The Things I've Learned in a Year of Counterpoint: All Dissonance is Passing

Nothing more here than a few lessons I've learned in the last year...more to come in the next weeks, as well as explanations. This serves as filler while I prepare a sort of opus magnum over the next two weeks- a discussion of Christian morality, and Christian Anarchy.


Life is a lot like counterpoint, really. We often ask for it to be homophonic; planned, controlled, and worry when it isn't. Like isn't a chorale tune, though. Life is counterpoint. It swells, it fades, it conflicts and it inspires. And the first rule of counterpoint? All dissonance is passing. So sit back, and enjoy the ride. All things resolve.

A Few Other Lessons (bon mots):

Live your own dream; sing your own song.

Love cannot conquer all things; what makes it beautiful is that it doesn't need to.

Have grand dreams, but delight in small things.

Be mindful of what you fear; what you fear is what you worship.

Cynicism is a tool for a lazy thinker. It speaks loundly, but works little.
Criticism is silent, and acts swiftly and wisely.

The times when you feel most you cannot breathe are the times you need to step back and take a deep breath.

Every day, find something new that is beautiful, and learn to love it. A pebble, a blade of grass, a leaf, a star, a person. All life is wondrous, learn to see it as such.

Erkläret,
Benjamin

Ein Tugendlich Pfliecht

From my Notebook XII:

März 10, 2008-
Often as I am tired I find myself beginning to wonder, in retrospect, about decisions I have made. Questioning them, specifically. Revisiting again and again the mistakes and successes, but mostly mistakes, of my past.
What if I had asked earlier? What if I had done x different, or chosen y instead? Would that have fixed my current problem, or made it worse? Would I be happier? Can I ever fix it? Would my life be better now if I had chosen differently?

But I stop myself tonight.

Virtue does not wonder about what might have been. It sees what is, and though it need not be happy, accepts the present with quiet dignity. In this, there is honor. In doubtful retrospective, there is only confusion and retrograde growth.

The Poor Knight II

From Søren Kierkegaard: Fear and Trembling, p.30-A Panegyric upon Abraham

"Not one shall be forgotten who was great in the world. But each was great in his own way, and each in proportion to the greatness of that which he loved. For he who loved himself became great by himself, and he who loved other men became great by his selfless devotion, but he who loved Ideals became greater than all.

Everyone shall be remembered, but each became great in proportion to his expectation. One became great by expecting the possible, another by expecting the eternal, but he who expected the impossible became greater than all.

Everyone shall be remembered, but each became great in proportion to the greatness of that with which he strove. For he who strove with the world became great by overcoming the world, and he who strove with himself became great by overcoming himself, but he who strove with ideals became greater than all. So there was strife in the world, man against man, one against a thousand, but he who strove with ideals was greater than all. So there was strife upon earth: there was one who overcame all by his power, and there was one who overcame God by his impotence. There was one who relied upon himself and gained all, there was one who secure in his strength sacrificed all, but he who believed those Ideals was greater than all.

There was one who was great by reason of his power, and one who was great by reason of his wisdom, and one who was great by reason of his hope, and one who was great by reason of his love, but the one who chose ideals, and Idiot to other men, was greater than all: great by reason of his power whose strength is impotence, great by reason of his wisdom whose secret is foolishness, great by reason of his hope whose form is madness, great by reason of the love which is hatred of oneself."

The Poor Knight I

From Dostoevsky's Idiot, Book 2, Chapter 6:

"Deepest respect," Aglaia went on gravely and earnestly, "because that poem simply describes a man who is capable of an ideal, and what is more, a man who having once set an ideal before him has faith in it, and having faith in it gives up his life to it. This does not always happen in our day. We are not told directly what the 'poor knight's' ideal was, but one can see it was some vision, and the knight in loving devotion has put a rosary around his neck instead of a scarf...anyway, it's clear that the poor knight did not care what his lady was, or what she did. It was enough for him that he had chosen her and put faith in her pure beauty and then did homage to her forever.

That's just his merit; if she were to become a thief afterwards, he would still be bound to believe in her and be ready to break a spear for her. He seems to be, in one striking figure, the grand conception of chivalry's Platonic love. Of course that is all an ideal- in the poor knight that feeling reaches its utmost limit in asceticism. It must be admitted that to be capable of such a love means a great deal, and that such love leaves behind a profound impression."

