Dr. Gerald Horne is a prolific author — he published three(!) books in 2014 alone. He is a professor of History and African American Studies at the University of Houston, an advocate for justice, and the former executive director of the National Conference of Black Lawyers (in the USofA). Last year, I read his book, The Counter-Revolution of 1776: Slave Resistance and the Origins of the United States of America, and I thought it was one of the best books I read that year. It helped me to make a lot of sense of why the American revolution always felt different to me than a number of the other revolutions I have studied (essentially, the American revolution was a revolution fought by local elites, whose wealth and power was rooted in stealing land from Indigenous peoples and enslaving Africans; when Britain threatened the American Settlers with the emancipation of the slaves, and also blocked the Settlers from expanding westward — not to mention increasing taxes on imports, especially the importation of slaves, in order to pay for a war Britain had fought to ensure that Spain and France did not overrun the American colonies — the Settler elite revolted). This makes the American revolution a “counter-revolution” and explains much about American revolutionary history up until the present day (remember when Time Magazine named George W. Bush the Person of the Year and branded him, on their cover, as an “American Revolutionary”? That makes sense within the American counter-revolutionary context).
Dr. Horne, despite his busy schedule, was kind enough to briefly respond to a few questions that I sent to him. I want to thank him very much for his willingness to do this and for all that he does. Thank you, Dr. Horne!
(1) I have long been fascinated by revolutionary moments and those people and events which precede them and make revolution not simply imaginable but historically possible. However, I have primarily focused upon moments like Russian, French, and Haitian revolutions. However, the American Revolution hasn’t interested me to nearly the same degree. I think your book helped me to understand why. Rather than referring to this as a genuine revolutionary moment in history, you refer to it as a “counter-revolution.” I think that this is a very critical point. However, you don’t much contrast the history you describe to other revolutions in order to draw out this distinction to readers who may be less familiar with the various moments I have mentioned here. Perhaps you could take a moment to do so? Furthermore, to what other historical events would you compare this “counter-revolution” (the Tea Party comes to mind for me, or the so-called Oath Keepers who showed up in Ferguson – making counter-revolutionary action an ongoing American practice – but perhaps you have some other examples in mind)?
The Haitian Revolution led to the abolition of slavery. The revolt against British Rule in 1776 led to the successful rebels ousting their ‘colonial master’ from leadership of the African Slave Trade—while London moved toward abolition. That is a major theme of the book. I also chide historians in the U.S. who have been quite critical of revolutions globally—Russian, Cuban, French, Chinese, etc.—but have been remarkably quiet about the obvious defects of the so-called ‘Revolution’ that took place here.
When protesters march under the banner ‘Black Lives Matter’, they are providing a direct challenge—and affront—to 1776, which is why there is so much pressure for these protesters to drop this slogan in favor of the more anodyne, ‘All Lives Matter.’
As I note in the book, even—particularly—left wing historians have done a poor job of historicizing and theorizing the depth of conservatism among Euro-Americans generally, the working and middle classes particularly. You have ‘theoreticians’ who claim their reason for being is blocking the rise of fascism in the U.S.—yet have little or nothing to say about the 1991 gubernatorial election in La., where a Euro-American majority voted for a fascist.
Assuming [neither]climate change nor world war overcomes us all, historians of the future will be—and should be—unsparing in their critique of contemporary U.S. historians; left-wingers generally; and—especially—those who purport to discuss ‘race.’
Continue reading
What Is a Paulinist To Do? An Interview with Ward Blanton
Dr. Ward Blanton is Reader in Biblical Cultures and European Thought at the University of Kent. He is one of an increasing number of scholars who are (re)reading Paul in conversation with continental philosophy and social theory. He recently published a book entitled, A Materialism for the Masses: Saint Paul and the Philosophy of Undying Life, where he continues to develop his thinking and reads Paul along with the likes of Freud, Nietzsche, Breton, Derrida, Foucault, Deleuze, Pasolini and others (see here for more about the book). After reading the book, I contacted Ward and asked him if he would be willing to engage in an interview about some of the matters he discussed. What follows, below, is the exchange that we had. Along the way, I discovered that not only is Ward an intelligent fellow (something obvious to anybody familiar with his work), but he is also incredibly passionate and gracious. Thank you, Ward, for your participation in this. I look forward to those things that are to come.
(1A) In your preface, you say that you often feel you are asking only a few fundamental political questions. The questions you then mention, involved the throwing of rocks or organizing groups of rock throwers (xv-xvi). In what follows, you don’t ever explicitly return to this question. David Graeber is a fan of rock throwing (especially organized rock throwing), Chris Hedges thinks the opposite. Jensen, Churchill, and Gelderloos think we should be throwing more than rocks, but Chenoweth, Stephan and Sharp argue that it’s a mistake to throw anything at all. Rock throwing seems a bit complicated but, what I really want to know is: can we start throwing rocks now?
When the time is right for rock throwing no one ever asks permission!
But I think this is a very important question about my book, and about my Paul.
Continue reading
Gospel Fragments
Once, while dining with the Pharisees and Tax-Collectors, one of the elders seated at the right hand of the host began to question Jesus about the sayings attributed to him.
“Teacher,” the elder said, “you have told us to love our neighbours and you told us who our neighbours are. I have heard that you have also told us to love our enemies and to pray for those who persecute us. But you have not been so clear as to who our enemies are. Tell me, teacher, who is my enemy, so that I may love him? Who is the one who persecutes me so that I may pray for him?”
