|
::
Back to Page 2 ::
Freedom
There is nothing more worthy to fight for than freedom.
It is a word that is quick to our lips when any injustice
is done. I have sprouted philosophies of freedom since
my teenage years, a time when people are more likely
to want freedom because of the rules and social codes
that constantly threaten to tell them 'No'.
It is these old 'no-sayers' that e.e cummings writes
about, and though the 'old' in this context is more
to do with attitude than age it is more likely an older
generation who are saying 'no' as their own interests
have changed.
Albert Camus defined a rebel as one who was willing
to saying 'No'. In this respect he meant saying 'No'
when being told how to behave, saying 'No' to the traditional
values and virtues.
Still there is 'freedom to' and 'freedom from'. My
freedom may impose upon your freedom. I should be free
to party all night, then again my neighbours should
be free to sleep quietly all night.
Society is basically people coming together to live
in close proximity to one another for reasons that might
be economic or social, but from the beginning it was
for security, to feel safe within the group from the
dangers outside. If you were the only person on Earth
there would be no need for rules and laws.
So what is freedom? According to whose definitions?
What are the assumptions underlying these notions of
freedom? Is freedom different now to 100 years ago?
Is it different in Australia and Saudi Arabia? Who creates
the laws defining our freedom?
Are we born with 'natural rights'? Where did they come
from? Have we always assumed that we had natural rights?
Whose rights in particular are we talking about? Where
do your own ideas on freedom come from?
"It's often safer to be in chains than to be free",
said Franz Kafka, a great Czech writer of the first
half of the twentieth century. His novel, The Trial
is about the persecution of a man by the police. They
come to his door, take him to the police station but
he is never told what the charge is. For a year they
taunt him by arriving at his door and taking him down
to the station. There is never any physical harm done
to him, but after all this he just wishes that he is
beaten or killed to be rid of the threat.
Nietzsche
'Is not life a hundred times too short for us to bore
ourselves.'
Karl Marx
It was Marx who said that 'Religion is the opium of
the masses'. By this he meant that the promise of the
afterlife kept the working classes, the poor, the outcaste,
in their places, never willing to question authority
(which linked the ruling classes and the Church) and
too scared to rebel against their 'supposed' betters.
Governments kill and exploit those they see as their
enemies, they oppress their countrymen by giving them
little opportunity or rights, but they do it within
the legitimate frameworks of Law and Order. Marx thought
this was ideology in operation and thought it the greatest
con-job in history.
God 2
The French poet, Paul Valery, said 'God made the world
out of nothing, but the nothingness shows through.'
The American Dream
America was built on the grand notions of Liberty,
Equality and Brotherhood. Having the whole Atlantic
Ocean separating it from the Old World of Europe which
was corrupted by class distinctions, religious strife
and inequality the first fathers of America set up a
Land of the Free.
Every American has the right and ability to become
President, no matter who they are. This is still a cherished
belief and people will testify to all those who have
come from poor backgrounds to 'make good'. And it is
possible.
However if we look at who has become President over
the last two hundred years we will notice that it just
might be a tad bit harder for some.
There has never been a female President. That accounts
for 50% of the population. No Negroes, Hispanics, Jews.
That would leave with about 25% left. Only one Catholic,
most being Protestants. All being Christians. 10%? Most
come from relatively affluent backgrounds and to get
to a position of running for President they must have
had a good education, preferably at one of the top Universities,
and be 'rich' to afford the campaign.
In the long run 1% of the population would be a generous
estimate of those who really have a chance of this particular
success.
No wonder it's a dream.
Who was the smartest person ever?
Some people make a living out of writing books that
make lists of famous people or the 'smartest'. These
lists that come out every few years (like the top ten
books or films) usually have Isaac Newton and Albert
Einstein fighting out top spot.
Einstein once said that all the things he knew, when
compared to what was out there, was like a grain of
sand on an endless beach.
Socrates is famous for saying that all he knew was
that he knew nothing. He thought he was pretty smart
saying this as it was one more thing than anyone else
knew.
Newton just worked on his calculus and didn't mind
if people made up stories about him being hit on the
head by apples.
Critical Density Value
Apparently this is very important and is at the crux
of whether the universe will expand forever or recollapse
and finally end in the Big Crunch. Stephen Hawking thinks
its a sure bet that it will expand for at least another
10 billion years so most of us won't be around to see
if he's wrong.
