A friend suggested that I read Rachel Kushner because she is just the opposite of me. But because every difference is an opposite in that one characteristic is the negation of all the other ones, so that black is the opposite of white but purple is also the negation of all the others in the spectrum put together. Here is another example. Various ethnic groups who came to the United States have various characteristics, but which of these groups is the opposite of all the others? Jews had been a pariah group for two thousand years. The Irish had come to a British Protestant country, which was what they had left and had been disdained there for a very long time. But the only group that can be considered as the opposite of all the others is that African Americans had been involuntary immigrants while the others (except for some indentured servants or ex-criminals) had not and that this is such a deep cleavage that it can be considered opposite, a term based on a judgment of substance rather than a simple logical negation. So “opposite” means more than different; it means a special quality which makes the two parties very different from one another so that the two parties are essentially different. I wanted to know what was important enough a difference to be considered a deep chasm between the two of us. I am familiar with Conservatives as being the opposite of being Liberal and Romantics the opposite of being Classical, so what was the difference between me and Rachel Kushner? My friend said that she was a nihilist and I was not and I wanted to consult the multiple ways in which the two differed so that the summary judgment of nihilism was worth invoking.
Read MoreBiden's Gun Control
Biden is going big in his Liberalism in that he believes that big government is the solution rather than big government being the problem, which is what most Conservatives think. Big Liberalism thinks that government can provide money and programs that will alleviate inequities and discrimination between class and ethnic groups, as happened when Social Security and Medicare led to abolishing the fact that the elderly were poorer than the other age groups in the population. Laws to insure equal accommodation transformed the southern states. Conservatives may think that government might tweak the market system, such as by creating incentives whereby private companies could expand broadband to rural areas, but Liberals think that only a government effort can make broadband universal so that it can become the basis for educating young people through distance learning and so broadband has to be the equivalent of a public utility, part of the national infrastructure, rather than a luxury item for those able to buy the product. You can’t have elementary and middle school and high school students attend distance learning if broadband isn’t universal. The prior model was rural electrification, where the government had to step in because customers were far enough apart that it made no sense for private power companies to expand their reach to rural areas and the cost of some areas, should the private companies enter the field, were prohibitively expensive. The government, such as in the TVA, had to do it, and so does broadband today, where a third of rural areas do not have broadband.
Read More"Wings"
I want to praise “Wings'', the silent war movie that was released in 1927 and won the very first Oscar award for best picture, not because the movie offers hidden depths despite what popular culture offers as fluff and evasions, rewarding audiences a faux tragedy when it is really a melodrama, nor because the movie can be “unmasked” so as to reveal how a popular product has been concocted to “fool” its audience so that the audience feels pleased with itself so that it had a few laughs and a few smiles without getting into anything but an illusion of love and war, a way to pass the time while eating the popcorn, “Wings'', all in all, a childish “art”. Rather, “Wings'' is genuine at being what it is: a set of straightforward feelings of sexual attraction, male friendship, the dangers and ironies of war, and a final reconciliation, so that this is the way life is lived however much the rough spots have been smoothed out, and so worth calling “art” even if it is less falutin’ enough to think it more closely akin to vaudeville than to the great tragedians-- except that Shakespeare was, in fact, quite adept at tugging heartstrings and having an audience hiss the villians. “Wings” has scenes and images and plot lines that move the audience and remain with them and make them the better for having done so. The movie accomplishes simplicity, which is no mean feat, given the turgid and muddied plots seen in any number of novels and movies where things take a long time getting started and are left in their lumpiness, as is the case with the Oscar nominees found in this present year, including “Nomadland'', which is about losers glorified by the actors and screenplay, or “Manx”, which tries and fails to be like Orsen Welles.