Review: "How Starbucks Saved My Life"

How Starbucks Saved My Life: A Son of Privilege Learns to Live Like Everyone Else

Michael Gates Gill, 2007. Gotham Books, a division of Penguin Group, New York, NY. 262 pages.


It was during an unplanned visit to a bookstore that I found this small copy; I was only waiting for my sister to finish shopping elsewhere when this book caught my eye- first as a novelty: A friend of a friend is quite taken with Starbucks, almost to the point of unhealthy obsession. It was when I read the jacket, however, that I took the book seriously- so seriously I left that day with a copy of the first printing, with high hopes of an autobiography that would rise above the normal self-indulgent drek that pollutes the biography and 'self-help' shelves of a Barnes & Noble near you. (Tip: If you want to distinguish yourself not only from the proliteriate, but also from the hoi polloi that normally frequents such a locale, I recommend pronouncing the store's name as though it were "Barns and Noblé" with special emphasis on the schwa, including raising the eyebrows slightly, like a French waiter silently questioning a patron's choice of wine. But I digress..)

"How Starbucks..." did not, in many ways, disappoint. The book is a touching exploration of the barriers we construct between the unwritten castes of society. What could better teach a lesson on how circumstance defines where, but not who, you are than falling from the heights of the corporate world to 'menial' tasks?

Gill outlines a number of years of his life, from his childhood with a driven father to his Yale education, and the patronage (or nepotistic) system that landed him his job with J. Walter Thompson. It was not until Gill was fired my higher management that he discovered what it was like with the 'little people', when he was forced to try to find work in a tough economy as a sixty-year-old man with no practical labor experience.

Offered a job at a Starbucks, Gill eagerly accepts, but is quick to view the job as beneath him. It is the great impetus of the book, however, to watch him struggle with this view, as he begins to find the hard work fulfilling- and to see his discovery of the racism and elitism that lives in his mind and heart. We are struck by the juxtaposition: Gill, who had never really believed that the world belonged to 'old white men' (as his daughter often told him) suddenly finds himself on the same side of the counter as young, productive black youth- serving 'old white men', and receiving an impressive dose of humility in the process- as well as self-worth: Gill had never really worked for anything in his life; privilege had provided.

Gill notes that the disdain for other groups is self-perpetuating. In a poignant sort of moment, his new boss tells him "...her angry, bitter aunt had told her repeatedly that 'white folks are the enemy.' In her view, she was taking a risk giving me a job, and wasn't going to give an inch until she knew I wouldn't give her any trouble [because of race]"

A powerful topic comes up repeatedly: the difference between rule by fear, by raison d'etre, and by partnership. He notes that no one at JWT respected each other, recounting a story of a presentation to Ford Motor Company of over two hundred ad layouts- each the painstaking work of hours of intense effort- where the executive responded "nothing bites my ass". Says Gill, "Everyone at Ford lived in fear and loved to see someone else get publicly humiliated"

What touches and inspires is the hope in the recounting of Gill's story- and the refreshing humility he brings.

"Maybe I was climbing Jacob's ladder, I thought, as I walked up my steep stairs at the end of this long night.
Back off, I told myself. You are not on some high-flying spiritual journey. You are a guy who made a series of mistakes and blew an easy existence. Face it, Mike, I told myself, you didn't get religion, you got broken.
I admitted at that moment that I would never have found this new world I really loved unless I had to.
And I had not been on some spiritual journey for the perfect job or satisfying life: I had been caught up in the struggle for survival...which was common for most people in this world, but uncommon for the spoiled prince I had been."

Perhaps what disappoints in "How Starbucks..." is not the story itself, but that Gill fails to draw any overarching conclusion. While we should not seek to moralize every story, Gill has through his incredible transformation set the stage for an incredible platform of philosophical truths. He fails, then, to give us anything to live by or conclude. Does this mean we cannot teach ourselves? Certainly not! But it is unfortunate to see this man able to recount his experience with such gripping, empathy-invoking language and yet not draw any greater lesson out of it than "Wow, I'm happy now"

All things considered, a better read than most autobiographies. If you're looking for inspiration, hope, or to rekindle the belief that hard work can make it, grab this from the shelf. If you'd like a deeper interpretation of the meaning of life and the value of hard work, stick to Marx and Hegel.

-Benjamin

Caucusing: A Practice in Realism?

Maybe I'm young and idealistic. A romanticist.