However the really spooky thing is that this critical
value thing determined the whole beginning of things
as well.
If the density of the universe after the Big Bang had
been greater by one part in a thousand billion, (don't
try to imagine how small) the universe would have curled
up and called it a day after only 10 years.
So did the universe keep on trying till it got it right?
If it didn't there would be no one around to say so.
Others might like the idea of a divine hand measuring
density carefully in her/his hands.
Pythagoras
The famous mathematician who is famous for his Theorem
concerning the square of the hypotenuse is equal to
the square of both sides of a triangle did not really
discover it himself. The Babylonians had known about
it for hundreds of years before Pythagoras visited (taken
as a prisoner actually) their country and took it home
to Greece as his own.
He was more famous at the time for his mysticism and
believed that numbers had magical, mystical qualities.
He also had a huge golden birthmark on his thigh which
prompted him to wear trousers rather than the flowing
gowns. Some also saw this as a mark of a god.
He lived for awhile as hermit in a temple near Mount
Carmel. One day he saw a ship entering the cove and
decided on the spot to sail to Egypt. The men on the
ship saw him descend the mountain and knowing it was
a sacred mountain that few could climb agreed to take
him to Egypt when he approached them. For two days and
three nights he sat in same corner silent, not eating
or drinking. The journey was unusually easy and free
of mishap so the men thought him a god. After wandering
the deserts for a while he was finally allowed to join
one sect, but had to have his long hair shaved like
a priest and was initiated into rites and mysteries
of the Egyptian temple, learning to read hieroglyphics.
When the Babylonian king, Kambyses, invaded Egypt in
525 B.C Pythagoras was transported back to Babylon where
he learn about the hypotenuse. When he finally returned
to Greece he was again revered and thought a god.
Now he's just a guy whose theorem every high school
kid has to learn to get the right answer for a question
that is not very important.
Language 2
Think of the all the words that come into your head
when I say the word, 'black'. List them down and do
the same for the word 'white'. (See Language 3 for conclusions)
Buddhism
I heard a guy lecture about Buddhism recently. He became
a Buddhist because his mother died of cancer. Mothers
die of cancer all the time and their sons fail to become
Buddhists, if they did Buddhism would would be vying
with Christianity for top of the religious league ladder.
But it seems her contracting cancer made him ask different
questions - in essence, Buddhist questions.
Instead of accepting the explanations of Western science;
that is, she has the disease and the reasons could be
from a range of sources and now we'll try to help, he
asked why did get the disease.
The discourse of Western science is based on rationality
and logic. These two methods of inquiry are privileged
in our society and it is believed that truth derives
from this type of investigation. You look for causes
not ask stupid questions like Why?
People smoke all their lives and live to one hundred
and don't die of lung cancer and others die young from
the same disease, having never had a puff. People spend
their lives in the sun and might get a few spots and
dry up but someone who kept clear of the sun all their
lives dies of a melanoma on the sole of their foot.
The Buddhist wanted to know why his mother caught cancer
and not someone else.
Western science refuses to deal with such irrational
questions. There are no answers in their way of thinking
and is therefore useless. Our Buddhist friend saw this
as a great flaw in their understanding of life. So he
went to Buddhism for his answers and found out all about
karma. You get what you give out. Usually in past lives.
There's no escaping your actions; you are responsible
for doing 'good' (this is problematic for other beliefs
who say 'well who decides what is good?') and killing
a furry little creature in one life might be the cause
of cancer in the next.
Of course we can see Buddhism also deals with causes,
but they are not the same as the measurable truths of
Western science.
There is no God in Buddhism and it is more an ethical
system, yet many would ask who is taking care of the
'tally sheet', and dishing out rewards and punishments
in future lives. This again is thinking in Western terms
and each life is still a state of 'being'. There is
also no notion of progress like we have in the West.
The highest state is Nirvana, a state of ridding yourself
of the body and arriving at non-being.
I also wonder at times why the World War 1 poet, Wilfred
Owen, survived four years of horror, enduring the trench
warfare from 1914 to 1918 to die from a stray bullet
a week before the end of the war.
Saving Animals/Karma
Some dedicated and caring people spend their lives
saving whales, rhinos, elephants and the Sumatran tigers.
