it.

Rachel’s novel is a sprawling work about people trying to break out of their narrow confines and redefine what is possible, for themselves and for society as a whole. In addition to the gay couple there’s a union organizer in a biracial relationship trying to organize the workers at a New York university and a director in a cooperative theater group directing an experimental play. The stories intersect and each character tells his or her own story.

The gay couple are named Flip and Warren. Flip is a sassy (and often very funny) actor, Warren a sensitive and somewhat conservative psychic. Warren wants some kind of formal commitment to their relationship, Flip isn’t so sure.

Flip opens the book and may be the most distinctive voice in it. In the following scene, he is talking with his friend Mario at a gathering of gays and lesbians discussing same sex marriage. He has just whispered to Mario that he doesn’t see the point of same sex marriage:

“The point?” says Mario, his voice rising. “The point is to have some kind of stability in your life! The point is to have some kind of faith that your relationship is going to last! That it’s not just—you know, what they’re always saying about us. That it’s not just sex. That it’s not just—hedonism.”

Well, there’s a word. But I say, although admittedly my respect might be wearing a bit thin, “Yeah, but Mario. You can have those things without being married. I mean, even most straight people don’t get married. Well, OK, actually most of them do get married. But most of them get divorced.”

“But when it does work for them, they’re together for years and years,” Mario says. “And why? Because the society supports them, it supports their relationship. Not just economically, but you know. Emotionally.”

“How does it support them?” I say. “By turning them into nice little husbands and wives with their lives all mapped out for them? By giving them some rules about not fooling around and earning a living that have nothing to do with the actual people involved? By making them feel like failures if they don’t get married?”

And then, when others in the discussion group start mentioning things like health insurance, Social Security, property rights, inheritance, child custody, and next of kin hospital rights, Flips says,

“Actually, I think those are the wrong questions. Because if we want those things, there are others ways to get them. Or there should be. So the question isn’t why can’t we get married so we can have those things. The question is, why do you have to get married to have them.”

But the conversation doesn’t end there because Warren, for reasons he can’t entirely articulate, wants to get married. At one point they have the following exchange:

“Well, we don’t have to call it marriage,” Warren says. “We can call it something else. A commitment ceremony.”

“God, that’s worse. It’s so, ‘Oh, we’re gay and we’re not allowed to get married, so let’s make up some really cute name to disguise the fact.”

They never do figure out what to call the wedding/commitment ceremony. Other options are “union,” “initiation into adulthood,” “party,” and even “abduction.” Their invitation reads, “Please come join us at our wedding—or whatever we decide to call it.” As Flip’s sister explains to her boyfriend,

“I think the confusion over the name comes from some sort of debate the two of them are having, over whether they’re doing this totally new thing, which would probably be Flip’s preference, or if they actually are just fulfilling a totally traditional role that has historically been denied to gay people, which I would guess is what Warren wants. Not that he’d ever put it like that, but I think there’s something about the tradition that he does like. Since he, of course, isn’t aware, or maybe, given his situation, just doesn’t care that weddings have traditionally been the ceremonies in which the daughter is handed over from the father to a husband in exchange for some kind of price.”

One reason Warren wants to get married is because, as he says, their relationship feels so fragile. He says he wants to declare their relationship in public “so I can’t ever take it back.”

Flip finally comes around, although he does so in his own “flip” way. Here are the vows he imagines delivering: “I, Flip Philip Bernard Terence Zombrowski, love you, Warren Baird Huddleston, with all my heart, and all my mind, and all my spirit, and all my soul. And all my body, too, I suppose. And I intend to love you, and honor you, and cherish you, and make you happy, and make you miserable, for the rest of my life or the rest of your life, whichever comes first, and if we’re lucky, they’ll both come at the exact same time, even though I’m so much younger than you” [13 years].

Whether marriage is altogether a positive institution, Rachel is not sure. Flip captures her ambivalence. Regardless of her own views, however, she believes couples who want to get married should be able to do so, regardless of their sexual orientation, which is why she’s in Maine. Her novel just captures other dimensions of the issue.

* * * * *

I’ll just add to my 2009 post that one of Harris-Perry guests, while agreeing that job discrimination is a more pressing issue than marriage, argued that sometimes, to make social change happen, progressives have to work within conservative institutions. After all, there’s a possibility of bipartisan support there. That’s why a significant same-sex victory came first in the repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, just as significant African American civil rights progress also occurred in the military. You start where there’s an opening and move on from there.

Posted in Kranz (Rachel) | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Life as a Stage Coach Ride

George Wright, "Mail Coaches on a Road"

George Wright, “Mail Coaches on a Road”

When I was visiting my parents a couple of weeks ago, I took a shuttle between Sewanee and the Nashville airport and found myself thinking of those 18th century coach rides described by Samuel Johnson and Henry Fielding. Both authors used journeying with strangers as an opportunity to reflect upon human nature.

