hermit's thatch
Skip to content

    Moderation

    Tuesday, January 17, 2012

    The world curbs its appetites through moderation. Appetites are seen as inevitable and, therefore, to be invariably indulged, but with the excusing proviso that moderation is available and will retain a sense of functionality. Moderation rescues all excesses by demonstrating to the dubious that everything is permitted for everything can be tempered by power.

    Moderation consists of a quantitative level of desire that is socially safe and acceptable. Thus is conserved the core of appetite or desire. An enormous superstructure of moderation exists in society and politics, whole technologies mitigating excess, smoothing it out, making it palatable, even sustainable.

    A model of moderation, for example, is society’s consumption of alcohol (one could substitute as examples war, petroleum, power, pleasure or other commodity or act). From primordial times, consumption of alcohol has lured human energy and roused its fantasy. Nothing stops consumption of alcohol except what is fancifully evoked: moderation. An individual can, in this argument, be moderate, consume moderately. Here moderation refers to lack of dysfunction. Law, science, and technology conspire to define moderation and functionality. But true cost, economic, social, psychological, is never taken into account. Production, technology, transportation, marketing, enforcement, finance, medical infrastructure for death, injury, and destruction, the impact on families and individuals — all of these factors are socially tolerable costs if only, runs the argument, individuals would just be moderate — understanding that many will not.

    All of these enormous cost factors are already mitigated by expressions of moderation. What, on such a scale, is excess?

    Society maintains these costs because of the perceived inevitability of appetite for the given object, action, or desire. Such is the tautology of moderation, which tolerates a complex network of effort and excess because moderation can always be invoked for the postulated individual consumer. Consumption (of alcohol, war, power, pleasure), however much criticized publicly, is the core of material well-being in the modern world.

    Moderation abets consumption. War, food, transportation, entertainment, education, administration, manufacturing, resource exploitation — no field of worldly endeavor is not worthy. But a tenet of modern economics is that as long as production continues, the destruction of the same product is acceptable, indeed necessary. Gross national product is measured not by positive and healthful activities and goods but by how much money and profit is to be got. More cancers, more injuries, more warfare, more vehicles, more deforestation, more chemicals, more banks, more pavement, more food outlets, more consumption — the more the better as far as producing profit and control. All are acceptable because moderation can ameliorate excess, withholding indulgence to just before the moment of self-destruction. Individuals may succumb to excess as peripheral or tolerable damage to the ethics of moderation, but, in fact, such losses are useful lessons, a warning, a propitiation like a sacrifice to ward off the true lesson that moderation fails.

    Thus moderation not only fails but kills. Moderation is a barrier to reality. Moderation is the fraud of ethics, a physical, chemical, or psychological computation of limits that nevertheless destroy in order to sustain desire. If desire comes from within, then society abets desire in each individual. If desire is prompted from without by manipulating forces and people, then society induces it.

    The solitary has the opportunity to look upon society and the mechanisms of consumption as a juggernaut for crushing the self. The remedy is not in opposing the vast processes of society, however. This is a physical impossibility, of course, and perhaps a psychological conceit. But no action is warranted or mandated. It is enough to retain an integrity that acknowledges the sleight of hand that is moderation, and disengage from whatever requires moderation for justification of consumption in the largest ethical sense.

    Filed in thatch | | Comments (0)

    “The Pleasure of Ruins”

    Friday, January 6, 2012

    Rose Macaulay’s The Pleasure of Ruins, published in 1952, is a “random excursion into the fantastic world” of ruins, that which time and circumstances have made of the external and material world of ancient cultures. This pleasure is a distinct phenomenon of the Western world, the taking of enjoyment in visiting and contemplating the ruins of ancient civilizations.

    The fascination with the ruins of ancient Near Eastern, Greek, and Roman ruins predominated from the Renaissance through the 18th century. What was the fascination? A morbid pleasure, what Henry James called a “heartless pastime,” adding, “and the pleasure, I confess, shows a note of perversity.”

    During the aforementioned centuries, the pleasure carried a touch of eccentric antiquarianism, a touch of cultural superiority, as if to say, “they are gone but I am here” — and only a bit of archeological or historical research interest. Add to this the extensive and shameless looting of antiquities carted back to England and the continent and one can built the case that the pleasure of ruins is a kind of cultural violence one hand removed. The ancient civilizations fell long ago through no doing of moderns, but moderns rob the graves in order to assure themselves that it won’t happen here.