Since being reminded of karma I have taken to saving
geckos, ladybirds, beetles and even wasps out of our
swimming pool. I know it's only a small gesture but
if I am taken to account in a future life I am sure
it will count for something. If there were larger animals
in the pool I would save them, though I'm not sure about
the Sumatran tiger.
Despite this I hate ants. They bury under the paving
and leave mounds of sand that just return the next day
if you sweep it clear. I have to confess to sometimes
boiling the kettle and pouring the boiling water down
the cracks in the paving. Since hearing about karma
I know I have quite a bit to make up for and will probably
be killed in the next life by being caught in a lava
flow from an erupting volcano.
A Straight Highway
A friend and I were hitchhiking across Australia when
we were eighteen. At midnight on the corner of the highway
that led from Norseman into the Nullarbor a truck driver
stopped. It was one of those huge trucks that carry
cargo across the continent and they usually get up to
speeds of 150 kilometres per hour once they wind up.
We threw the surfboards in the back and got in with
our dog. We chatted and he told us how he had travelled
non stop from Sydney to Perth, had a three hour break
and was on his way back. He admitted that most drivers
took speed to keep them going.
We were quiet for a few minutes when Pete asked the
driver if he wanted a cigarette. 'Do you want a smoke?'
No answer. Raising his voice Pete asked again, 'Want
a smoke?' The driver woke up, hands stiff on the wheel
and the truck hitting 140. He decided to pull over after
this and sleep.
It was one of those rare occasions when smoking saves
your life.
Fearless
I have often thought that to be fearless would be the
greatest quality a person might possess to cope with
the world. Imagine never being afraid to do anything.
We have all heard of fearless acts. They are usually
thrillseekers doing wild and dangerous things at the
ends of the earth. This would be quite nice. However
there is also another fearlessness; standing alone and
not fearing anything that can happen to you. To be totally
independent, secure in your relationship to the cosmos,
and like that poet standing with your middle finger
raised, not caring about the consequences. Nobody can
do a thing to you because you do not care.
Not caring about what others will think of you or what
they can do to you is a rebellious act, if not the rebellious
act. Conformity and fear combine to form the cornerstone
of society. Our society must create people who will
do as they are told and be scared of the consequences.
If you do not care you are dangerous.
The world would be a pretty mean and nasty place if
everyone didn't care about anything, but how many things
are out there that we have been conned into 'caring
about' which make no sense and we would be better off
without.
At the Grave of Jim Morrison
Some heroes never die. Rock stars have the propensity
to die young, making them much bigger in death than
life. None more so than Jim Morrison.
Take the train from Gare St Lazare out to the Pere-Lachaise
cemetary. This is a beautiful place to have your coffin
dropped in the ground. The avenues are all willowed
and on a sunny day you might feel the urge to have a
picnic if it wasn't for the fact you were in a cemetary.
You can go on any day of the year and find a crowd at
Jim's grave.
On one ordinary Friday morning there was a crowd as
we approached. One girl in long blonde plaits knelt
before the headstone with her candles lit, offering
a sea bed of shells and tears, others huddled behind,
90's hippies in ponytails, middle-aged tourists wanting
to see every sight, even a man in a suit, all wanting
to see the name of Jim Morrison cut in stone.
Once you get to see the headstone you might be a little
disappointed. It is rather small, nothing in comparison
to his reputation or the other famous people in the
cemetary. This place has been taking in the celebrities
for over a hundred years. There's Oscar Wilde, Marcel
Proust, infamous old generals, but these days they don't
attract much of a crowd. Poor Oscar Wilde still gets
the odd visit by those appreciating one-liners and Proust's
dark marble grave still attracts those believers of
the canon, but Jim has outdone them all, and the devoted
still crowd in as if it was a live concert.
But it's not his actual grave that makes him famous
in this cemetary of cemetaries, it's that his name is
scribbled and chiselled on other headstones and tombs
in every corner of the place. His devoted, perhaps in
a defiant act against a Creator who took their hero
so young have desecrated a sacred place. Or maybe they
had a few of Jim's traits and where stoned or drunk
at the time. Others who know that death is not final
left their final respects:
The Lizard King still lives.
You can do anything Jim.