Read MoreApparant Meaning and Actual Meaning
Here is a difficult and deep literary question. What is the difference between apparent meaning and actual meaning and how do texts make use of that distinction? The actual meaning of a text is what critics will say is the accurate meaning even if people are misled to think the text is otherwise, as when readers have a sense of what they are getting at, what the text is communicating, even if the text has not been sufficiently analyzed so as to find what it actually means by looking at its words, phrases, images, and all the other apparatus through which critics or just careful readers interrogate a text. An ordinary communication exemplifies the difference of the two meanings. You get a sense that a beloved loves you even if the spouse sends you unclear or stunted signals. A person won’t rely on the words rather than appreciate the meanings of the words, consulting the intentions rather than the words themselves. The same thing happens if people swear an oath to God. It doesn’t mean that God will punish the person for having broken the oath, but a person has just indicated that they will speak truthfully by whatever one holds dear, such as a mother’s grave. The intention is more important than the formula of words even as in literature a reader can get a sense that people seem polite in Jane Austen because they use what seem to us today to be cordial words, when in fact, critics would say, Austen characters are very cutting with one another, some readers preferring politeness to incisiveness, and so separating “Janites”, as they were and are called, from the darker Austen considered by some critics. While, then, there is evidence in the text that leads people to misinterpret the text, and so the text gives off an apparent meaning, there is also and better evidence which justifies the actual text, which is the accurate or, at the least, the more accurate text as constituting the actual text.
Read MoreMelodrama is a Major Genre
Melodrama is usually thought of as an inferior genre. It pits bad people against good ones, as if it were not a simplification to separate people in that way. Melodrama also has exaggerated emotions which people dwell on for much too long and present themselves as victims rather than as active participants in their own lives, and so lose or lessen their dignity. Moreover, melodramatic plots are resolved by arbitrary intrusions of coincidence or derring do, when what ordinarily happens is that people work their way through circumstances and character. “The Count of Monte Cristo” is melodrama because his escape allows his hero to engage in a passion for revenge so as to exquisitely appreciate the suffering inflicted to make up for the suffering that has been caused, everyone drowning in their bad feelings, everyone, including the protagonist, a victim and also malevolent. This is the set of feelings that settle into the Nineteenth Century, supposedly because a more popular audience was not well enough educated to consider finer feelings, though one wonders whether the audiences for Greek tragedy were as elevated as the spectacles to which they attended.
Read MoreBiden's Long March
Biden’s press conference on last Thursday made clear that the achievement of his legislative agenda will be a long slough, inched forward, rather than a blitzkrieg whereby Biden will rush law after law following his spectacular success at the American Recovery Plan. The reasons for this are that the American Recovery Plan was a fluke in that it was subject to reconciliation, whereby only a majority was required, and also because McConnell has made clear that he will hold his caucus together to be against any legislative measure Biden may propose just so that McConnell can in 2022 claim that Biden hadn’t done anything and so the Republicans should take the House and the Senate, even though McConnell has no legislative agenda himself, the same pattern whereby Republicans had said they would replace Obamacare with a better plan and never bothered to offer one for twelve years.
Read MoreThe Contemplative Edward G. Robinson
Hollywood actors who have long careers are likely to have distinctive personalities and characters that have them play the same person in a number of different settings, just as the audience would like to believe that they too could move from living in a gangster movie to a western or from a comedy to a melodrama. Jack Lemon, for example, was a likeable but timid pushover who managed to be a Parisian policeman in a bordello, an ex-alcoholic, and the apartment ever used by his office boss, Fred MacMurray, to meet assignations. Somehow, Lemon was always appealing. The same is true of Edward G. Robinson, who had a nearly forty year career, and who was readily identified in his early days for the tough gangster and his striking intonation of “See?” that were often mimicked and put in cartoon movies. His personality and character, however, were not all that tough, even at the beginning. To the contrary, what sustained all his roles from “Little Caesar” in 1932 to “Soylent Green” in 1967, was his contemplativeness, as expressed largely in his voice and in a muggish face that nevertheless allowed him to express his secret thoughts, to see him able to change his mind, to observe the world of which he was a part, something all of us cultivate, which is to both be there and to observe what is being noticed at the moment when it is happening. Quite an accomplishment, even greater than Cary Grant’s upper class diction and amused befuddlement that also gave him a very extended run.