    Macaulay’s first chapter (the rest of the book is a detailed if chatty catalog) clearly shows how the pleasure of ruins is enjoyed by the Western world. The first note is the Old Testament, where the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel savor the vengeance of God on the enemies of the people, namely Babylon, Edom, Nineveh, Tyre. Already there was a touch of this sense in the earlier books of the Old Testament, where Yahweh directs the ravaging of Canaanite towns, farms, forests, and populations, but there the pleasure of ruins is attributed to God. The prophets evoke God’s vengeance, depicting the desired aftermath as prophecy. The pleasure of ruins shifts from God to his prophets, which is to say the observing culture. Thus Babylon (Isaiah 13:21+):

    Wild beasts of the desert shall lie there, and their houses shall be full of doleful creatures, and owls shall dwell there, and wild goats shall dance there, and the wild beasts of the islands shall cry in their desolate houses, and dragons in their pleasant palaces. … Your pomp is brought down to the graves, and the noise of your harp strings. The worm is spread beneath you and the worms cover you. How you have fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! … I will make you a possession for the bittern, and pools of water …

    Elsewhere it is the cormorant, the ravens, thorns, adders, and vultures.

    Italian Renaissance writers are not vengeful but curious, reflective, flattered. The ruins are those of their intellectual and even physical ancestors, after all, and inspire them to better heights. The British at this time neatly divide into humors. Not that Shakespeare and the Elizabethans did not sprinkle their plays with bats and eyes of newt and the like, all on dark moors with strange fogs and witches and skulls buried a few inches below the soil surface. But these were literary contrivances, not real ruins to gaze upon, not yet, anyway.

    Within a century or so, the ruins of classical antiquity provoke reflections of melancholy for some, but for others, the collecting of antiquities is a confirmation of empire-building, of moral superiority, and these bring back, like Elgin stealing whole Greek cities, as much as they can carry off. But the literary fashion was the discovery of ruins on one’s own soil, which inspires either genuine melancholy (always with a nobleman’s affectation) or outright pleasure. Macaulay quotes John Dyer’s poem “Grongar Hill,” describing a castle:

    ‘Tis now the raven’s bleak abode;
    ‘Tis now the apartment of the toad;
    And there the fox securely feeds;
    And there the pois’nous adder breeds,
    Conceal’d in ruins, moss, and weeds;
    While, ever and anon, there falls
    Huge heap of hoary moulder’d walls.
    Yet time has seen, that lifts the low,
    And level lays the lofty brow,
    Has seen this broken pile complete,
    Big with the vanity of state;
    But transient is the smile of Fate!
    A little rule, a little sway,
    A sunbeam in a winter’s day,
    Is all the proud and mighty have
    Between the cradle and the grave.

    We are far beyond cursing an enemy’s proud towers or adding baneful props to a play or even the later cultural arrogance of antiquarian collectors. Dyer strikes the note of melancholy mixed with what Macaulay calls

    cheerful enjoyment of the dismal scene, a brisk, approving gaiety, expressed in firm octosyllabic or decasyllabic lines, with satisfied enumerations of the gloomy objects perceived, and a good moral at the end.

    Here Macaulay provides a valuable service in revealing an eerie side to our cultural psyche. Although the emphasis is especially British, the pleasures of melancholy are subtly expressed by all of the Western world. But — and here Macaulay only offers a few paragraphs — not the rest of the world. Not, she notes, the Arab, Indian, or Chinese. She notes the ancient Chinese reaction to ruins, ruins of war: the melancholy is genuine, the identification with the people in their last desperate hours is heartfelt and true. In particular, and not unexpected, is the identification of this suffering witnessed of a place familiar to the observer. Here Macaulay quotes a famous Chinese poem by Tsao Chih, written about the great city of the Warring States period:

    In Loyang how still it is.
    Palaces and houses all burnt to ashes,
    Walls and fences broken and gaping,
    Thorns and brambles shouting up to the sky. …
    I turn aside, for the straight road is lost:
    The fields are overgrown, and will never be plowed again.
    I have been away such a long time
    That I do not know which street is which.
    How sad and desolate the empty moors are!
    A thousand miles without the smoke of a chimney.
    I think of the house in which I lived all those years:
    I am heart-stricken and cannot speak.

    Macaulay goes no further with non-Western opinion of ruins. But the sentiment of the Middle Ages is closer to the Eastern, as in the famous Old English Wanderer poem, reflection on the aftermath of war and human destructiveness. Our contemporary pleasure in ruins is videoed, televised, streamed, and made into movies for mass anesthetizing.