In response to this question, Jesus told the following story:
“Once there was a man whose wife had died and who had been left alone to raise a single daughter. In order to raise her up and protect her and educate her and put money aside for her dowry, this man worked very long hours doing backbreaking work for a thankless taskmaster. Yet he always greeted his master respectfully, he smiled and nodded and laughed at his master’s jokes. He rose when his master rose and only sat when invited to do so. He never complained when he was beaten. He didn’t interrupt and he always thanked his master for his pay and for the opportunity to work for him. Sometimes, when the master patted his shoulder or shook his hand after a job well done, he expressed a particularly great delight. But the work was hard and he was often weary when he got home. If his daughter did not have dinner prepared, he would be short-tempered with her. If his work clothes were not properly washed and laid out in their place early the next morning, he would yell at her. Sometimes, if he were particularly sore or tired or had been beaten by his master, he would hit his daughter. This went on for some time until the man became injured at work. He was unable to fulfill his normal duties and hoped that his years of service would incline the master to give him a different role. Sadly, this was not the case and the master threw him out. Unable to find other work, he was reduced to begging. The little money he was able to raise begging in the streets with his daughter – who now joined him there – was not enough for them to survive and so, weeping a great many tears, he did what many others did before and with and after him. He sold his daughter into slavery and that was the last he saw of his only child.”
There was silence around the table when Jesus finished his story and so he asked a question:
“Tell me, who is the enemy of this man?”
Without hesitation, the elder who had initiated the conversation responded, “Surely the taskmaster is the enemy! Surely he is the one the man is called to love!”
“Oh, you blind and foolish fellow,” Jesus responded, “no wonder you are seated where you are at this table! The taskmaster is not the enemy of this man – for he always greeted him as a friend and he always was respectful in his presence and he always showed delight in his company. No, the man treated the taskmaster as his friend and so he was, regardless of how the taskmaster treated him. The true enemy – the one the man treated like his enemy – was his daughter. She was the one he was short with and yelled at and beat and ultimately sold into slavery, regardless of his feelings for her. Those whom you harm are the enemies you are called to love in deed and in action for love is a doing far more than a feeling. However, the taskmaster was the one who persecuted the man. I do not say that it is necessary to love such a person – has he not already been treated as a friend, even by those whom he abuses? – but it may be worthwhile to pray for him. Perhaps my Father in heaven will hear your prayers and make him into a good master instead of a cruel one or, if that proves to be too difficult, perhaps my Father in heaven will hear your prayers and strike him dead.
Your enemy is not the one who harms you, but the one you harm. And so I say this: do no harm. As for the one who persecutes you, leave that one in the hands of God. Rome crushes you – whom you treat as a friend – and you crush the people – whom you treat as enemies although they are flesh of your flesh and blood of your blood. You cannot stop Rome but one day Rome will be stopped. Whether or not you are also stopped at that point will depend on whether or not you have ceased to do violence to those who are less than you. If you do not learn to actively love your enemies, when judgment falls on Rome, those whom you have treated as enemies may decide to accept that designation and rise up against you. They will be singing songs of freedom as they beat plowshares into swords and they will cut you down like the harvest and not one of you will be saved.”
When Jesus finished speaking, several of those gathered at the meal decided it was time to get serious about their plot to kill him.
A Eulogy
For a few days, there was a pretty terrible smell in the hallway by the elevator near the entrance I use to get in and out of my building. Then the smell was gone and there was a whole bunch of furniture stacked up by the garbage bins out back. Apparently the forensics unit had stopped by somewhere in between the disappearance of the smell and the appearance of the furniture but I hadn’t noticed them. Or maybe I had — I often see the police here, I just don’t pay close enough attention to them to see what units are showing up. To be honest, I didn’t even notice that the cat who is usually sitting in the window of the apartment by the entrance had vanished. It was only when a neighbour pointed in the window that I noticed that the cat was gone and the room was half gutted.
They say she killed the cat before she killed herself.
One of my neighbours said that he once found her crying on the front steps of the building. When he asked her why she was crying she said she was hungry and had no food. He asked her if she had any parents who might help her out and she had told him that they wouldn’t help her anymore. They said maybe next month. They said she had to be more responsible. He was appalled and put together a big box of food for her.
She wasn’t all that old. Younger than me by half a dozen years, I reckon. She wore glasses and had short red curly hair. I think she had some sort of developmental disability. She was always friendly with the kids and I. I know another woman in the building was bullying her. Everyone else knows this other woman. Most, except for a few of the hardcore drinkers who are always lounging around out back, avoid this other woman as much as possible. The last time I spoke with the girl who is said to have killed herself and her cat, she told me that this other woman had threatened her life and told her not to talk with any of the men in the building. The girl who is said to have killed herself and her cat said that the other woman wanted all the men to herself.
I remember thinking, “Why would anybody want to bully you? How could anybody feel threatened by you?” And I felt sad and angry and helpless.
Sometime around the time she stopped being who she had been, sometime around the time she stopped being at all, we were laying in bed, all mixed up together — limbs and heat and breath and thoughts and silences all tangled up together — and I was tracing the lines on your face. The curve of your brow, the dip of your temple, the line of your jaw, I was tracing you in space, when you asked me to tell you a story. I didn’t know what story I would tell, I did not know this story until I told it, but this was the story I told:
Once upon a time there was a boy who lived in the forest. He made a house out of cans he had found but every night the wind would blow the cans down. They would fall with a crash around him and wake him up and then he would lay in the dark, exposed to the night and its creatures, too scared to move. He would cry until the sun came up. When the sun came up, he would set his house of cans back up and then go looking for food. By the time he came back, the cans would have fallen down again and so he would set them back up in the evening before he fell asleep and before they fell down around him and woke him up and left him crying in the night. And this went on and on, day after day, night after night.