I come from the fine state of Iowa, where we have the privilege of caucusing before any other state has their preliminary party elections. We gain a lot of media attention for this, and it leaves a lot of people wondering why it is such a small (lightly populated) state has the first say.

I think that is a fair question, and I'm of no expertise to fairly explain it, other than to say two things about it:

By guaranteeing that we are first, a state which otherwise would be ignored is placed foremost in the minds of the candidates. With three electoral votes, Iowa isn't worth the time of candidates, unless we set a precedent upon which other states may base their own decision.

Secondly, Iowa is generally known as being a litmus test of candidates. We have an incredible mix of voters here, with far left, far right, and everything in between seeing fairly even representation throughout the state. If a candidate does well here, it means many, if not all, major groups have at least some members who support him. (or this year, her.)


All this to say, I caucused this year-and it was an honor to be a part of the first stage in the selection of a candidate. I was amazed, however, by what I heard there.

"If anyone deserves a Presidency, it's John McCain. I was in the marines, and God knows what that man has been through. But I'm also 69, and I recognize that I would be too old to be president. Besides, McCain would never win. We need to stop throwing away our votes on men like Huckabee and McCain, men who may be nice to see but would never be elected. We have to unite behind an electable candidate, like Giuliani or Romney, or we'll be defeated in November. Stop wasting your votes, people!"

Maybe I'm young and idealistic.

See, I think we need to be dealing with a lot more than electability. We need to go deeper than issues. We should be selecting candidates based on their ideals and worldview- no one can know the issues in the future, but you can know how a candidate thinks, and whether they would react through a worldview pleasing and in accordance to yours.

I think we need to select a candidate who we really agree with, and shamelessly vote for their ideas, not their "electability". Has no one ever realized that we damn candidates or make them based on arbitrary, fear-based decision that someone else is 'electable'?

I cannot help but think that when we stand up for the things we each believe in, and we unabashedly put our ballots where out beliefs are, this country can begin to become great again. When every man has representation based on what he believes, not who was the most likely to be popular, we will have a government that can rule of the people, by the people, for the people.

Maybe I'm young and idealistic.

But maybe not. Maybe the world is jaded.

What about Creationism?

There's been a lot of buzz about Huckabee basing his run on religious "radicalism", and his apparent stubborn insistance on ID simply because Evolutionary theory conflicts with Biblical doctrine.

With the media and political left screaming that he'll indoctrinate our children and make Christianity a government-endorsed religion, this excerpt is one I thought might be nice to put out there for consideration.

Huckabee: 'I Feel Like Seabiscuit' -- 01/04/2008

What about creationism?

ABC's "Good Morning America" grilled Huckabee about his evangelical ties, making Creationism the issue.

ABC's Robin Roberts mentioned a new book from the National Academy of Sciences that says Creationism has no place in the classroom -- given the overwhelming evidence in favor of evolution.

"Do you agree with that -- that Creationism should be kept out of our classrooms," Roberts asked. "In ten-and-a-half years as a governor, I never touched it," Huckabee said. "It's not an issue for a president. It wasn't even an issue for me as a governor, and governors do deal with education - but not the curriculum." Huckabee said his focus as governor was on music and arts in education.

"Should creationism be banned from the classroom, yes or no?" Roberts persisted.

"Banned? Well, banning sounds like sort of a censorship," Huckabee said. "I don't think most people agree with censorship. Should we teach it as a doctrine? Of course not. Should we teach that some people believe it, some don't? I think that's academic freedom."

Errare humanum est

I'll admit right away, I tend to procrastinate. Even to the point of being flat-out lazy.

But I've done a little more to damn myself in this forum.
When I started this blog, I thought it would be a great way to air some ideas, and it is. The problem was that I approached it like a lecture series, and that just won't do. I'm neither able to easily continue talking in a direct line, nor will it produce material fast enough to satisfy whatever readers I might happen to acquire.

I'm also reluctant to post. I've had a lot of great ideas, quick thoughts, homilies and notes since the 19th, but most of them have landed in the circular file because my first thought is that I need to finish talking about absolutism first. Bad situation, that.

So here's the deal: I apologize for not promptly ending the absolutism issue. But I will get there soon, I promise. In between major points there will be reviews, ideas, unfinished thoughts. Major additions to a topic will be labeled with the topic and number in the series for fast use of the indices and search features.

My first new post first thing tomorrow: a few thoughts on idealism.