Wallace
Alfred Wallace was probably the most unlucky scientist
in history. He is not even well known today though his
discoveries could rank him high on the list of scientists
who changed the world. In the 1840's and 1850's he took
to the jungle of the Amazon, the islands of Indonesia,
going to places Whites had never been before, all to
finance his love of Science.
Unlike Charles Darwin who was from a respected and
rich family of the upper class, Wallace was just a working
class lad. Darwin's journeys, though adventurous, were
tame compared to Wallace. He had to pay for everything
himself by catching birds and was usually alone for
long stretches at the end of the world.
It is still a matter of conjecture but many believe
that it was Wallace who came up with final clinching
proof for the Theory of Evolution or more specifically,
Natural Selection. He was on an island in Indonesia
when he came upon the idea and wrote to his hero, Charles
Darwin. By the time he got back to Europe Darwin was
famous.
Selfless
Is it possible to totally selfless? Can we be thoroughly
altruistic, acting for the interests of others and not
ourselves? Do we behave in a certain way only because
we will be advantaged in some way?
I admire Mother Teresa as much as anyone, but is she
selfless? Her actions bring hope and solace to others,
and for this she is a saint, but isn't she doing something
that brings happiness to herself. She must go to bed
each night, admittedly worn out, but feeling pretty
damn good about herself. She receives what she wants
through helping others, even being a person that all
will admire and say 'Isn't Mother Teresa an absolute
saint'. Isn't this constructing a self that she presents
to the world knowing her reward is their admiration?
Tragedies
The great tragedies of life you see every night on
the News. The smaller tragedies, the ones that really
concern us, are all around, often unsighted and seeming
ordinary. What e.e cummings would have called a state
of 'undying'.
What are we Capable of Doing?
What will people do when the prospect of death raises
its dark skull-like head, and turns towards them face
to face?
The Polish Nobel Prize winner, Czeslaw Milosz, recalled
his time in a German concentration camp in a book that
revealed some terrible aspects to our nature. At the
train station there were two trains for the prisoners.
One took Jews off to Auschwitz while the other went
to a less deadly camp. He watched a mother head off
to the train which took them to a camp that would be
a place of horror, but unlike Auschwitz it wouldn't
mean automatic death. There was a tiny glimmer of hope.
Women with children were automatically assigned to
the Auschwitz train. Without a child you could get on
the other train.
He watched as the woman walked along the platform,
a screaming four year old child behind crying 'Mama,
Mama'. She ignored her, walking on. The child pursued,
out of her mind that her mother was leaving her, 'Mama,
Mama', till the German guard asked her whether this
was her child. 'No, it is not my child'. Summing up
the situation the guard swore at her, saying that if
this is how Jews treat their children they deserved
to die, before hitting her over the head with the butt
of his rifle and throwing her and the child on the train
to Auschwitz.
He also noted the occasional act of great heroism.
Order
Humans like to believe that there is an order to everything.
This assumes that there is some overall plan, which
we like too. The idea that there is some hand shaping
the universe and our lives makes us feel as though there
is a reason for our existence. A purpose and meaning.
Some scientists think that it is only a function of
our brains as there is something in the chemical makeup
that looks for patterns.
Look at how we have divided up the world. We classify
and find boxes to fit people. Race, class, gender; as
if it is all natural and we have been smart enough to
find where everything fits. We see the chaos of Nature
and subjugate it to our needs; cut down the wilderness
and replace it with nicely ordered cities, a perfect
grid plan of streets, the order of rose gardens and
lawns. Sitting back smiling at our achievements.
Desperately we look for patterns to see how to predict
our lives, finding safety in routine and symmetry. Even
wearing the same 'lucky' footy socks for a big match
and believing in the star guide assumes some greater
plan, an order to things.
Islands and Mountains
On the Galapagos Islands it's perfectly clear. With
a bit of biological theory and good old empiricism you
cannot think we are anything but higher order animals
who have evolved down the evolutionary track. And it's
OK, you feel good about it. Then arrive in Peru and
head to Macchu Picchu, stand on the side of the mountains
and you are overwhelmed by your smallness. I don't like
the word 'spiritual' much, but that's what it is. You
believe in the possibility of God.
A cynical friend thinks it's an altitude (not attitude)
thing. The higher you go the more irrational you become.