Some days, he would walk to the road that passed through the woods, and ask the people who traveled on that road to help him or feed him or take him away with them. But they never seemed to see or hear him. They passed by him like the wind and he was less than the air the wind passed through.
Other days, when out looking for food, he would discover families of people who did not live in the forest, who had stopped in this or that clearing in order to have a picnic. Sometimes they would throw scraps to the animals — a piece of fruit for a bird, a nut for a squirrel, bread crumbs for the ants — and he would try to snatch the scraps away. But the people would throw rocks at him and beat him with sticks. “This food is for the animals! It is for the bird, and the squirrel, and the ants! Go away!” And he would go away, sore and hungry, and back to his house of fallen cans.
One day, he decided that he would go onto the road and follow it out of the woods. He walked and he walked and he walked until his feet were sore and blistered from the pavement. But the woods were still all around him, so he continued walking. He walked and he walked and he walked until his blisters had burst and his feet were trailing blood. But the woods were still all around him, so he continued walking. The sun began to set and the night, along with its creatures, began to awaken and, finally, he was unable to walk anymore. He could not stand and so he crawled to the side of the road. He was a long, long way from his house of cans. But the woods were still all around him. Night came. The wind blew. And he was less than the air the wind passed through.
The End.
Love and Death
I recently watched a documentary about a fellow who spends some time with children in an AIDS orphanage in India. One of the boys becomes very ill. His body becomes covered in sores and blisters that burst and stay open and seep and make him look like his skin is peeling away from his body. The doctors say the same thing is happening to the membranes and tissues inside of him as well. His lips look like God or the devil has taken a potato peeler to them. A compress is kept over his eyes, blinding him, in order to try and prevent infection from spreading there. He frequently spits or drools out blood and mucus and, I don’t know, the kind of fluid you think oozes from wounds.
He is in a lot of pain.
His name is Surya. He is about the same size as Charlie. Charlie, my son, Charlie, my beloved, Charlie my beautiful one whose hair smells like sunshine. Charlie who takes me by the hand and looks up into my eyes and tells me that I am beautiful and that I make his heart feel happy and then asks if he can sit on my lap and watch a movie with me. This Surya, he is also somebody’s son, it’s just his parents died, ya know? He is also beloved, it’s just that the people who love him aren’t wealthy or influential or connected, see? And I’m sure his hair also smells like the wind and childhood and earth and the wonder, and when the person who was with him got up to leave and use the bathroom, he also took him by the hand and, speaking for the first time in days, said, “No!” This Surya, this Charlie, this boy, this beloved child, he said “No!” because he was afraid that he would die in those moments when he was alone.
I watched all of this far away from where Suryas are too numerous to count. I watched it play out as a movie on a flat screen HDTV. And I cried awhile, and the gal who was with me, who loves me and whom I love, she cried awhile, too, and we held each other and later that night we made love and then the next morning the alarm went off on my smartphone (which, like most things I own, is made by children like Surya who live and die like Surya) and I went off to work and she went off to school.
And life went on.
And death did, too.
~
A year ago, I would have laughed at the idea of referring to sex as “making love”. Who talks that way? If sex was transcendental, it was simply because the nearly pure physicality of it could permit sad and lonely and broken and lost and angry and weary people — people like me — to momentarily forget all of these things. In sex, you can lose your self in touching and being touched, in giving and taking, in caressing, and in fucking. You can give yourself away, you can become absorbed in another — just as another can become absorbed in you — and in that forgetting you can also forget that this life doesn’t seem worth living. But, hell, all the reasons for dying seem like bullshit, too, and so, in this limbo between the living and the dead, there is, at least, la petite mort.
Funny just how much can change in a year.
~
In the documentary that featured Surya, the Charlie covered in sores, there was also a young girl who becomes very ill and comatose and is on the verge of dying. The father eventually tries to rush her to the hospital — he is sitting on the back of a motorbike, holding her in his arms — she is naked but for a blanket — and they get caught on the road waiting for a train to pass at a rail crossing. She dies then. We see her die — her head falls back, her mouth open, everything totally limp and the father cannot close her mouth. He takes her in his arms, the blanket falling from her body and turns and starts walking back into the night with her. “I am taking her home.”
What was her name? I don’t remember her name. But the film makers thought the scene was dramatic enough that they decided to include it twice — once at the beginning, without any subtitles or talking (what better hook for those of us far way watching this movie on HDTVs, right?), and once later one within the context of the story and with a voice over. I do remember this though: wrapped in a shroud, her body looked tiny, as did the grave they buried her in. When she was buried, she didn’t look any bigger than my Ruby, my beloved, my beautiful girl who isn’t afraid to say, “No!” to me when I tell her it is bath time, and who asks me to be a monster so she can sit me down and bring me presents in the closet, and who want to hold my head on her stomach when she is falling asleep. I watched the dad bury this little girl, I watched him weep and hit himself in the forehead when he looked at pictures of her, I watched him love his Ruby and lose her. Forever and ever and ever. And this is not uncommon. To cite just one, from any number of possible examples, around 2000 children under the age of five die every day from diarrhea-related disease. That’s two thousand Charlies and Rubies every day. That’s more than one every minute. Gone forever and ever and ever.
Welcome to the world we live in. Things don’t have to be this way. We all know that. It’s just that we haven’t wanted to love one another at least well enough to prevent the needless suffering and dying of children. And we never will. Things will always be this way with us. We know this, too.
~
Last weekend I went to my father’s wedding. I missed the first (wasn’t born then) and the second (wasn’t speaking with him then) but I made the third. It was a small ceremony in an old stone Anglican church with beautiful wood floors, and candles, and stained glass windows, and a pipe organ that I loved as much as all the other parts combined. Ruby thought we were in a castle, she thought the priest — who was wearing a white robe — was a ghost, and she thought the bride was a princess. She was pretty excited about the whole thing and stood on the pew the whole time so that she could “see the princess.” Charlie was a lot less excited about the actually ceremony but he played games on my phone and it kept him still and quiet.