    Almost an aside because Macaulay does not mention it but in passing is the fact that from the British view, the eccentric antiquarian view, can be seen the evolution of the idea of ornamental hermits to grace the ruinous appearance of a noble’s wide estate. The hermit is made another ornament, a column, a decaying wall, the remnants of an ancient abbey. The hermit by this era is but a ruin in the cultural sense, and so scarce that an ornamental one must be hired, instructed, and placed like an artificial flower in a sterile garden.

    Filed in thatch | | Comments (0)

    Depression

    Friday, December 30, 2011

    What was called melancholia up to the last centuries is today called depression. The term itself suggests the definition: a depressed patch of land is low, not as a hillside valley or low and moist meadow brightened by flowers but more qualitatively as a ditch that fills with dank water, filled with jagged rocks, a hollow or lowland that projects darkness and wariness.

    A customary definition of depression is sadness that exceeds objective conditions, that is not justified by anything specific. From this general definition can be derived a distinction between a tragic sense of life and clinical depression that does not originate in philosophy. But there is much in the world and human condition that can give rise to depression, after all. One need not point to specific circumstances. The social norm for responding to doleful and cruel circumstances is anger, determination, and increasingly pitched aggression at apparent injustice or wrong. The norm is not resignation or a patterned inaction. The reactions are not born of sadness but are moral characterizations. Anger, cynicism, and violence projected outwardly against a perceived evil is not melancholia. Indeed, there is a latent optimism in such a person’s responses that reflects a will to power and a confidence in the ego.

    Similarly, personalities oriented toward extroversion may experience restlessness and the desire for sociability when alone for a long time or without interpersonal exchanges. Their apparent sadness is desire, which cannot be described as depression because it deflects introspection and is focused on others. This focus does not simply preempt depression. Rather, the individual is not self-aware enough to be depressed. As with the angry and aggressive, the extrovert is less likely to be characterized as depressed because there is a confidence in self, in ego, as a potentially successful social tool that gives rise to optimism. There is an expectation of revived or restored conviviality to which solitude or even loneliness is viewed as an interruption.

    When such a personality does collapse emotionally, then the facade of self-confidence is lost nd symptoms of true depression ensue. The state was probably always there, but society is quick to categorize and medicate. Biographies of melancholics of the past show this oscillation between sun and darkness, and were somehow able to ride out the darkness in an age when there were no pills. Today many psychiatrists and pharmaceutical companies recommend preventive drugs, seeing in the social collapse around us the logically resulting despondency of many people. This neither addresses the causes of social collapse nor the necessity to find an understanding of how to cope.

    Whole catalogs of depressed poets and artists have been assembled, such as this one at Wikipedia: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_with_major_depressive_disorder). The obvious fact is that many of the names on such lists are creative people: writers, painters, composers, poets. Did depression drive them to such avocations, or did the avocations, once pursued, drive them to depression? The indubitable fact seems to be that the insightful and sensitive nature of such individuals, and their depiction of what they see or experience of life, makes their art excruciatingly personal and intense. What the brain does with the depth of this experience is a medical and not an artistic issue. But the process even today is haphazardly addressed with pharmaceuticals and electroshock, the latter historically failing many by exacerbating their condition.

    ***

    American novelist David Foster Wallace (1962-2008) once said in an interview:

    Reading requires sitting alone by yourself in a quiet room. I have friends, intelligent friends, who don’t like to read because they get not just bored — there’s an almost dread that comes up I think, here [in the US], about having to be alone and in having to be quiet. You see that when you walk into most public spaces in America.It isn’t quiet anymore, they pipe music through. … It seems significant that we don’t want things to be quiet, ever, any more.

    Contemporary novelist Jonathan Franzen remembered David Foster Wallace when Franzen visited an obscure and solitary island off the coast of Chile. Franzen and Wallace, as fellow-novelists of similar age, were fast friends. On one of their last visits, Franzen busily admired the hummingbirds everywhere around the back patio of Wallace’s house, adding to his ornithological knowledge before an upcoming study trip to Ecuador. But Wallace could not appreciate the birds, or much else about nature or anything else at this point. Wallace suffered from depression. When he found his pharmaceutical no longer worked, he dropped it, didn’t follow up with a replacement, and committed suicide. Franzen visited Wallace’s widow before leaving for the Chile, and she unexpectedly gave him some of her husband’s cremation ashes to deposit on that lonely deserted island, thinking he would have liked that.

    The island was named by the Chilean government Alejandro Selkirk, after the marooned sailor taken as the model of Robinson Crusoe in Daniel Defoe’s famous novel. But the locals still called the island by its original name, Masafuera, meaning “Farther Away.” The New Yorker essay of Franzen titled “Farther Away: Robinson Crusoe, David Foster Wallace, and the Island of Solitude,” makes for reflective reading about solitude, wilderness, friendship, and the origins of the novel.