Read MoreIshiguro's "Klara and the Sun"
Early blurbs about Ishiguro’s “Klara and the Sun” sounded as if they would be disappointing. They promised the book to be about a clone who becomes like a human being or about the dire consequences of technology. Neither of these themes were to be the case even if Ishiguro’s earlier masterpiece, “Never Let Me Go” does show how a clone is recognized by the reader as having become human because one pair of them does find a family and one of the pair finds art by doing doodles. Rather than these themes becoming inevitable for the sci-fi universe, as when in “Blade Runner”, the robots, however short their life spans, have seen great experiences and so are the equivalent of humans, Ishiguro works to an opposite tack, which is to show how the clones, in this case the mechanical artificial intelligences, are of a very different kind of species, subject to their own initiatives and feelings, and the reader only gradually learns what is universal to all sentient species, including both humans and those not biologically based. This is a much deeper inspection into this particular sci-fi genre, in that it goes beyond showing creatures to be human like by showing what is natural to a species, any species, and so does the work that was done to Rousseau and others to find out what is the nature of human beings if they are shed of social conventions and left only with their most primitive or elementary sensations. Rousseau was the end of a century or so long experiment to find a bare bones psychology in Hobbes, Spinoza and Locke and Hume, the collection of them usually understood as contract theorists when what they were more importantly dealing with was philosophical anthropology, which meant the elementary origins of human emotions, that sequence overturned by Kant, who took up a critical stance, whereby he demonstrated what had to be there in actual rather than original life and society, because without these assumptions the world as it is wouldn’t make sense.
Read MoreJane Austen's Invention
I am afraid that I am going to stick to my guns, however much my view of romance is contrary to the long history of romance in world literature, I thinking that, Ovid and Chaucer to the contrary, love is understood until Jane Austen as it was with Dante’s Francesca and Paolo, who resided in the second circle of Hell because they were people separated by a mad passion from social life rather than integrated with one another and into society. Romance is not part of human nature and so there as long as there have been people. To the contrary, it was invented much more recently, even after the American and French revolutions. What Jane Austen invented in the second decade of the Nineteenth Century was that real romance meant that the couple would find their mutual devotion by coming to deeply understand their characters and would also find a way for the lovers to find the social situation that suited them and that the couple could emotionally prosper by being part of social life rather than isolated from it, which is also the idea that marriage counselors will say. This revolution was so powerful that the previous dispensation was suffused in its light even if Twentieth Century critics reinvent the Dante idea of love as the real meaning of love, but such are the avenues and lanes whereby cultural adaptations evolve, ever tracking back on themselves as they claim to be doing something new, as happens when politicians think they are inventing new ways to be free when they are repeating cliches of previous generations.
Read MoreJoe Biden's Radical Liberalism
Rahm Emanuel, when he was Chief of Staff to Barack Obama, said “No crisis should be wasted”. What he meant was that when there is a legislative moment where there is an urgency and general willingness to act, measures should be added to the package of other measures that are a long time part of the leadership’s agenda. That is what happened with the passage yesterday of the American Recovery Act. No Republicans joined to aid the Democrats, truthfully saying that many of the measures had nothing to do with coronavirus relief but were part of long time Democratic wish lists, but some of the Democrats did not waver too much from the bill, except for eliminating the fifteen dollar minimum wage and forgiving student loans, and did approve of provisions that could be considered radical in a liberal way in that they moved forward major programs to expand entitlements so as to provide a more substantial way of life for all citizens and particularly those who were all but the rich, the rich not needing the assistance. Biden’s law is incremental but substantial, a firm way whereby economic situations do not interfere in people achieving their life, liberty and quest for happiness. From a Liberal point of view, this is the greatest advance since the New Deal, and Democrats from Bernie Sanders to John Manchin are impressed by the audacity, even if Larry Summers says that the package of money is so large that it will lead to inflation. The U. S. has had no inflation since the late Seventies, which is two generations ago, and the Federal Reserve has the ability and the power to squeeze out any inflation should it arise. Look at the solid policy accomplishments rather than speculation.