And me? I don’t know what all I was feeling. Or maybe I do but I don’t think I can talk about the way it felt without, in that very act of talking (or writing), retroactively changing what happened. So I’ll say no more about that.
What a mess life is, eh? How often we hurt when we desire to help, how often we betray when we desire to love, how often we curse when we desire to bless. It is very hard to know what we are doing, regardless of what our intentions are.
And how often we get bogged down in our own wounds, our own cuts and scars and insecurities, and never see anything beyond ourselves. Even now — I watched a movie and I feel things about characters therein by comparing them to my own children, whom I will continue to love in practical ways (just as I will continue to ignore or oppress the Suryas and the girls whose names I forget in practical ways), so, really, am I even seeing anything beyond myself here?
~
After I watched this documentary, I wanted to be more kind. I wanted to never be angry at another person again. I just wanted to love… and be loved, too. I’m weary of anger and frustration and pettiness and violence, violence, violence everywhere. But, you know, after I went to work the next morning somebody was rude to the fellow who helps me out and makes coffee in the Resource Centre I supervise and so I decided to be rude back to the fellow who disrespected my helper. I didn’t say anything rude in words — but in my tone and in my body language, I basically told the fellow that he could fuck off and I didn’t give a shit about anything he might have to say about that. Then, that night, Charlie and Ruby were refusing to go to sleep and I felt frustrated, even after reflecting upon Surya and the girl whose name I forgot, even after thinking how I failed that fellow at my work, even after recognizing these things in the midst of feeling frustrated… I still felt frustrated and, after sternly telling the kids to be quiet and go to bed, I went to another room and dropped a number of whispered eff bombs as I washed the dishes (in an overly aggressive manner… fucking dishes).
Do I ever learn anything at all? Woe to me if I can watch a documentary like that and go on unchanged and unchanging.
~
…
~
But I will tell you a secret. A very exciting one. One wholly unanticipated. One I stopped believing in a long, long time ago. Are you ready? This is the secret:
I have already begun to change.
Ain’t that something? Because I was dead but I am now alive. And that breaking process, that slow inexorable shattering that drained me of my insides and filled me up with darkness inside? It wasn’t the final word. My pieces are coming together again. But I am not going back to being who I was before. I am being made new. I, too, have experienced the resurrection of the dead. Here and now, I have been born again — this time from the dead.
This is what love has done with me. How about that, eh? I wouldn’t trade this love for anything in the world. Not that I could trade it even if (for some unimaginably absurd reason) I wanted to do so. This love after all, is something I am in, not something I produce. It is more an event and an environment than a choice. At least for me. Perhaps the one who loves me, who introduced me to this love in which we are now situated, perhaps for her it was a choice. For me it was not. The dead don’t make choices. They’re simply dead. I could not choose myself back alive. I could not heal myself. My heart felt as though it had been broken into pieces, and the pieces had been burned, and then the charred remains had been wrapped all around with barbed wire. But when she first laid her head on my shoulder, when she first held my hand, when she first said to me, “I love you,” everything changed and the wires were cut and the ashes were swept away and the pieces came back together and, just like the motherfucking Grinch, my heart grew three sizes that day… and it hasn’t stopped growing since. I’ve got a long way to go yet, my hair still stinks like the grave and I’m a bit of a mess and sometimes old feelings or reactions still surface, but a resurrection is more like an insurrection than a makeover. It takes times but, baby, it runs all the way up and all the way down and the fruit that it bears are a lot longer lasting than a tan and botox injections.
~
And the girl, the Ruby who died? Her name is Vembadi. I will not forget it again. She died but our time with her has not ended. Because we know her story now. We are responsible for it and we our responsible for ourselves and how we will live in light of it.
Whether or not this proves to be a responsibility we can handle will be determined, I think, by whether or not we are in love.
What the Elephants Remember: A Fable
Some cold and flu germs only live for a few minutes.
The mayfly has a life expectancy ranging from half an hour up until a maximum of twenty-four hours.
Our skin cells live, on average, two to four weeks.
Some octopuses live six months. Others, up to five years.
In 2010, the worldwide average life expectancy for homo sapiens was 67.2 years, although, currently, where I live, it is closer to 80 years.
Some species of turtle can live between 150-250 years.
Some pine trees can live over 5000 years. Some sponges are thought to be more than 10,000 years old.
Tirritopsis nutricula is a species of jellyfish that is immortal — it will live as long as the ocean will sustain it.
Our sun is estimated to be 5 billion years old and is expected to live another 5 billion years before it dies.
The universe, although harder to calculate, may be somewhere around 13.75 +/- 0.1 gigayears old. I’m not sure how much older it’s supposed to live before it doesn’t anymore.
How can all these “things” co-exist? How can we inhabit a space together? Isn’t that amazing?
~
What is the measure of a life? The mayfly is born, reproduces, and dies in a day or less. Does it experience angst? Does the pine tree? Do we want them to?
Does the sun feel the same about us as we feel about our skin cells?
Does a cold germ feel about itself the same as we feel about ourselves?
Does a 10,000 year old sponge look at the brevity of our lives and wonder if, between being born, reproducing, and dying, we ever find time to ask bigger questions about meaning and beauty and truth?
~
Does the length of time that one lives determine the kind of meaning one finds in life?
Elephants have the same lifespan as we do. Do elephants think the same as we do? They, too, bury their dead. They mourn the loss of loved ones with tears streaming down their faces. Their children play. They like to shower.
