Notes for a short novel, opening scenes
Usilla (an Indian-India name), 18 and a photographer, familiar handle,Silla
A whitewashed sign on a whitewashed clapboard one-story building on main street, Ursula Sheridan Photography
She periodically exhibits her work here, but there is no picture of her
She hosts a periodic competition
From the B and B window across the street, a puma sits in a tree behind the gallery
Its color is that of the countryside around this No. CA town.
Silla's father owns a hardware business that the narrator has come to investigate for possible purchase.
These "facts" are the starting point, rather than mapping out the whole thing as in novel-/story-writing exercises before now.
---
You have filled some gaps in my half-knowledge of what you have been doing, and been up to, since high school. Thanks. I was curious and still am. But I see from this distance (in time and space), and because of it, that we can never really know or need to know each other's histories. This is not to subtract anything for the affection I have for you, our time together, and the care-full thoughts I have had about you over the years, and now. Nor does it subtract from the importance of our separate paths both chosen and fateful. What we have done with our lives is what we have done, and experienced, for good or ill. And now is now.
High school was an arguably important four years of our lives, and we have had the fortune, I think good, to have been granted more than that, for we are still here. But a blip in time it was, part of a set of formative experiences which has been built upon and forgotten as the case might be. In short, there is nothing left but memories, and the gap of intervening years from then till now just that, a gap for which there can be no adequate accounting. Nor should we feel compelled to fill it in, but it is nice/interesting to know what happened in pieces. How did you turn out? How was life for you?
In lieu of this accounting, did any or all of it really matter? and what we are about now? is there salvation in our deeds and daily lives?
In mine, I am not sure. But I will go through some of this to let you see what is now. Perhaps you will be able to connect that with that which you knew about me so long ago that it was and shall remain yesterday.
---
I miss Western landscapes. Oh, the distances and the colors, to be drunk with them any time of day or eve. But I have never described them, what I saw and felt as I stood or sat and stared into the distance. The words including the technical ones escape me, or I don't even possess them. But Edward Abbey and others did. Zane Gray did. Here is a short vista of a desert Southwest in //Tales of Lonely Trails//.
My gaze then seemed impelled and held by things afar, a vast yellow and purple corrugated world of distance, apparently now on a level with my eyes. I was drawn by the beauty and grandeur of that scene; and then I was transfixed, almost by fear, by the realization that I dared to venture down into this wild and up-flung fastness. I kept looking afar, sweeping the three-quarter circle of horizon till my judgment of distance was confounded and my sense of proportion dwarfed one moment and magnified the next.
With this and other descriptions, this once popular American author can still take you there and bring you to the edge of a panorama and present it to you so that you are there too. (Why is it that sometimes you see a comma before //too//? I never liked it.)
Not all are interested in word pictures of landscapes, but in the absence of being there, these are as good as photos and paintings for me because they are vivid pictures in the mind, colorful imagined places I can visit again and again without a boarding card or pack mule. Anytime. Such mental places have been as real to me as being present at a specific time and place and looking at the reality before me.
Sometimes when I close my eyes and relax, places I have never been come into view. What makes them so real is vividness. Where do these come from? Are they beaming to me from some remote location?
Sometimes I close my eyes and action starts and a kind of scene unfolds in a disturbing sequence, or a lost loved one appears. Then a sudden jolt, a reflex, immediately opens my eyes to stop the spirits and demons that would appear and injure me. Conjured or chosen images are powerful; they are as physical presence. I choose sometimes not to look or to go there, chasing the pictures away.
Of course, there can be most pleasing realities and the people and actions, well, would that they continue to seduce me before the breakfast bell rings and I have to get up. These are so not mundane compared to that woman I was with in my memory, or that raft down that river and that icy water from the runoff freshening the moments recalled after the fact that day or later.
Once in a while a photo or painting will move me, even a moment in time that I capture by stopping and looking or watching something. Here are two examples followed by what happened next. What was real about these things? What I saw in my mind and what I felt and thought. Nothing else. But you must judge, as the storytellers say.