    None should disparage sufferers of depression. Melancholy reaches back to the most ancient of literary records. The tragic sense of life is often bottled up in single souls and leaks out like a poison until it consumes. Pharmaceuticals help many people today but research fails to serve them and conventional palliatives for depression are clearly still elusive when, for example, seasonal affective disorder can largely be addressed with full-spectrum lighting and vitamin D. If conditions and circumstances are the triggers of depression, then humanity would always be melancholy, yet clearly that is not the case. (Nor, necessarily, is heredity.) More immediate conditions and circumstances are clearly the case in the depression suffered by writers like Ernest Hemingway and Ezra Pound, due not to nature’s aberration but to horrific electroshock treatments administered by arrogant technocrats. The fullness of solitude eludes the electrical and chemical mechanisms of brain and nervous system. The fullness of solitude eludes depression.

    Filed in thatch | | Comments (0)

    Breath

    Tuesday, December 20, 2011

    One of the great paradoxes is summarized in the Buddhist saying that, on the one hand, to be born as a human being is a great and rare event, and that one should use this precious happening wisely, and on the other hand, there is nothing special about anything, or, as Morihei Ueshiba, founder of Aikido would say, we spend our whole life working diligently on the Path only to discover that there is No Path.

    This paradox has it counterpart in our breath. On the one hand we inhale, and our whole body is animated, waiting, as it were, for the unique gift of air to nourish our being, to refresh every vitality. And then, on the other hand, we exhale, we dispose of what is now spent and useless, without a thought. There are other parallels: for example, we eagerly eat food prepared for many hours and presented in fine conviviality and fanfare, and then we digest and expel its remnant without much thought. But breath captures our attention because breath is celebrated and keenly appreciated by every physical art such as yoga and every meditation tradition, East and West.

    Inhalation represents beginning, hope, expectation. The child in the womb is silent, reposed, and does not need breath because it does not (yet) partake of frail human necessities, blissfully unaware that it is growing, developing, and undergoing an irreversible trajectory. When the child is born, the shock of reality evokes a sharp cry. An old Arabic tradition says that a baby cries on birth because it sees the devil, lurking nearby. Or it sees death itself lurking in the shadows. Perhaps the baby cries because it must be born, because it is now thrown inexorably into existence, that existence so celebrated as unique by others but greeted by a cry of sorrow by the innocent.

    Inhalation signals the beginning. What we take in, as breath or as experience, all that is environment, pain, pleasure, thought or words, all these events come to represent beginnings. Each inhalation is a sunrise, the beginning of a new episode, a commonality with what already exists. The body is a microcosm, each organ awaiting inhalation, awaiting its renewal, just as every creature on the earth awaits the sunrise to begin anew, to begin again. And the sun finds some youthful and new, others waning and dying, but all must acknowledge the newness that the sunrise represents, just as each organ sees each inhalation as a sign that life goes on, however youthful and healthy are the organs, or how weakened and failing they may be.

    Exhalation, on the other hand, represents this terminus to all, like sunset and the coming of night, of silence, quiescence, diminishing, dissolution. Perhaps you have stood by the bedside of a dying person. In today’s modern circumstances, pain management makes the transition quiet and unobtrusive, but in the past, the dying person, unconscious in mind but not in organs or lungs, did not die quietly. Each breath was a loud and scraping, a gasping effort, the inhalation struggling to suck in air, the exhalation labored and spent. And then the pause, the horribly long pause between the last exhalation and another inhalation that will signify life, that trembling flame of a candle, that sadness of the whole body and organs remembering the obverse of this dying, remembering when that body emerged from the still, oceanic womb, into a new world, and its earliest struggle to conform to breathing after so long dormant. And upon dying, the reverse, the long path traversed only to end in No Path, only to end ignominiously, in a wretched noisy dying that only frightens those who watch or listen or remember a birth long ago and wonder.

    In meditation, there is nothing but this inhalation and exhalation. We have cut through the intermediate, which is to say life. Thoughts, sounds, drifting dregs of a consciousness between sunrise and sunset, float up and float about like stale air to be expelled, or better, to be ignored until passing. Among thoughts there is no inhalation or exhalation — only living beings do this, unless the whole planet, the whole universe, breathes in and out. In meditation, we are bidden concentrate on breathing, perhaps counting or following the breath, until there is nothing else, no thoughts, no feelings, no awareness of anything else, even the coolness of the room, the degree of light, the hum of an appliance. Sometimes a bird’s cry startles, so without awareness of environment is the meditative state. Only inhalation and exhalation, as if to maintain the reality that we are a composite of body and mind. The breathing is autonomous and frees us to realize not thoughts and feelings but to reveal to us our nothingness, our absolute identity with everything else, everything else that exists. Inhale, exhale — we traverse the whole path from birth to death in that in-breath and out-breath.