Maybe it's just some sort of altitude sickness, a type
of hallucinating without hallucinating. God as a chemical
reaction, she says.
God is Love Yeh
I understood 'God is Love' for a moment perhaps. An
epiphany that soon left me. But to explain.
When Christ said it and others after him, it might
have meant some life force, a way of living which didn't
automatically mean a Creator wanting things from humankind.
It was a state of being (this might correspond to the
Christian concept of 'a state of grace') where existence
itself was sacred and the way to live was to love, care,
respect others. These words are not sufficient though,
and goes beyond abstract formulations we create to describe
or understand existence.
Many priests and ministers still say it, but it isn't
quite right. Often it is connected with rigid rules
and laws that control us. 'God is Love' transcends this.
Perhaps it is a way of thinking and feeling about life.
Many religious people do not believe in orthodox versions
of God and do not go to Church on Sundays.
As you can see I still haven't quite got it, but it
certainly has to do with God as a metaphor and that
these things that can make us whole are within us and
not in an external God.
P.S Another thought: God is Love sounds so simple and
it might be but it is complex in that individuals have
to overcome most things they have been taught, attempt
to locate themselves outside the ways that we see the
world (moralities, ideologies, etc) and especially try
to understand what the word 'love' signifies.
Language 3
The associations with the word 'black': evil, darkness,
dirty. For 'white': pure, angel, virginity, clouds,
clean. If you look up a thesaurus it will associate
black with dozens of negative ideas and images: blackball
(to exclude), blackguard, blacklist, black cat, black
sheep of the family, etc.
The English language cannot help but be racist and
place as Whites as superior through the meanings embedded
in the language itself.
Letting Go 2
What do we let go of? Primarily it is those things
that make us judge ourselves in materialistic ways.
If I have this job, live in this area, have this amount
of wealth, mix with these types of people, then I am
a success. Often it is thought that this will bring
happiness and contentment. It is usually the opposite.
This does not mean that money, status and the like are
bad in themselves, it is our attitude towards them.
Having them is one thing, letting them control who we
are is another.
It is not just material objects. If we see people as
objects or even as sources that we 'live through' it
serves the same purpose. Fulfilment, happiness, joy,
come from within and not from outside sources.
This is not to trivialise the lives of people who live
in poverty and may suffer, but their lives can be far
more meaningful than the family with the two million
dollar house, right jobs, right schools, big prospects.
Letting Go is a realisation that these things do not
matter. They trap us into lives that revolve around
'collecting' things - money, people, status - and losing
sight of what we are. Even our attitudes to death would
change: it would not matter as much, and are a sign
of us hanging onto our bodies as if they defined exactly
what we are. We let go.
In many ways this is the meaning of spirituality: to
believe in the spirit rather than the body and the things
we collect.
God as metaphor
Perhaps God is a metaphor for all the beauty and wonder
of the world. For us to see and live this beauty and
wonder, acting out of love for all the things we encounter.
Western Liberal Democracies
In Western Liberal Democracies we value free speech,
democratic elections, human rights, the rights of the
individual. Capitalism is the preferred model of economic
management, Christianity our religion, Democracy our
cherished political system. All are built on assumptions
that state that the individual is a sovereign entity
who is in control of their own lives. We also think
that the rest of the world should be like us.
The family unit is the cornerstone with husband, wife
and children living happily together. It could even
be said that the idea of the family, having a good home
and begetting children, who succeed in what they do;
who then in turn get a job, get married and have children,
doing it all over ad infinitum, gives meaning to life.
Then again there is often a great discrepancy between
the ideal and how people live their lives.
The End of History
When the Berlin Wall came down in 1989 it seemed that
there was no longer a Cold War or indeed a great ideological
schism that split the world between communism and liberal
democracy. No good versus bad guys anymore, though America
soon found another evil force to deal with in the form
of Saddam Hussein and the Iraqis. However it seemed
to some observers that liberal democracy and capitalism
had shown its worth and had won out.
This led the historian, Francis Fukuyama to write a
book called The End Of History, where he extols the
virtues of capitalism and liberal democracy as though
the world had evolved to this final state of perfection
and no longer did we need to worry about conflicting
ideologies.