---
I was given this today via an email: " . . . with the West drawing lines 'also' in Africa or like the 38th parallel. Do you know how that happened?"
Thanks for the stimulus to go checking my understandings of things historical. I am still no historian, and not yet convinced that the study/discipline is worth much in the absence of an infrastructure (e.g., education, a reason-driven body politic, etc.) to support and check its "facts" and its thoroughly researched and considered lessons.
My personal inadequacies aside, this meandering article ("A Point of View: Democracy and Islamic Law") does ask an interesting question to which it does not indicate an answer, yet. Must wait to sell this newspaper so that I can buy the next tomorrow?) Could have gone straight to the question, but I will wait patiently while the winded have their way of getting at the answer, or should I say, a response.
The question then: "What way of defining ourselves reconciles democratic elections with real opposition and individual rights?"
I will venture a guess. We (should) define ourselves as a reasonable and feeling (caring) people who accept rules and laws we take a hand in formulating, and then we play by same. As in any play, while you (a majority) win today, I have a chance to convince in an orderly and peaceful way such that the outcomes next time lean more towards the better possibilities I visualize. Without burning the house down, I can really, really oppose what is going on without denying your right to what it is you enjoy while having it your way.
Our way is best, but sometimes (always?) we have to see and value our differences to make any progress. And the game is all about progress, making everything better for as many as possible. I am an idealist: Would that all enjoy everything more and better, not just goodies for the few. And if a significant few at the top, or the bottom, show a society's deep inequities in access to the means of having a say and a meal (I would include health in the list), then something needs to be done. For the reasonable and feeling people that we are or can be, we will see that inequalities make for a broken or fractured and incomplete way of being.
The alternative is to be "led" by a benevolent philosopher-dictator, whereby we can go about our lives and not bother about messy stuff like political systems (democracy versus what?), opposition (because your god does not look like mine?), individual rights (you ain't got any anymore, so what are you talking about?). These affairs of state are just the claptrap of a few disgruntled souls who have had too much school, or alcohol, or material things, the real opiates of the masses in the West.
Of course, the implication of the article, or so it seems to me, is that there must be things on which to base governing and the governed, and a democratic model is preferred. Religion is one, values as I have indicated, a person, like a dictator, pure utilitarianism--things for the good of each and all needs to be done regardless of persuasions or personalities. [I am not quite sure what I was trying to say here.] I guess that is the secular swaysion of sorts. What else? Oh, anarchy, but who really wants that? Has it proved itself at any level of implementation?
Those societies that want to be ruled by whatever, let 'em be so ruled.
I guess I got off on a tangent. Back to the thesis, or should I say the reason for the writing that I found meandering.
The question he asks is, if anything, the thesis, or raison d'etre. The rest is a reading of histories for our benefit, to place us all on the same page, I guess. But the real point is his question which he puts off answering. The suggestion is, and it is provocative, that we are doing democracy wrong in some way in the West. Well, natch, not real news. And we have lost our way more than I like, etc. So I will await his answer or analysis. And keep my tangents to myself till the second part of his article appears.
---
Interruptions in life therefore thought. Oh for a sustained idea to carry me from the first to the last word.
---
Topics to develop in a short series on teaching and learning.
Best way to learn [done]
Typical course agenda
Common framework
Take some medicine
Applying what you learn
Which English (to speak/learn)
Skills--general, objectives specific rwsl [reading, writing, etc.]
