Run Rabbit

[peterbirks]

I think that one has to admit a certain emptiness in one's life when the most interesting thing one can think of doing is leaving the mobile phone uncharged even though it only has one bar left, just to see how long it takes (unused, of course, no-one ever phones me on it) for the phone to either beep a low-battery warning or, perhaps, just die silently.

It's not sadness. Actually, I'm feeling quite mellow, content. I just don't feel like going out, or anything, Maybe I'll read a bit more of A Handful Of Dust. Though I kind of like the early Waugh that I've been reading, I fear that it seems rather lightweight. Interspersing this with Auster's Leviathan made comparisons between the two inevitable, and Auster achieved a win in perhaps the most important area — page-turnability.

My PhD supervisor phoned me up the other week, out of the blue. It was nice to talk to him. He's retired 10 years now. He has no TV, no computer, and no fridge. Upon retirement apparently they have some counselling/planning process during which he was asked "Now, let's get some plans together for what you will do after you retire. What do you like doing?"

"I like doing nothing", my supervisor replied.

"Oh, well, you'll be fine then".


This reference to literature is brought on, of course, by the death of John Updike, seen as one of the four giants of American literature in the second half of the 20th century (with Mailer, Bellow and Roth). I never really 'got' Updike, although perhaps I should try again. But, thinking about it, I nevere really appreciated any of these supposed giants of the literary stage. Auster and Dick were far more my cup of tea.

I'm a sucker for short little phrases that encapsulate something about society, and I read a beauty this morning in the Financial Times. Referring to the Kate Winslet character in Revolutionary Road, the review continues

"She thinks they are a special couple. Actually they are just neurotics with a faith in their right to the keys of paradise".

"A faith in their right to the keys of paradise." If that doesn't sum up the attitude of so many people these days, I don't know what does. They certainly don't wasn't to hear the Birks motto "Life sucks, and it gets worse as you get older". No, there seems to be some kind of belief that, not only is perfect happiness somewhere round the corner (with or without material worries), but also that it is a basic human right to achieve it. The perfect partner, the perfect job, the perfect body, the perfect life. Yes, all of these can be yours. Just read my book, buy my product, join this club, join this religion. Whatever. (Implicit in all these messages is the subext: "By the way, if you don't, and you aren't perfectly happy, well, that just goes to show what a piece of shit you are for not believing us. Sign up now!")

One of the strongest characters in the film Crash, which I think deserved its Oscar, btw, was the Sandra Bullock character who was well off but was unhappy and was desperately unhappy because she was unhappy. Me, I get unhappy, but I'm not unhappy about my unhappiness, because I know the world sucks. Sandra Bullock's character felt (a) betrayed and (b) a failure, because she was not happy.

The "great four" American authors tried to address this and other such questions about America, but I wonder if the novel is the right form for such questions to be addressed. Satire, film, even comic books, perhaps make a better job of it.

_______________

Comments

The American Dream

[geoffchall.livejournal.com]

There's something screwed up with America in their belief in the idea that they are entitled to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. They misinterpret to mean that they are entitled to Happiness and that this is an end in itself. What they're entitled to is the pursuit, not the attainment. It took me years to work that out, that for me life isn't about achievement but about the striving for those achievement. And I say this at the end of another year's work at the Tax Return coalface. I know that although I might have moaned about how much of an uphill struggle it is to maximise what we do, I know there will be a feeling of ennui for the next couple of weeks because all I will have is achievement.

But I've also got old enough to realise that this attitude is not universal. We're all different.

Tricolons (Topic of Cancer)

[real-aardvark.livejournal.com]

Well, fuck Taleb and his despision of people he thinks are "historians." I've just spent half an hour on the Web, trying to be a Historian, and where are the facts when you need them? Give me the Codrington Library (invitees only) any day. [snipped by cretin limit -- I have no idea what goes here, but something to do with Google and Wikipeida/] "Drafts of the constitution/Jefferson," only to be forcibly reminded -- correctly, for once on the Web -- that Jefferson had little or nothing to do with the Constitution ... so we're into Declaration of Independence territory here, which is always going to be tricky.

Consider: How much credence would you place in the stated aims of 1/3rd of the British population who are about to risk a war by declaring separation from the other 2/3rds, from the perspective of 230 years?