Read MoreShakespearean Excess
Among those authors that have contributed to “the great works of the Western imagination”, the position of Shakespeare is well known and assured, however much his plays require allowances that need not be granted to other authors, whether they work in drama or in poetry or in novels. Other great works are complete in themselves, benefiting from an exquisite unification of their parts though a generic device of the author’s own choosing. The device of a journey through hell and then purgatory and heaven supplies a unity for the stories Dante, the character, has told to him and the various awful settings in which those often first person narratives take place. Indeed, the device, the architecture of the afterlife, is the most memorable conceit the author Dante leaves us with, far more telling than the stories of major and minor miscreants and the poetry of the description of those people and places. For his part, Chaucer crafts tales that are gems of multilayered meanings and intersections of plot motifs and narrative devices, those arranged in a format, the journey of travelers, which need not strain for unity or overall dramatic structure, even if one can claim that, indeed, there is an arc in “The Canterbury Tales”, moving them, one might say, from concerns of everyday life to matters of the soul. Certainly, Milton is always full of his own Miltonic seriousness, clearly a presence that combines the author’s personality with a form for his artistic presentation. Mark Van Doren found this a weakness. Milton never gave you a breather, was always high minded. Van Doren liked Cervantes for taking time to provide bathroom breaks for his characters. I like the redactors of the Old Testament who never let on to whether their characters (Ruth, David, Joseph) ever themselves caught on to the complexity of their own motivations and their own situations. That is the unity of tone, more important than is the intermittent presence of God, that holds the narrative books of the Old Testament together.
Read MoreWhy Jane Austen Loves Romance
Love stories about the adventure of courtship and love are so popular, such a standard sub-genre of the genre of domestic histories, that people think it has always been the case. Yes, there are sexual and lustful couplings as well as fits of passion in the Bible and in Greek and Roman romance but there was something new that happened in the early Nineteenth Century, rightly beginning with what is called the Romantic Period, that does engage people with love and courtship as being a pivotal matter, as is elaborated by Goethe’s Werther, by Mozart’s trilogy of “The Marriage of Figaro”, “Così Fan Tutti” and “Don Giovanni'', all dedicated to the idea that love was revolutionary in that it unsettled social relationships and also made love independent of ordinary social relationships, nevertheless until that time everyone understanding that people were still attracted to but opposed to the lovers in Dante because the two are entwined but wafted about by the currents of the wind, and so therefore not the right way to be. Jane Austen, for her part, is preoccupied in every one of her books with how people will create a marriage out of elective affinities, as Goethe put it, rather than for some other reason or to deal with some other subject so as to fill out a novel. Jane Austen could have written about the improvement of agriculture, as was indeed a social development in the area of which he lived as well as a theme of the time, or the state of politics, about which her mentor William Shakespeare had more than dabbled and whose contemporary perturbations, as with the Warren Hastings Impeachment, Austen had followed. But instead she did focus on this new found topic of romance, which just a few generations ago Samuel Johnson had only gingerly advanced the idea that people should consider how well they can get along with the people they marry rather than just the fact that they might carry with them property or wealth or social position. And here Jane Austen is presenting the aim of her stories as treating marriage as people so deeply emotionally involved with their spouses so as to be the be all and end all of their purposes in life, however much the pursuit of romantic happiness has to overcome many hurdles of disparate wealth or personality. The pursuit of happiness, that Eighteenth Century idea, had been limited, in the early Nineteenth Century, to the pursuit of romance. How did this happen to a person remarkably circumspect about the traditions of society and who embodied a Conservative political philosophy which led her to believe that people, like as not, were better off to marry to people of their own class rather than try to cross over as spouses with people of different social backgrounds?
Read MoreModern Taboos
Taboos are usually associated with ancient ways, sometimes religious, whereby people are separated with one another because they are so horrified by their physical or social conditions. Women were separated into their huts during their periods because the women were regarded as unclean, possibly because, as has been said, that women have a wound that never heals. Jews and Muslims did not eat pork perhaps because it was diseased but more likely because it separated these groups of people from other groups of people. Taboos are therefore irrational in that they are responses to fear and without the need to explain why these taboos are. Durkheim updated that idea when he said that people ostracized or did worse to people who behaved differently rather than violated rituals when people violated norms as to sexual practices, beliefs and, as Goffman added, personal disfigurement.