Word order demystified
Common errors
---
During that year I regularly went to the public library and sat in the area for foreign periodicals. I spent a couple of hours perusing at least one each in French, German and English. I am not sure I learned much more from the French and German ones, but it was fun to try to decode what passed quickly on the turning pages. Captions of pictures and headlines were what I focused on most. Now and then I would venture into the articles and test my understanding. I had my computer handy and looked up the word or phrase till it became too distracting, too slow to get the story and continuity. And then I would write or research a topic on my computer until it was time to go, signaled by fatigue or hunger, with a quick look at the new exhibit on the top floor before I exited the building. Fatigue was the worst, because that was when I would have to pack up and shlep home the four long blocks. By time of my arrival I was usually awake again. It was better if hunger drove me out of the swinging doors and onto the street. A kebap place or fast vegetarian restaurant was nearby. There was always the Chinese place or a Czech pub with a lunch special. I was spoiled because the food was affordable and it filled me up. Returning to the library was often the goal yet seldom realized. Then the shlep home was mandatory. A hot lunch any time of year begat a drowsiness inescapable, and the lure of drifting off into a drugged sleep under the duvet on a cold winter afternoon heaven on earth.
---
It may not apply, but it seems like it should. Oh, by the way, when I referred to the principle behind Snowden's whistleblowing, I was not talking about his principles but a principle we have often cited in our more idealistic moments. I will put it in my own words.
It is justifiable to blow the whistle on something illegal, or grossly out of line with collective values, supposed allegiance or contractual obligations notwithstanding. In short, there are higher laws to obey if the law of the day or practice is deemed immoral. But do so at your peril.
Nuremberg Trials Principle IV, Superior Orders can be paraphrased: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders".
The wikipedia article goes on to say that
Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the jurisprudence found in certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection. It is also supported by the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status which was issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which conscientious objectors can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.
Lots of stuff here of interest. Did Snowden's action stem from what is going on in an illegal war? one
that has not been legally declared? Was his status as an outsourced arm of the defense establishment put him in the role of subordinate to superior as seen under Principle IV? And wouldn't his exoneration or lessened offense be so deemed under this rubric versus that of the Espionage Act? If a spy tells the world what it in essence already knows, is he really revealing secrets? Etc.
So, my question remains, but not for you personally, just the general you. However, if there is humor here or a clever workaround, I would be interested in hearing about it, or reading it. This is a complex issue for which we do not need to raise a hand and be counted. Just an interesting exercise, especially if asked a leading question in conversation. For my part, I think the principles that inform the answers to whether or not one agrees with what he did most interesting. But you, the personal you, would expect that of me by now.
---
To see a World in a Grain of Sand when taken alone from Blake's "Auguries of Innocence" is ambiguous, even in light of the assertion by presumably a number [of readers] that "The poem contains a series of paradoxes which speak of innocence juxtaposed with evil and corruption." What can it mean? I deem that because of some particular, one of the infrequent openings into the light and enlightenment is for some life changing--that is one reading. Another is that more than it, the thing itself, we can see more than the detail, the particular. Any one thing can open consciousness to boundless reverie and realizations.
. . . Heaven in a Wild Flower,/Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand/And Eternity in an hour.
---
At the present moment, we are experiencing the rise of new digital pleasures and distractions, the expansion of a mostly visual culture that races far ahead of the imagination, the ubiquity of social networks that redefine the pure solitude once required for reading a demanding book. And in this time of rapid changes in the workplace, life's great mysteries seem more economic than existential. A digital environment also stresses quantitative thinking, and perhaps that helps explain why the most exciting cultural advances are now in science and medicine.
It is hardly a surprise that in this atmosphere, college students choose to major in fields that are most relevant to the life around them. What a blessing that is on literature. Slipping out from behind ivied prison doors, where they have been forced to labor as evaluative "texts," the great thoughts and feelings made permanent by art can resume their rightful place as a unique phase of ordinary experience.
http://online.wsj.com/
THE SATURDAY ESSAY
July 12, 2013
Who Ruined the Humanities?
By LEE SIEGEL
---
Further to the world in a grain of sand, Wovoka
Black Coyote, one of the Arapaho delegates and also a police officer, the same incident came up, but with a very different sequel. Black Coyote told how they had seated themselves on the ground in front of Wovoka, as described by Tall Bull, and went on to tell how the messiah had waved his feathers over his hat, and then, when he withdrew his hand, Black Coyote looked into the hat and there "saw the whole world."