Why are they not like us? Why have they not developed civilizations and cities and guns? We do they let us slaughter them?
Is it because they were wise enough to not put the men in charge?
Or is it because they’ve decided that they do not want to be like us? Is it because they remember that if we forget that we are animals we become brutes? Perhaps they would rather die with the earth instead of becoming like those who got civilized and killed the earth?
Instead, they roam their ranges, follow the water, and forage for food. Perhaps their lives look hard to us. But that, too, may be a sign of all that we have forgotten. And all that they have not.
Thoughts I had while waiting for a bus that never came
First Thought:
“Is there a triangle in this sentence?”
Second Thought:
What is this?
Third Thought:
What is this?
Commentary
I encourage you all to come up with your own answers before reading what follows.
First Thought:
It seems to me that whether or not a triangle is contained in the sentence quoted, depends upon what a triangle is and if a triangle is and what the relation is between this supposed triangle and the name given to it (i.e. “triangle”). If a triangle is something that exists outside of language and apart from the name we give to it (does anything exist outside of language? How can we talk about it then? And if we can’t talk about it, how can we know it?), then one could argue that there is no triangle contained within the sentence. But is a triangle divorced from the name “triangle” still a triangle? If it is not then the name “triangle” itself contains or is a triangle, in which case there is a triangle in the sentence.
Second thought:
I came up with the following although I’m sure answer could be multiplied endlessly:
- A tetrahedron;
- Four triangles;
- A quadrilateral divided into four uneven parts;
- A quadrilateral divided in half;
- A symbol;
- A shape;
- A thing;
- The representation of something else;
- No( )thing;
- An empty signifier;
- Modern art;
- Not a pipe.
Third Thought:
- Me;
- A picture of me;
- A simulacrum;
- A series of tiny coloured dots displayed on a computer monitor;
- A singularity;
- One in a series;
- A multitude;
- The same thing as that explored in the Second Thought above;
- Something different than that explored in the Second Thought above;
- A stunningly attractive and intelligent young man;
- All of the above;
- None of the above.
And you all? What answers did you give to these questions?
The Pianist (A Fairy Tale)
I’ve seen her at the pub before. She is young, especially for a place like this, and one of the first things most any fellow would notice about her is how full her lips are. Generally she is sitting at the bar drinking with an older fellow – not the same older fellow – but different men who look almost but not quite old enough to be her father.
She doesn’t smile very much. Her posture and her expressions remind me of the way a person drinks at a work function.
Another gal I used to drink with at this pub once told me that she is a sex worker who picks up clients here. Perhaps it is the formality with which she drinks that led to this conclusion… perhaps it is the ever changing older and far less attractive men around her.
I don’t know if this story is true. Maybe she’s just socially awkward and, let’s be honest, it’s pretty much only older folks who drink at this place so if a pretty young gal shows up here, there’s bound to be any number of daddies creeping on her. And, who knows, maybe the gal who told me this story was just feeling insecure or jealous of her beauty.
But, honestly, I don’t care either way. If a person chooses to be a sex worker, I reckon that’s no better or worse than choosing to be a social worker or a construction worker or any other kind of worker.
~
When she sits down beside me, I thought I had a pretty clear idea of where our conversation might go. We are both fairly drunk – her more than me, I think, as she keeps repeating the same questions or makes the same statements multiple times. She begins by telling me that she is a registered nurse but later states that she’s actually a nurse practitioner – it’s just most people don’t understand what a nurse practitioner is, so it’s easier to say she’s an RN. On weekends, she goes to Toronto and is a “Bud Girl” at special events. She does a mock performance of how she gets the fellas to buy beer from her. She is quick to call me “honey”. Mostly, I only like it when the older servers at the bar call me that. They’ve spent a lifetime waiting tables, dealing with drunks, putting up with pricks and I reckon they can get away with calling people “dear” or “honey” or “sweetie.” Whenever the younger servers pull that on me, I feel like they’re trying too hard. Let’s not get carried away, okay?
But she calls me “honey” and she touches my arm a lot when she talks to me. She asks me if I’m single and I say that I am. She asks me why and I am honest and say that most everybody I meet bores me – I don’t really give a fuck about hearing somebody talking about her favourite TV shows or her favourite kind of music or the fact that she really digs guys who can make her laugh. Wow! Who knew? God, what a bore. She says she understands and feels exactly the same way about the guys she has met since moving to Ontario when she was twenty-four. That was three years ago – she came here from B.C. – and started a new life for herself.
I don’t mention that I’ve already decided that she is boring, too.
~
She gets excited when she learns that I play piano and have a keyboard. Turns out she is a classically trained musician – piano and vocals. She asks if I have all eighty-eight keys and if they are pressure sensitive. It is imperative that they be pressure sensitive. I say that they are but that I don’t have a full range. She asks if I have drinks at my place and if I like to party. I mention I have drinks but I don’t party much these days. But, hey, I don’t care if she indulges.
~
She asks about going back to my place.
I say okay.
Getting into her car she says, “But we’re just doing this as friends, right? This is just a friends thing, okay?”
I say okay.
~
My place is a bit of a mess from having kids for the last four days. I tidy up quickly and mix a drink for her as she settles at the keyboard. She plays some songs from memory and some songs from sheets that I have. I play a few songs and she sings in the background. She has a decent voice but she is an exceptional piano player. When I play, she pauses to powder her nose… a few times. And then she plays one of the most beautiful renditions of the Moonlight Sonata that I have ever heard.
When she finishes, she says thank you very much and, gosh, it’s hot in here, and I escort her to her car and say goodnight. I smoke a final cigarette out back after she drives away and then I go to bed.