Were my fellow passengers and I determined to impress each other, as are the passengers in Johnson’s “A Journey on a Stage Coach” (The Adventurer, August 25, 1753)? Maybe somewhat. One of my fellow passengers was a Hollywood film editor, who impressed us all by revealing that she edited the television show Pretty Little Liars. Having learned this, part of me wanted to impress her back by demonstrating to her my knowledge, as a film professor, of editing strategies and famous editors. Here’s how Johnson describes his own passengers:

In a stage coach, the passengers are for the most part wholly unknown to one another, and without expectation of ever meeting again when their journey is at an end; one should therefore imagine, that it was of little importance to any of them, what conjectures the rest should form concerning him. Yet so it is, that as all think themselves secure from detection, all assume that character of which they are most desirous, and on no occasion is the general ambition of superiority more apparently indulged.

In Johnson’s coach ride, the passengers maintain a silence for the first leg of the journey but then animosities begin to arise:

[E]very one was apparently suspected of endeavoring to impose false appearances upon the rest; all continued their haughtiness in hopes to enforce their claims; and all grew every hour more sullen, because they found their representations of themselves without effect.

Thus we travelled on four days with malevolence perpetually increasing, and without any endeavor but to outvie each other in superciliousness and neglect; and when any two of us could separate ourselves for a moment we vented our indignation at the sauciness of the rest.

Fielding too mentions “bickerings” and “little animosities” in the introductory chapter of the last book (Book XVIII) of Tom Jones. In our case, we skirted one subject that could have set us off, which was Obamacare.

That’s because the film editor talked about how grateful she was to have health insurance, telling us that she knew from personal experience how medical bills could devastate someone who was uninsured. She added that her dependence was locking her into her current job, even though she was interested in trying other things. Another woman mentioned that “luckily we have Obamacare” and then, in case we had missed it, added, “I’m being sarcastic.” She went on to complain about all the freeloaders who would bankrupt America by insisting on having free healthcare.

Not skilled in public debate nor desirous of engaging in a disagreeable argument, I merely said something to the effect of “that’s one way of looking at it.” But what went through my mind was that even though someone in the shuttle had just mentioned seeing, close up, the financial devastation that can visit one who is uninsured, all she could think of was irresponsible “takers’ who were out to take her money and bankrupt America. The editor strategically changed the subject, although not after mentioning that it was only because she belonged to a union that she, as an independent contractor, had health insurance. Later she would mention all the people she knew that had never been able to get their jobs back after the writer’s strike of 2007. Were any of them, I wondered, unable to get health insurance now.

Who knows where we would have ended up after four days. In this case, however, the ride was only 90 minutes and our conversation was amicable. It was what Fielding describes in the final stage of a long journey, where people generally

make up at last, and mount, for the last time, into their vehicle with cheerfulness and good humor; since after this one stage, it may possible happen to us, as it commonly happens to them, never to meet more.

I wondered afterwards whether any minds would have been changed had we entered into a spirited debate about the pros and cons of Obamacare. Had we missed a valuable opportunity? After all we, as a nation, are all on this coach together, strangers though we may be to each other. This is a far more apt analogy than a car ride or an airplane ride since those methods of transport isolate us from each other. In a shuttle, by contrast, people are forced by their very proximity to interact. Like it or not, we are all in our social safety net programs together.

One aspect of Fielding that I love is his confidence (which he later lost) that we can all get along if we remain good humored about it. True, he then undermines his point by attacking anyone who disagrees with him. But I prefer to end today’s post with this note to his readers/fellow travelers:

And now, my friend, I take this opportunity (as I shall have no other) of heartily wishing thee well. If I have been an entertaining companion to thee, I promise thee it is what I have desired. If in anything I have offended, it was really without any intention.

How’s that for an approach to political discourse?

Posted in Fielding (Henry), Johnson (Samuel) | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Palms before My Feet

Russian icon of Jesus entering Jerusalem

Russian icon of Jesus entering Jerusalem

Palm Sunday

Today is Palm Sunday, the day when Jesus rode into Jerusalem upon a donkey to the shouts of children strewing palms. Five days later he would be crucified. Here’s a wonderful G. K. Chesterton poem of the event told from the point of view of the donkey. It reminds us that Jesus is the savior of the outcast and the downtrodden.

The Donkey

By G. K. Chesterton

When fishes flew and forests walked
And figs grew upon thorn,
Some moment when the moon was blood
Then surely I was born.

With monstrous head and sickening cry
And ears like errant wings,
The devil’s walking parody
On all four-footed things.

The tattered outlaw of the earth,
Of ancient crooked will;
Starve, scourge, deride me: I am dumb,
I keep my secret still.

Fools! For I also had my hour;
One far fierce hour and sweet:
There was a shout about my ears,
And palms before my feet.

Posted in Chesterton (G.K.) | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

  • AVAILABLE NOW!

  • Literature is as vital to our lives as food and shelter. Stories and poems help us work through the challenges we face, from everyday irritations to loneliness, heartache, and death. Literature is meant to mix it up with life. This website explores how it does so.

    Please feel free to e-mail me [rrbates (at) smcm (dot) edu]. I would be honored to hear your thoughts and questions about literature.

  • Sign up for weekly newsletter

    Your email will not be shared or sold.
    * = required field

    powered by MailChimp!
  • Twitter Authentication data is incomplete