---
Hard and soft. Sounds like porn! Well, here is a bit of porn, then.
Psychology has both hard and soft aspects. If we get some rats and implant some electrodes, we can consistently trigger the same behaviors. And this has been demonstrated with humans. Hard.
Soft. There are at the very least four personality types or temperaments. Fuzzy lines exist between each, but consistently enough, people demonstrate preference for one over the others (e.g., Myers-Briggs and Keirsey Temperament Sorter). The reliability is such that soft instruments that inventory these things in us can be used to increase self awareness and assess the match between one's "personality" and choice of work. In other words, practical applications. Soft science that works.
Literature has both hard and soft. Hard would include concordances, meta analyses, etc. An interesting relatively recent example involved the works of Agatha Christie. As her signs of aging increased, her works deteriorated in range of vocabulary, coherence of plot, etc. Only after her death were these parallel phenomena identified and tracked. The tracking began and ended with analyses of her books.
Soft, but hugely reliable. Ten people read Hamlet. Five are experts in lit analysis and criticism. Five are not. All ten reject the claim that the play is about road rage or the fact that a bridge would fall someday in Washington state.
Points being that in both hard and soft sciences, evidence is gathered and weighed. Conclusions/predictions made. We understand the world better, until further testing or the addition of new knowledge and we have to revise. "Truth-enough-to-proceed" points along the way to comprehending our worlds.
Other than pressing your button again, I still find truth a good word.
Fact: Did you brush your teeth this morning?
Answer, if you are not joshing as usual, will be true whether you did or not. A little truth.
Probability: Does brushing your teeth decrease the likelihood of dental problems later in life? Ask any dentist; you will get the very same answer every time. A useful bit of advice, a truth we can use.
Explanation: Will brushing your teeth with coke (as in cola) damage tooth enamel? Your chemistry guy will tell you that this is 99 percent true. Good enough truth.
Cultural insight: Mao and no doubt other Chinese of his generation drank and swilled lots of tea to "take care of" their teeth, based in part on the justification that tigers don't brush theirs! We know this--it is true and a fact. And (fact, probability, explanation) Mao's teeth and gums were rotten! As was a lot of his political philosophy.
Which brings me to the truths of politics or sociology or systems like the environment. We might call these soft science insights, Reasonable Interpretations Subject to Further Verification. Good enough truth for now. How about: "George W. and the constellation of characters he surrounded himself with ignored what we knew and what we didn't. The object was Iraq invasion and retribution for a war his daddy 'lost'." Argue this one, but it is a defensible position; some might find it so persuasive as to use this insight to base a campaign against the Bush-like idiots of the world.
And now for the non-scientific, hard or soft. I can't claim all these examples of science and truths we can, to a large degree, rely on without considering a negative example.
>>"In every fach there are critics and people who "study" (musicologists). For me both musicologists and critics have one thing in common — they have no musical talent so they have to talk and write about."
No, no. Wait, not necessarily. Some people like to talk and write about. Others like to sing or make music, etc. Some of each category are good. Others not. And some probably do both pretty well, or not. And the claim of causality is flawed. Because one cannot sing or make music does not lead to talking and writing about. I know a guy who wanted to be a flamenco guitarist. He was terrible. Now he is a doctor, not a writer or critic.
I sense you have a deep suspicion--no, you have actually voiced it--a deep negative regard for those who study. Or maybe it is just the silly ones you have met or read. And your stated preference is "I'm just not into [scholarly stuff] except in some political sense since that can affect lives." So be it. I accept that.
For me, and this is all about me in case you were wondering, I think all of these things affect lives. Psychology, literature . . . basket-weaving. The "Rite of Spring "caused a riot in Paris, I think. Music even affects lives. And studying all of these things and how they do what they do is/are fascinating.
TO BE CONTINUED