~
A friend tells me I should be looking to get laid. She points out that the mock profiles I set up on an online dating site – one to see if I could get rid of an old toaster, one pretending to be a total D&D nerd dressed up like a banana, and one pretending to be a circus bear – aren’t actually very conducive to meeting people and she reminds me that, really, I should be more serious about dating or at least picking people up. She says it’ll make things easier.
I’m not so sure. The story of lonely people meeting in bars and going home to lose themselves in the embrace of strangers seems a little overplayed. I met a girl at a pub. She came home with me and played my piano and then she left. I never touched her once. And, that, I think, made this whole encounter much less boring than I thought it was going to be. I was laughing to myself about it as I fell asleep.
~
I hope I don’t ever see her again.
Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Taught My Kids to Love the Energy Company
1. Down the Rabbit Hole
If you want to surprise yourself after you watch “Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs,” ask this question: who is the protagonist in this story and who is the antagonist? In other words, who is the good guy and who is the bad guy? (And, yes, they are both guys.)
Once you ask this question you realize something surprising: the person you might otherwise imagine to be the bad guy — Flint Lockwood, who almost destroys the entire world — is actually the protagonist. He’s the fellow we’ve been rooting for. If that’s the case, who is the bad guy? The Mayor. Of course, we are groomed from the beginning to root for Flint and to dislike the Mayor — Flint has a backs story and we first meet him as a wide-and-starry-eyed child who is bullied by his peers but loved by his mother (who dies while he is young, leaving him with a gruff but loving father who doesn’t know how to communicate or connect with his boy). Unlike Flint, the Mayor has no back story — I didn’t even know that he had a name until I looked the movie up on IMDB.
Flint = good; Mayor = bad. Everything unfolds from this. And down the rabbit hole we go…
2. Friends and Enemies and You
Who or what is Flint Lockwood? Well, we know he is something of a dreamer and an inventor. He is a bit nerdy, sometimes a bit misguided, but always well-intentioned. After a number of failed efforts, he does something of great significance: he invents a machine that causes it to rain food, thereby revitalizing the economy of a town that was dying and creating access to a resource that was quite limited (previously, the folks in Flint’s town lived off of sardines). Food, of course, provides people with energy — Flint is an energy provider.
However, Flint’s method of resource extraction ends up producing some less-than-ideal results. The amount of waste produced is staggering and, although everyone ignores it (Flint invents a machine called “The OutOfSighter” to catapult the waste out of sight and out of mind), it piles up on the horizon and threatens to tumble down and annihilate the town. As if that’s not bad enough, the mass production of this resource also results in an environmental disaster that threatens to destroy the entire planet.
Does this story sound familiar to anybody? It should. Flint isn’t just any energy provider, he’s Big Oil.
So, if that’s who Flint is, who is the Mayor? Well, let’s look at the way he speaks about himself in the first behind the scenes shot we have of him:
This hellhole is too small for me, Brent. I wanna be big. I want people to look at me and say, “That is one big mayor.” And that’s why this has to work. It has to work. Otherwise, I’m just a tiny mayor of a tiny town full of tiny sardine-sucking knuckle-scrapers.
Of course, the mayor very quickly does become big… very big.
So the oil company is the good guy and the Mayor is the bad guy and the bad guy wants to be big… do I really need to explain this? The antagonist in this film is big government. Yes, you see, the problems arise because the government wants to exploit the kindly, good-hearted but somewhat naive energy producer in order to gain wealth and status. Flint just wants to make everybody’s lives better — the Mayor wants to be big. Because of this the Mayor pushes Flint to do things he would not do otherwise. Flint realizes that things are getting somewhat out of control and dangerous and wants to pull the plug — but the Mayor talks him out of it and then, when that fails, the Mayor breaks Flint’s machine to prevent him from pulling the plug. Then, when disaster strikes, the Mayor abandons the town to try and make his own escape at the expense of others. Big government is not your friend.
But there is another enemy lurking here, somebody else who is to blame for all of this. Who is this hidden enemy who also helps to drive the world to the brink of destruction? You. You see, if you weren’t demanding that the energy provider continually flood the market with more and more and more, everything would have been just fine. The energy provider was ever only trying to make you happy. After all, unlike the Mayor, Flint was never motivated by a desire for wealth, or power or status. Sure, he wanted to be loved by others (who doesn’t?) and maybe that blinded him a little, but isn’t that true of all of us?
3. Vindication and Salvation
All of this is beautifully explained in a speech that the police officer, Earl, makes to the townspeople when they are intent on lynching Flint because they blame him for the disaster. As they rock Flint’s car back and forth, Earl jumps in to restore order and says:
This mess we’re in is all our faults. Me, I didn’t even protect my own son. Look, I’m as mad at Flint as you are. In fact, when he gets out of that car, I’m gonna slap him in the face. I know Flint Lockwood made the food, but it was made-to-order. And now it’s time for all of us to pay the bill.
So, you see, BP, TransCanada, Keystone XL, Imperial Oil, none of them are to blame for any of this mess. We are. If the oil companies are guilty of anything it’s of trying too hard to make us happy and to be loved by us.
Notice, also, that it is a police officer making this speech in the movie. Earl is the representative of the rule of law in this film, and the law vindicates Flint. Sure, he may deserve a slap… but even that is barely enacted, and Earl quickly apologizes to Flint for slapping him (but, don’t worry, Flint is such a nice guy that he responds by saying, “That’s okay”!). So, really, the law punishes the energy provider more to placate the people than to serve justice (and, of course, out of love for the people, the energy provider goes along with it… just like good ol’ Tony Hayward who pretty much died for our sins).