I want to suggest a different way to understand the way peoples are separated from other groups of people in the modern way but this time for reasons that are very rational. People are separated by keeping secret to the deviants that they are not pretty or handsome, that they are not very able at their work, or that even if they are just not very nice people. These verbal separations are accomplished so as to provide people with respect, so as not to hurt them, and so become or remain part of the community at large, and so is a progressive rather than a deeply unnecessary set of practices.
Read MoreThe Department of Justice
Merrick Garland will need all the intelligence and judicial discernment his supporters say he has, as well as a theoretical perspective his prior roles have not required, so that Garland will be successful as Attorney General because the policies to be implemented by him will be the most important of the issues of the Biden Administration after that of the coronavirus Recovery Act and what comes right after that, which will probably be some deal on immigration. Biden is correct in picking Garland to deal with some of the most controversial issues Biden will have to deal with. Here are three of them: what to do with prosecutions of Trump and his henchmen; the legislation concerning police violence and voter disenfranchisement; and the legislation concerning social media. All three of them fall into the hands of the Justice Department because criminal justice, voting rights and anti-trust are part of their responsibilities.
Read MoreMy First Vaccine Shot
I got my first vaccine shot yesterday, as you oldsters probably already had before me. It was done in what is called "The Salt Palace'', which is in downtown Salt Lake City. It is a convention center of gigantic proportions that was built in 1995 and seems to have taken its inspiration from an airport terminal. It had very long hallways with properly spaced chairs between so that all the people waiting for their appointments to start at ten a.m. business could sit while they were waiting, quite considerate of the fact that many elderly people can’t wait standing for a long time. Everything was well organized. I was ushered into the Grand Ballroom where one person promptly went over the paperwork and then shifted to a table where I got my shot and then went to another place to wait for fifteen minutes to see if I had a reaction. All of the people at work, from those at the start to guide you where to go, or at the end to tell you to go home, were all perky and friendly, something I much appreciated, anxious that something in the process might go wrong because of the paperwork or the injection. Nothing did.
Read MoreThe Crisis in Education
All institutions are always in a state of crisis. The economy has to adjust every generation or so to new products, a changing work force, and new ways of raising capital. The airline industry has to find today ways to work out of the problems created by high union contracts, unregulated competition, terrorism, and high oil prices just as it had to find a way out of the cluster of problems that arose after World War II: how to increase the passenger base; how to absorb Army Air Corps bases as civilian airports; how to stake out routes. Medicine switches from being office based to hospital based, from treating infections to treating organ diseases and cancers. Institutions are never just on the cusp between one era and another. The ground shifts so quickly that an era of medicine or industry is only a metaphor for the fact that some features of an institution may coexist for a while together even if one or another of those features will change for any number of reasons.
Education is an institution that is also always changing. Education, however, is described as in a state of crisis rather than merely in the process of responding to the next challenge. That is because education always falls short of the goals it and other institutions of social life set for it. Doctors may be required to treat but they are not required to cure diseases regarded as incurable; generals are expected to win wars, not to put an end to war. Teachers, on the other hand, are expected to provide, as the New York State Court of Appeals has held, “a sound basic education” for every young person, without defining what that would mean, though the phrase would seem to mean, if it has any meaning at all, that every young person will have learned enough to hold down a middle class occupation, regardless of the abilities of the child. Education is, in general, so grand a thing in conception that its goals always outstrip the ability of the institution to meet those goals. The goals of education are no less than to make every member of society economically productive, intellectually inquisitive, morally responsible, socially conscious, and psychologically mature.
Read MoreThe Insurrection as a Great Event
How do we know when great events have occurred, when something happens which is of great consequence, the road of history having taken one fork rather than another? Sometimes there are announcements and celebrations and ceremonies. Neville Chamberlain announced that Great Britain was at a state of war with Germany on Sept. 1, 1939. FDR announced there was a state of war with Japan at a joint session of Congress on Dec. 8, 1941. There were crowds of people in Times Square on V-E Day. Bells rang when the Declaration of Independence was announced and read at numerous crowds. Great events are also proclaimed at technological events. There were fireworks when the Brooklyn Bridge opened, and crowds of people crossed it in celebration at the new marvel. People cheered and were itself a celebration when Edison opened up the Pearl St. station in lower Manhattan and so began the Electric Age. There was a ceremonial golden spike hammered in by the last link between the Central Pacific and the Union Pacific to commemorate the opening of the railroad from the Atlantic to the Pacific Oceans.