He wrote ' A remarkable consensus concerning the legitimacy
of liberal democracy had emerged throughout the world
over the past few years, as it conquered rival ideologies
like hereditary monarchy, fascism, and most recently
communism.' It also suggests that this is the ideal
system of government and now that all-comers have gone
by the wayside it is also the 'end of ideology'.
However to suggest this is in fact yet another ideological
position, one that has seen past societies moving towards
this ideal form (not unlike Marx's naive theory of History)
and which seeks to destroy any other ideology.
As we have seen throughout history the winners are
as ideological as the losers but being winners they
get to say how it is. The West has certainly had a platform
that is laudable: freedom, truth, justice and human
right, however history has shown that these ideal notions
have often been more rhetoric than reality and millions
have suffered in the quest of another's freedom.
Winners also never use propaganda, are never bad -
these are allocated to the enemy.
Fukuyama would have us believe liberal democracy is
not an ideology at all, just a form of governing that
is innately superior and just.
Knowledge
If you read old text books from only fifty years ago
you will laugh or cry at the rubbish that is put across
as truth and fact. Dates and events might be right,
but as soon as they start making comments and drawing
conclusions they seem hopefully naive or iniquitous.
So why do we think that we are right now? Won't readers
in 2040 think the same thing of texts written in the
1990's.
So what is knowledge afterall? How exactly do we 'find
out' things? Where do we learn these?
Let me say before I move on that I think knowledge
and 'content' is very important to understanding ourselves
and the world. We cannot throw out the old knowledge
and ridicule it before we actually know about it. Sometimes
they have been stepping stones to new knowledge, often
times not.
What is important is to recognise that all knowledge
is partial and that we are always working from information
that will change. This is the dilemma of our time: there
is more sources of information than can ever hopefully
be read or understood and that it is changing just as
fast.
Nevertheless it has been observed that a line of poetry,
a novel, a play, no matter when it was written, still
has the power of changing our lives. This is, of course,
more important than watching the world change around
us rather than within, and in the long run what we are
within is the only reality that matters.
Equality
Who ever said that equality was a 'Right'? We throw
it around now as if it is something we are naturally
born with, but an examination of history will show that
it is a fairly new phenomena.
On the Road to Machu Picchu
High in the Andes is the beautiful city of Cuzco. Streets
cobbled and clean, straight-faced Spanish exteriors
hiding wonderful sealed courtyards within. It was here
that the famous conquistador, Francisco Pizarro came
in 1532 looking for Eldorado.
Machu Picchu is still over a hundred miles further
into the mountains and Francisco and his men never learned
the way to the secret city of the Incans. High on the
mountainside, the Incans built their city for their
privileged classes and entourages. Believing that they
were indeed closer to God as the clouds wrapped themselves
around the top of mountains that kept on going into
the distance.
Travelling on the train to Machu Picchu you pass families
still living like they did a hundred years ago with
their chickens and guinea pigs and still look surprised
as the train winds slowly passes.
And there amongst such poverty and what appears the
end of the earth for me, high on a hillside is a giant
billboard. Coke, the god of first world countries.
The train keeps to the winding path of the Urubamba
River, torrents racing over boulders smoothed by time,
till you pull into the tiny station at Machu Picchu.
Coke signs festoon every building and the locals are
waiting with Coke, Pepsi and Evian water lying in tubs
of ice for the visitors.
Language 4
A famous example is the word 'snow' in the Eskimos'
language. They have over 40 words for snow, which relates
to falling snow, snow on the ground, hard snow packed
like ice, snow in a blizzard, etc. When they 'see' snow
they see it differently to a Westerner who only has
one word for it.
At the other end of the spectrum are the Aztecs who
have only one word which covers snow, ice and cold.
The Shona of Zimbabwe have only three words for colours.
Cipswuka, for orange, red, purple and some blue; citema
for blue and some green; and cicena for green and yellow.
My Grandmother
My grandmother arrived in Australia just after WW1.
Despite her constant ravings about the individual being
in control of their own destinies she really was at
the end of some bad karma.
She worked at the Indiana Tea Rooms on Cottesloe beach,
before it became a dozen other things and finally returning
to its original name in the 1990's.
I didn't know my grandmother well, she was just the
old woman who trundled down the drive with her stringed
boxes full of cakes. She loved afternoon teas and would
expect everyone to sit up properly and for my mother
to bring out her best china.