Not only does the law vindicate Flint but it is right to do so — for Flint is the one who ends up saving everybody in the end. How does he do this? With further technological advances. Specifically, he invents a flying car that permits him to gain access to the machine in the sky that has gone haywire so that he can prevent a catastrophe.
That he uses a flying car is significant — aren’t flying cars the symbol of a future when technology has produced a wonderful world for us wherein anything is possible and all our problems have been solved? The solution, then, is not to abandon any of our technological advances but to trust in technology to miraculously save us from an impending disaster that appears to be unavoidable and catastrophic. If this also sounds like a familiar story it should — the oil companies have been saying the same thing to us for years about climate change.
4. Conclusion: Stop Worrying…
All told, the message here is this: any environmental catastrophe we are experiencing was produced by self-serving politicians and greedy consumers exploiting well-intentioned energy providers. The solution, then, is to not cast stones, except at big government, and wait for BP to save us, just like Flint saves the townspeople in the film.
So, really, if this is anything to go on (and anybody with children should break out in a sweat from 3:10-3:40, although the previous minutes provide the necessary context for that segment), by watching this movie I’ve been preparing my child to view the world in a certain way — a way that favours the narrative of the oil giants and a way that brackets out other narratives. This is how I’ve been teaching Charlie to stop worrying and love the bomb.
Books of 2012 (2/3)
So looks like my two part series, turned into a three part series… sorry for the brevity of some of these (that’s what I get for doing this all at once at the end of the year instead of monthly)…
19. Germinal by Émile Zola.
Germinal has been on my books to read list for a long time. I’m very glad that I sat down and read it this year. It was a really phenomenal narrative exploring matters related to class, industrialization, the rise of the capitalists, and the crushing of the proletariat in France. Characters from various classes (from the owners to the miners) are presented as having depth and complexity and are not caricatured or presented as “bad guys/gals” vs. “good guys/gals”. I highly recommend this book — it was one of my favourites this year.
As I was reading it, I was struck by the absence of this kind of literature in the contemporary scene. Folks like Franzen and Wallace are (or were) writing really good books but this whole struggle with matters related to class, not to mention matters related to justice and inequalities regarding class, labour, wealth, and the distribution of goods, seems to be completely missing from our stories. I wish somebody would write a book like this rooted in the present day. Regardless, this is really highly recommended reading and reminded my as to why I fell in love with 19th century literature in the first place (think I may go reread some Hugo now).
20. Brighton Rock by Graham Greene.
I joined a book club when I moved to London and this was the book they were reading when I joined. It is the tale of a few small town gangsters in a British resort town back in the 1930s. It was a fun read although I didn’t feel that it had the depth of character and plot that I found in The Power and the Glory (although it has been some years since I read that book, so I might be wrong there). There were a few things I found fairly interesting though.
First, the ways in which the villains are caught up in the social imaginary and moralism of Roman Catholicism, whereas the woman who represents justice (Ida), has shed that moral system. The mobster kill people are are convinced they are going to hell. Ida drinks and fucks her way to justice — even, it should be noted, if that ends up being costly to other people along the way (Lady Justice, standing blindfolded with her sword and scales came to mind more than once).
Secondly, I found it interesting how the most ruthless mobster was always contemplating his damnation and the possibility of redemption or forgiveness (which he seemed to desperately desire, even though he repeatedly stated that this was out of his reach). In this regard, he kept thinking about an old saying that if a person repents in the split second when they are dying (in the time it takes from them to fall “from the stirrup to the ground”) then that person will be saved. Now this is interesting because when another gang tries to kill Pinkie he is so distracted and shocked that he doesn’t even think about repenting. This terrifies him. However at the end [SPOILER about to happen!] when he falls from the cliff something funny happens — those who were there remark that they never hear a splash… as though he were simply lifted out of existence. Keeping in mind the remarks about finding salvation while falling, I like how Greene leaves this open to the possibility of Pinkie being saved.
Thirdly, as another possible interpretation of this last point, I was struck by how some of the characters involved in the gang thought that they were already living in hell (i.e. — we’re not going to hell, we’re already there, baby). What if this is actually true and “Brighton Rock” is Greene’s vision, not so much of hell but (since he was a Catholic) of purgatory? Then, there is no splash when Pinkie falls because, having done is time and repented, he is lifted out of purgatory? This is a bit of a stretch, but it’s fun to play with the text in this way.
21. The God of Small Things by Arundhati Roy.
I have read various political essays Roy has written (mostly about Maoism and revolution in contemporary India) and so I was happy to finally get around to this Booker Prize winner this year (my wife had been telling me I should read it for years). I enjoyed her voice and the ways in which themes of family, and class, and communism, and caste where woven together with a little magic and a lot of tragedy thrown in. It was pretty and sad… but just seemed to be missing the certain something that would push it from going “good” to being “exceptional.” I don’t know… maybe I was flying high from reading Wallace and Zola and so I was in the wrong head space to get the most I could have from this book.
22. True History of the Kelly Gang by Peter Carey.
Prior to reading this book (the second one selected by my book club since I joined), I didn’t know anything about Ned Kelly or his time as an outlaw in the Australian outback. Seems like a pretty interesting character and something of a Robin Hood/Jesse James kind of figure in Australia (and if you want to read a letter written by Ned and his gang, see here). It was a fun story to read and Carey did a good job in inhabiting the character of Kelly in order to tell it (even though, it should be noted, that means we may not always want to believe the claims made by the narrator). I enjoyed the ways in which matters of race, poverty, religion, resistance and violence where woven together.