    The masters say that at a certain point we will find that sitting is what we like to do best, that we will look forward to it with an unexpected eagerness. Perhaps that is because we refresh our minds before another day or we relax a while from the stress of what lies ahead or what was behind us during the day. Or, perhaps it is because we get to know our breath, and therefore our selves, if we are willing to do so. If we have no thoughts, no distractions, and do not chase the clouds with our mind’s eye but sit quietly, then breath teaches us. Breath teaches us beginnings and ends, the cycle of life, the fullness of being and the mystery of coming to be and passing away.

    Filed in thatch | | Comments (0)
    ‹ Older posts
    • Links

      • hermit’s slate (forum)
      • hermitary
      • hermits around the web
    • Recent Posts

      • Moderation
      • “The Pleasure of Ruins”
      • Depression
      • Breath
      • Back to the sages
      • Simplicity in the 90′s
      • Modern crossroads
    • Archives

      • January 2012 (2)
      • December 2011 (3)
      • November 2011 (2)
      • October 2011 (2)
      • September 2011 (2)
      • August 2011 (3)
      • July 2011 (3)
      • June 2011 (2)
      • May 2011 (2)
      • April 2011 (2)
      • March 2011 (2)
      • February 2011 (3)
      • January 2011 (2)
      • December 2010 (3)
      • November 2010 (3)
      • October 2010 (3)
      • September 2010 (3)
      • August 2010 (2)
      • July 2010 (4)
      • June 2010 (3)
      • May 2010 (2)
      • April 2010 (4)
      • March 2010 (3)
      • February 2010 (3)
      • January 2010 (3)
      • December 2009 (4)
      • November 2009 (3)
      • October 2009 (4)
      • September 2009 (3)
      • August 2009 (3)
      • July 2009 (3)
      • June 2009 (2)
      • May 2009 (5)
      • April 2009 (3)
      • March 2009 (4)
      • February 2009 (2)
      • January 2009 (3)
      • December 2008 (4)
      • November 2008 (3)
      • October 2008 (5)
      • September 2008 (4)
      • August 2008 (4)
      • July 2008 (5)
      • June 2008 (4)
      • May 2008 (3)
      • April 2008 (5)
      • March 2008 (4)
      • February 2008 (5)
      • January 2008 (5)
      • December 2007 (4)
      • November 2007 (6)
      • October 2007 (6)
      • September 2007 (6)
      • August 2007 (6)
      • July 2007 (6)
      • June 2007 (6)
      • May 2007 (12)
      • April 2007 (6)
      • March 2007 (4)
      • February 2007 (5)
      • January 2007 (5)
      • December 2006 (4)
      • November 2006 (4)
      • October 2006 (5)
      • September 2006 (4)
      • August 2006 (5)
      • July 2006 (5)
      • June 2006 (5)
      • May 2006 (6)
      • April 2006 (5)
      • March 2006 (6)
      • February 2006 (5)
      • January 2006 (7)
      • December 2005 (5)
      • November 2005 (7)
      • October 2005 (7)
      • September 2005 (6)
      • August 2005 (6)
      • July 2005 (6)
      • June 2005 (8)
      • May 2005 (6)
      • April 2005 (8)
      • March 2005 (9)
      • February 2005 (7)
      • January 2005 (10)
      • December 2004 (12)
      • November 2004 (11)
      • October 2004 (10)
      • September 2004 (10)
      • August 2004 (7)
      • July 2004 (6)
      • June 2004 (12)
      • May 2004 (8)
      • April 2004 (8)
      • March 2004 (9)
      • February 2004 (6)
      • January 2004 (10)
      • December 2003 (6)
      • November 2003 (5)
      • October 2003 (12)
      • September 2003 (10)
      • August 2003 (14)
      • July 2003 (7)
      • June 2003 (5)
      • May 2003 (11)
      • April 2003 (6)
      • March 2003 (1)
      • February 2003 (1)
      • January 2003 (3)
      • December 2002 (3)
      • November 2002 (2)
    • RSS Links

      • All posts
      • All comments
    © 2012 Hermitary & Meng-hu ¶ WordPress & veryplaintxt