Consider also, should you wish to decry the notion of "historical perspective," how much credence you would give to the stated aims of a Declaration of Independence written by the Tamil population of north-eastern Sri Lanka, circa 2009?

A Declaration of Independence is a Declaration of Independence. It is nothing else. It probably contains more honesty than yer average local council political manifesto, but not much...

Which is where I came in with the Codrington^w Web search. I know that Jefferson wrote several drafts, late at night, with copious crossings-out a la Thing. I'm damn sure that several revisions appllied to this very clause. No luck. (That's the Web for you.)

However, piecing together an argument from nothing -- as Historians do, and as 99% of Accountants do, once they've discarded the dubious VAT returns supplied by their clients ... you're nobbut a Historian on a short imeframe, me lad -- here we go.

With added Powerpoint.

(1) Tricolons were tremendously popular in the 18th century.Basically, if you had a rotten Latin teacher (but were a gentleman rather than a monk), it's the only bit of rhetoric you'd remember.
(2) The ur-tricolon for this particular trope was John Locke: "Life, Liberty, and Property."
(3) Now, this is where it gets interesting. Clearly, nobody bar Genghiz Khan can object to the right to Life; and, as you can already see, a tricolon tends towards an A-B-A pattern, where you stress the obvious (first) item, and hope that that stress carries over to the less obvious (third).
(4) Nobody could object to the right to Liberty, either. Unless you live in the 17c/18c, which for current purposes of argument are identical. Liberty isn't yours; it's granted by the King. You should note that this is therefore the main plank of the tricolon, because it's contentious.
(5) The right to "Property" may be construed as an appeal to the propertied (ie political) class; thus confirming, by precedence, the previous two rights. Actually, I'm not that clear that Locke meant any such thing. He was quite clear that "property" derived from labour. Marx apparently disagreed.
(6) And here is where we get to the interesting bit.

Why alter "Property," which in Locke's sense was quite general, to "the pursuit of Happiness?" Many Columbian drug-barons (why not margraves?) need to know.

Absent a scholarly corpus, I can only suggest that Jefferson had something very specific in mind, but I can't say what. One rather vague indication on Wikipedia suggests that "happiness" means freedom to pursue one's chosen career. Which, for eleven out of the twelve months, I imagine you might endorse.

Pointlessly continues, because the arbitrary 4137 character limit allows me to do so.

Re: Tricolons (Topic of Cancer)

[real-aardvark.livejournal.com]

My theory is (as with all theories by historians) simple:
(a) He was sitting in a bar when he wrote the original draft. People kept yelling at him (probably people from Pennsylvania). Suddenly, parrotting Locke didn't seem to work.
(b) Being a rather large-scale Virinia landowner, "property" meant "property" to Jefferson,, a simple-minded and literalist soul. Obviously, "property" is the issue.
(c) *Fill in latest new fad phrase here.* Oh, look, "pursuit of happiness." What could go wrong with that? I've got several paintings of bewhigged gentlemen frolicking over the cotton fields after nubile negro gals. Bostonians probably fuck dead cod in the spring, but ya gotta pursue the pursuable.

Yes. I truly believe that's how it happened. The Codrington awaits.

Also I'm sick and tired of pathetic Englishmen in their declining years pissing on about America, or Americans, being "screwed up" for any given arbitrary reason. It's cultural, and at least in this case it's aspirational. Get the fuck over it, you ancient git.

Re: Tricolons (Topic of Cancer)

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

If you are referring to the main text, I would point out that I'm not specific about Americans at all. Sure, I mention Sandra Bullock, but I ascribe her sadness to a modern condition, not to her Americanness.

Kate Winslet is, of course, British, although I accept that she plays an American. But my main text was really about modern society (note that I say "the attitude of so many people these days", not "the attitude of so many Americans"). I didn't mean to make it specific to, or a crticism of, America or Americans. I accept that in the last sentence I talked about the "four greats" "addressing this and other issues about America". But then, they would, wouldn't they, being American. It would be nice if some British authors addressed such problems about Britain, but we are a way behind on that curve at the moment.

Then again, people often project what they wish onto my, frequently deliberately ambiguous, witterings. That's fine by me as well.

PJ

Re: Tricolons (Topic of Cancer)

[peterbirks.livejournal.com]

Is this of any use?

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/trt001.html

or this?

http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/treasures/images/decp1.jpg

PJ