It’s funny — we can look at gangsters or outlaws or criminals or fugitives from different eras of history and we can actually view them sympathetically or even as heroes or, at the very least, recognize that they acted nobly given their circumstances. Yet we are completely blind to this kind of reading of criminals or fugitives or “terrorists” in our context. Shit, I mean we have a First Nations chief who is on her third week of a hunger strike here in Canada because of the Canadian government’s consistent practice of violence, law-breaking, treaty-breaking, and genocide against her people and she is the one settler society is calling an “extremist” and “terrorist.” That doesn’t make much sense to me but, then again, Ned Kelly, Robin Hood, and Jesse James were all white men so maybe that makes a big difference.
23. Arrow of God by Chinua Achebe.
I was recently looking over my list of “Books that I have read” I noticed a LOT of gaps in my reading (actually, it’s a bit embarrassing to have that list posted because of the massive gaps in pretty much every area, but I don’t mind a little embarrassment). One of the gaps I noticed in my reading is the absence of literature from outside of North America and Europe. I’m intending to work towards rectifying that so I picked up this book by Achebe late in the year.
I found it to be enjoyable and it was good to read a narrative exploring colonialism, the spread of Christianity in Africa, and traditional ways of structuring life together in parts of Africa, that come from the perspective of an African author. A pleasant and quick read.
24. The Pale King by David Foster Wallace.
So, you would think about book filled with technical tax information and terminology, telling the stories of workers at an IRS office would be boring as hell but, hey, you would be wrong! This book was well on it’s way to being one of my favourite books ever before it’s rather abrupt termination (Wallace killed himself before he completed the manuscript… I thought it was further along than it was when I picked it up, so I was really pretty sad that we don’t get to see the story and the threads come together [or not] in a manner comparable to “Infinite Jest”).
I really love Wallace’s voice. It is hypnotic and it was that, sometimes more than the plot or the characters, that pulled in through “Infinite Jest” (in the same way that Proust’s voice pulled me through “In Search of Lost Time”). However, I think Wallace’s writing got better with this story. There were points where I laughed out loud several times in a single chapter and I pretty much never do this when reading (even when reading things I find funny, I usually just smile or laugh in my mind but not out loud). It was really a delight to read and a major disappointment that it ended where it did.
Although, you know, given the way that “Infinite Jest” ended (i.e. by leaving the plot threads pointing towards one another and a certain conclusion but not actually completing the story and leaving it to the reader to work out that conclusion on his or he own), maybe this was part of Wallace’s intention. Instead of an “infinite” story (which one could read in a loop forever) one has a permanent rupture and the literal death of the author. In this situation, what is the role of the reader?
25. I Am a Memory Come Alive: Autobiographical Writings by Franz Kafka (edited by Nahum N. Glazer).
I remember a writer once saying that she would always disappoint her fans when they sought her out to discover more, to dig deeper into the the depths out of which she drew her stories, to find further answers to their questions, and all that. She stated something like this: “the best of me, the very best part of me, are those stories. There is nothing deeper behind them or greater beyond them — they are the best I have to give.” I’ve often thought of that quotation when learning about authors and scholars. It’s a good quote to keep in mind when coming to Kafka because, shoot, reading these autobiographical writings made me think, “Man, what a miserable prick” (and then made me note to my self that I should post less autobiographical material!).
26. Scorned and Beloved: Dead of Winter Meetings with Canadian Eccentrics by Bill Richardson.
This was a fun little book to read on the side when I felt like being distracted from more serious things. Richardson, a CBC radio personality, traveled across Canada and dug into the archives and folk tales in order to dig up stories of various eccentrics from across Canada. It was fun to read but not spectacular (although the bushman who lived in the middle of nowhere and, at one point, cut off his own hand and healed and survived on his own without medication was pretty spectacular). A lot of the “eccentrics” where fellows who like wearing dresses or were gay before such things were what they are today.
I was struck by the ways in which small communities back in the day used to accept these so-called “eccentrics.” Yeah, so Timmy likes to wear dresses and he’ll steal your buttons, and maybe sneak into your kitchen, and steal some of your wife’s clothing off the line if he gets a chance… but that’s just Timmy, he’s a part of our community, he don’t mean no harm, and we look after him, I suppose. That sort of care and understanding seemed pretty common.
The same point was pretty strongly made in a documentary I recently watched called “Brother’s Keeper” about four brothers who are illiterate, may have other developmental or psychosocial barriers, and sleep in a tiny shack together (one brother is accused of murdering another brother and this is the central drama driving the documentary). Along the ways, it turns out that the brothers all share a bed together and there are rumours that they have sexual relations with each other. Based on our perceptions of tiny, rural, poverty-stricken communities in the United States, one would expect the brothers to be ostracized and vilified because of this… but the local people actually are very accepting of the brothers and very non-judgmental — “How’s it my business what goes on in there home?” and that sort of thing.
A third time I came across this point was reading Venturi’s “Roots of Revolution,” about the history of social and populist movements in 19th century Russia. I was reminded of how socialist and anarchist-based groups, back in the 1860s in Russia, where already adamantly proclaiming the equality of women and the equality of people of all races.
This made me rethink the story that contemporary urban, Western, liberal society tells itself about itself — i.e. that we are a recently new and improved phenomenon wherein queer people, people who are differently-abled, women, different races, and “eccentrics” are all accepted as equals. I’m still thinking through what the implications of this might be and have a few ideas… but that’s probably the subject of another post, if I ever get around to writing.
27. Lost Dogs by Jeff Lemire.
I really enjoyed Lemire’s Essex County Trilogy — it is amongst my favourite graphic novels — so it was fun to come across this earlier work. It is a poignant and sad story, with a lot of violence, few words, and no redemption. Not as good as Essex County but I really like the way in which Lemire is able to communicate so much in rough broad stroke pictures and little use of language.