Read MoreSchool Integration and School Effectiveness
This is a sad story. It is the story of the failure of the promise to equalize the outcomes between black and white students in the years after segregation ended. The irony was that the desegregation of schools was supposedly to be for that end, and was the clarion call for the Civil Rights Movement in the Fifties and Sixties, that emblemized by the Norman Rockwell painting of the little Ruby Bridges being escorted into a New Orleans elementary school by burly protectors. So many other changes in race relations did change. A Black middle class and a Black professional class has entered the ranks of doctors and lawyers and entrepreneurs. There are numerous bBlack politicians in that the percentage of Black congresspeople is about the same as that of the population at large even though there are, at the moment, only three Black Senators, but then there has been a Black President and, currently, a Black Vice President. The Secretary of Defense is a Black man. Perhaps most important as a measure of normalizing Black people in the United States, is that Black women are featured in fashion magazines and that there are a large number of Black people as reporters and news talk hosts and commentators. But not so with education.
Read MoreMarjorie Taylor Greene
I know those whom I respect and with whom I can discuss political matters who nonetheless disagree with my Biden Liberal-centrist perspective. It takes a little more to understand or try to discuss matters with Marjorie Taylor Greene, who most of us dismiss as a kook or a laughing stock, what with her Jewish lasers from space attacking California so as to start forest fires and so make available lands for high speed train travel. Let us compare the differences in the kinds of people who are anti-Biden and we will find that even Greene can be placed within an ideology, which can be defined as a highly articulated set of propositions about politics and society, or else placed, like Greene, as just a not very articulate view even if some intellectuals can fashion thoughts and feelings into an ideology or turn an ideology into sentiments that do not have much thought about them, Biden as well as anyone else subject to the back and forth of feelings and ideas. None of us can escape some broad view of what constitutes the political and social landscape. Even my uneducated father believed that the gentiles were, in general, out to get the Jews, but that the United States was pretty safe for the Jews, and my students, who thought themselves too uninformed to go out and vote, had a sense, living in the Northeast, that there should be racial justice and protections for gays and lesbians as just a matter of common decency.
Read More"The Third Man"
Nineteen Forty-Nine was a great year for movies, one that earned the ad of a decade later that “movies were better than ever”. Laurence Olivier’s “Hamlet” won the Best Oscar, the awards trying to believe that the most quality movies were also the most popular, but the year also included the musical “On the Town”, a blockbuster musical by the young people of Comden and Green and Leonard Bernstein, “Pinkie”, a movie about a mulatto girl trying to live in the South that showed some of the sorrows of segregation, “The Treasure of Sierra Madre”, which was a story as tightly drawn as a Chaucer story, and even the awful “My Friend Irma” remarkable only because it introduced Martin and Lewis, who stole the show with Martin’s suave deliveries, including his signature ability to caress the microphone, and Jerry Lewis, who was not so much imitating a cripple as much as imitating a nerd before there was such a term. It seems that the movies had moved on beyond World War II to pick up the new issues of the post-war world, such as suburbanization in “Mr. Blandings Builds His Dream House” which was produced in 1948, and even in the 1949 and wonderfully comic “I Was a Male War Bride”, where the women were seen as independent minded and responsible and sensible. Cary Grant was the comic foil to Ann Southern’s straight man, the opposite of Burns and Allen, a duo from the era of the Thirties, where Allen played the ditzie foil. Movies were into social issues, such as the overdrawn “Gentleman’s Agreement”. The weekly movie goer didn’t need to read the papers. Those who tuned into the dream factory had plenty of real issues to chew on. The major studios were at work with socially significent stuff, not just with film noir detective and crime stories that portrayed dark emotions shot mostly at night, such as “The Postman Rings Twice” or “Sorry, Wrong Number”, the genre seeming profound because the protagonists were quirky as well as bad. (But, then again, “Richard III” would qualify as a film noir piece.)
Read More