I never could understand what all the fuss was about.
Would you think you were a Wolf?
In 1919 two children went missing in India. Over a
year later a Rev Singh went looking for a 'ghost' that
had supposedly lived with wolves. On finding the den
Singh and his workers had to kill the mother wolf who
tried to attack them. Going inside they found a ball
of little creatures clinging together. On closer examination
it revealed two cubs and two children.
Kamala was eight and Amala was nearly two. They had
hard callouses on their knees and palms and moved on
all fours. Their teeth were sharp edged and they sniffed
their food. When they were brought back they ate only
raw meat and once killed and ate a whole chicken. At
night they prowled and howled. They didn't like humans
but followed the dog and cat around.
Amala died within a year, but Kamala lived till she
was eighteen.
What makes a human afterall? If brought up by wolves
would our reality be that we were wolves?
The novels An Imaginary Life by David Malouf and The
Knowledge of Angels by Jill Paton Walsh explore this
issue.
Conformity
Is conformity a dirty word? Some people live their
whole lives conforming to rules, laws, expectations
of society and are happy. They accept these codes of
behaviour as being integral to living a secure, happy
existence and accept this responsibility.
Marcel Duchamp
At the Armory Art Show (1913) in New York Duchamp rocked
the artworld and the general public by displaying a
urinal he bought at a plumbers down the road as a piece
of art. He was still in Europe at the time but a friend
observed a woman looking carefully at the piece. When
he approached her and asked what she thought she replied,
'That's shit'. Unfazed by this comment the man told
her that she had her orifices mixed up and smiled. Romance
sprung from this and they lived happily together for
the next two months.
Besides these 'Readymades' of Duchamp the Exhibition
included all the new Cubists. These paintings shocked
the public and there was talk of banning the Exhibition
because of its lewdness, immorality and indecency. This,
of course, brought out great crowds and it was a wonderful
success. Even the ex-President Theodore Roosevelt ranted
and raved about it not being Art.
Pataphysics
It was Alfred Jarry, the playwright of Ubu Roi (1896),
who founded the so-called science of pataphysics. It
is not a very well known set of beliefs and certainly
not a favourite amongst scientists. Pataphysics is the
science of the laws that govern exceptions. Jarry believed
that orthodox science was a bit of a fraud and that
the laws of Science were not really laws at all but
merely exceptions that happened to occur more frequently
than others. Pataphysics argued against all these laws
and said that their opposite could just as easily be
true.
Jarry also stated that 'God is the shortest distance
between zero and infinity.'
He died in 1907 of poverty and alcoholism, but is still
regarded as one of the early fathers of absurdist drama.
Darwin 2
Evolution was an old idea actually. Charles' grandfather,
Erasmus, had preached it years before and others believed
in the gradual evolution of creatures over time. The
Frenchman, Lamarck, believed that animals changed over
time by overusing a certain part of their body so that
in the next generation there would be a slight change,
and on and on and on. The giraffe therefore had a long
neck because it stretched for leaves and built up these
muscles which it passed on to offspring.
Most scientists thought this was nonsense though, even
Darwin. The changed occurred and there was evolution
but it was something else that controlled this.
Darwin is actually famous for his Theory of Natural
Selection. The thing that caused some creatures to evolve
and others to die off was that in any population there
are slight variations of mutation. Some of these advantage
the animal by making them faster, stronger or better
suited to their environment. Thus the white moths who
lived in a dark environment and had black mutant offspring
would often be soon outnumbered by the black moths who
reproduced and were less susceptible to predators. Those
creatures who had a mutation that gave them an advantage
passed on their traits and these were the 'evolved'
creatures that came from a slightly different parent.
Dance
Dance came before music,writing and speech. Letting
the body speak, movements that might have told what
was lurking inside those first dancers and the observer,
the interpreter.
Syadvada
The idea that there is not necessarily a truth or reality,
but versions of reality date back a long way. The Jaina
belief of syadvada basically states this. They use the
example of the seven blind men who have hold of one
part of an elephant, believing this is 'the reality',
the essence of an elephant, when it is all these things
and more.
Poetry
I read that there were three ways of coming to terms
with the world. The first two I forget, but the last
one was through art. Painting, sculpture, dance, literature
can all help you understand who you are and your connection
to the world you inhabit.
