Free to read

Somewhat more pessimistic maybe than some of the past formulations, where I’d like to believe more in what can be done short of everything, all at once, structurally and for good. The room for making some changes on the scale of relationships, perspectives, things within reach, and all those good things of the heart. Along with the power napping sleep program, the experimental theology reading group, some ideas along the lines of a free St. john’s, the things I used to worry about when I was so young and bright-eyed, only coming out now from being already within it , liking it too much and too late to back out. What would that look like? If you weren’t paying, didn’t have something vested, and without the degree at the end, or that quid pro quo we try to watch out for in Job—can you form the course without anything at all, other than people and books? No authority, even the dubious kind of a tutor’s, to steer and direct things—but well somehow anyway it has to get started, a question, a reading to be agreed on, and not just one but a sequence of some kind to hold it together. A time and place to meet, a kind of process for admission, tending toward openness and diversity, or else it’s just a bunch of friends reinforcing one another, not much growth or taking seriously. That’s great for just hanging out, talking afterwards, but in the time for struggling and grappling it takes something overarching to hold attention and direct it. An interest and an enterprise, like a game, a sport, a sailing or fishing, which have the possibility of sinking if not everyone is engaged. It asks a kind of consent of the governed, less in the sense of the enlightenment state of nature than in the spirit of those who want to have a good game. It doesn’t preclude wanting to win, or any other impulses, but sublimates them. And without breaking any rules, strictly speaking, it has that appeal to sportsmanship and fair-play which makes that person talking too much, hogging the ball, or not including everyone in the conversation, showing off, lacking grace, look pitiable. Someone has to take them into hand, for their own good, besides policing the more obvious breaches of wandering off topic, arguing or misinforming. It doesn’t have to be the same person every time, it can take turns—but framing it, and sustaining it, it seems inevitable some take the initiative, and others be good at something else, and so long as everyone is doing the things with a will, saying when they don’t buy into something, or else buying in sincerely, it more or less shambles along. But if just finding one other person is so rare, how likely is a group’s coming together?