Margaret Atwood once described poetry in this way:
When she was young she went walking in the woods with
her brother looking for insects and reptiles. They would
turn over stones to see what was there. Often they would
find lizards, beetles or even a salamander. Prose is
like turning over the stone and poking the creatures
with a stick to see 'what happens'. Poetry on the other
hand is about standing back and seeing what is there,
meditating on what you see.
Spot the Difference
Humans have the tendency to categorise, put things
in little boxes. Scientists may claim our brain is the
cause of this, having a function in some part which
orders things as if order was the natural order itself.
Still we define ourselves and others through our differences.
Drawing borderlines between us and them. Besides being
a fault of the human brain it is more likely that the
way we see the world and everything in it is intrically
linked with the discourses we think through and the
type of language available to understand these ideas.
Think of a discourse as a thin telescope we see through.
The telescope is fixed to the ground and cannot move
to either side. These are the parameters to how we can
think and determine what we see. When we come to talk
about the things at the end of the telescope there are
set ways of describing and explaining them.
Imagine living with a small group of people in a small
community cut off from others. One person is different
to the rest; he/she acts a little loopy (though the
word loopy merely means funny, haha) and may react to
things quite differently. He/she stares at people and
sings out loud for no apparent reason. Within this world
she/he is accepted, having many nice points as well.
There is even the possibility that she/he might be dangerous,
but the world is full of danger and this is all a part
of life.
In another society this person would be viewed in a
different light. Not deliberately but because of the
discourses that were natural for the rest of the people.
This is linked inextricably to the values of that society
(historical context) and the ideology operating, which
discourse or discursive practices are a part - both
creating values and being shaped by them. These people
would be judged through the discourse of psychiatry
which has become the dominant mode to think and talk
about people with 'mental illness'. As you can see I
have use a psychiatric term of mental illness to sum
up their condition. Before psychiatry became fashionable
it was not necessarily seen as either an 'illness' or
to do with the function of the mind or brain. Once this
way of thinking became the accepted way of thinking
about these behaviours there was no way to see them
outside this discourse.
Borders
Borders are places where all our notions of what is
right and wrong, normal or deviant, accepted practices
or unlawful behaviour meet in a thin dotted line. One
set of rules can change simply by stepping across.
When I was in primary school I worried about borders
that changed. One of those old maps of Europe in 1914
with its clearly marked lines dissolved in a matter
of years. The maps of the world in 1920 were then different
to those in 1950 and 1970. It just wouldn't stay fixed.
I wondered who went out and changed the fences. What
if you were German and spoke only German and acted like
a German and then, zap, border change and you were in
France. Worse than this: names of countries changed.
Africa I couldn't keep track of. Was there no certainty
I could hang on to?
Many years later I went into a club in London called
the Borderline and saw Ben Harper perform. Like any
good underground club it was full of smoke and border
people, those who cross lines or would like to.
Night is a border. People strip off the facade they
present during the day and re-emerge in the darkness
in their new selves.
The Fight Club
This film is an amazing critique of contemporary society:
its commercialism and materialism which commodifies
every aspect of our lives till people are what they
own, the jobs they inhabit, and the status that these
things allocate to an individual's worth.
The central values of the film seem to be based on
the Buddhist notions (or is it early Christian?) that
you must lose all these things before you can realise
who you are. It is not till you shed the things that
contemporary Western society decrees are indicators
of success that you are free.
Perhaps nothing new, but it is always worth be told
again, especially in the forceful manner this film does.
It has been criticised for its violence and it seems
reasonable to ask why is the main character only possible
through the brutality and violence of barefist fighting.
The club that soon forms is a secret club where men
come to lose their fear, to finally participate in their
own lives rather than the automatons that they had become
in their comfortable yet alienating jobs.
Last Words
Having given this book the grand title of 'A Users'
Guide to the Cosmos, God and Locations for Afternoon
Teas', it is probably expected that I finish on a profound
note. Unfortunately I have run out of things to say,
profound or otherwise, so leave you with the final words
of Jeanette Winterson in her novel, Gut Symmetries:
'Whatever it is that pulls the pin, that hurls you
past the boundaries of your own life into a brief and
total beauty, even for a moment, it is enough.'
|
