Saturday, February 24, 2018

Do you hear what I hear? / Listen to what I say

Further reflections/manifesto on possible podcasts/videos, elated by Sufjan's Christmas music again, and with Pullman's great essay Miss Goddard's Grave in the back of my mind as always:

For a long time, the questions have had the upper hand. The a of differance--what could it mean?

At a certain point it begins to seem that the true inheritors of Socratic inquiry, though, are not in the humanities at all, but in the sciences. Not stopping asking the questions, but with the courage to attempt to put forward answers to them, they do just a bit more with their words. The Righteous Mind, which I recently read, and 12 Rules for Life, which I haven't read yet, but have heard a lot about, seem to fulfill the Socratic statement of faith articulated in the Meno better than the 20C philosophy we've been reading in Tables and Chairs lately:
The soul, then, as being immortal, and having been born again many times, and having seen all things that exist, whether in this world or in the world below, has knowledge of them all; and it is no wonder that she should be able to call to remembrance all that she ever knew about virtue, and about everything; for as all nature is akin, and the soul has learned all things; there is no difficulty in her eliciting or as men say learning, out of a single recollection, all the rest, if a man is strenuous and does not faint; for all enquiry and all learning is but recollection. And therefore we ought not to listen to this sophistical argument about the impossibility of enquiry: for it will make us idle; and is sweet only to the sluggard; but the other saying will make us active and inquisitive. In that confiding, I will gladly enquire with you into the nature of virtue. (81d)
Dismiss Haidt and Peterson as sophists if you will, but it seems to me that would be dodging the issue. What is at stake is the possibility of meaning, not the implications of its impossibility.

What truth is it that seems to you to be at once metaphorically and literally true? Tell me that, and I'll tell you where your possibility is in its mysterious process of going, they seem to promise.

The account, of course only ever a likely one--whether given a Timaeus world of divine order, or a probabilistic multiverse of the dozen or so varieties proposed by the great popularizers of physics--anyway, this is the best we can do, to give our account, to see as far as we can and walk in the way as best we are able, to collect from what there is the material to become a bridge to those who will come after us in turn, and to tell them, above all: take heart!

Essential to this, of course, is a sense of humor, humility:
I do not know what I may appear to the world, but to myself I seem to have been only like a boy playing on the sea-shore, and diverting myself in now and then finding a smoother pebble or a prettier shell than ordinary, whilst the great ocean of truth lay all undiscovered before me. 
-- Louis Trenchard More, Isaac Newton: A Biography (New York: Scribner's, 1934), p. 664. (quoted in Greene, The Hidden Reality, at the opening of the last chapter: The Limits of Inquiry)
Just as the essential thing for justice, for pursuing the good, for all truth-seeking, is the most joyous and wonderful and mysterious thing of all: friendship. In that spirit I write all this to friends real and potential, with--I hope, and not elation only--

Love,

Wes

This year's read: the pluripotent Kierkegaard

In the way the music arises from the welter of Beethoven's 9th, or perhaps more along the lines of the gentle production of patterns in a Pink Floyd prog-rock opus like Cluster One, the brimming flow of Kierkegaard's writing gives rise to personalities. If you pace it out at one book for each month, give or take, that's twelve more lives, distilled in moments of clarity and astonishment, that the year holds out for you.

So beginning with Either/Or, after a frame story about a desirable desk with a hidden compartment--how could you not be hooked?--we move into part one, the papers of the aesthetic personality. He writes about plays I've never heard of, but also idolizes Mozart's Don Giovanni; references classics I've never read, but also alludes to concepts of recollection, repetition, irony, anxiety, which are all developed elsewhere in Kierkegaard's own massive output; and in a section called the Seducer's Diary, he portrays the scenes of a love unlike anything else in literature, ad certainly unlike anything else in philosophy.

Yet what the ethical personality will point out in part two, in his letters to the younger man, seems right: it is just the nature of such experience to feel completely unique; that in itself is only the stronger attestation to its universal character. The older man, a judge, married with children, fills in the dimension of free choice of the good as a corrective to the freedom from all choice the youthful persona adores. He claims his way includes the aesthetic and brings its yearnings to fulfillment, insofar as possible within the world, through an attachment to infinite, universal concepts in the midst of everyday concreteness. In this way we are brought to the threshold of a paradox which seems to inhere within the ethical outlook: the leap of faith which will so occupy Kierkegaard throughout his remaining brief life, given over to such difficult, fascinating works of truth-seeking in creative pseudonymity.

For as the brief biographical sketch included in the front matter suggests, he gave up his chance to marry the woman he loved, presumably so as to write these books instead, seeking balance, seeking more life, seeking the true motivation or purpose of his decision in the total picture of creation. Either he indeed had faith in something greater and more capacious even than the solidly ethical life of a happy marriage and a meaningful career, or he lost heart in his own capacity to live up to all of that and had to rebuild himself painstakingly, had to re-derive a point of view or a multiplicity of them in order to find new meaning in his life; he only yearned for, but did not quite have, faith.

Tuesday, February 6, 2018

Open letters to friends

In response to Pat's email of the other day--

https://eand.co/how-american-discourse-died-3a482f37099d 

Can we do anything to help illuminate and elucidate the sentiment here? Let's start a 90's throwback email chain! 
Pass it on, my friends. Hope all is well wich'you

--I wrote back to him and to Ryan:

 Hi fellas,

Well, I don't know about American discourse being dead as long as Americans get to write whatever they want in emails back and forth to each other in the comfort of homes bought and sold on an open market--seems to me the American dream and discourse are both doing fairly robustly, in the parlance of our time. If the market goes down a bit and no one is jumping out of windows, so much the better. 

I frankly get the impression this young vampire fancies himself quite the writer and has a case of sour grapes about his particular strain of the discourse not leaping out at people from the headlines of the bigger media outlets. But maybe that's just me projecting a bit there. I like his use of the word whataboutery, but I just don't think the case against nuance is all that strong. The point, again, is that you're free to say whatever you want, however you want, within certain well-understood legal paradigms, and the people you're talking to get to hear as much of it as they're willing or able to. If they--it seems to you--don't hear much other than a buzzword here or there and then shout you down with rote talking points about nuance, well, sorry, but there's probably someone out there who heard a bit more and is actually thinking about it. Those who have ears to hear, let them hear, sort of thing.

To his second point, about pseudoscience or reductionist materialism, yeah, that is a biggie, but that has been a long time coming. Ever since the Enlightenment, at least, we've had to think about reason's role in explanatory hypotheses, primarily about nature, but also its limits in speaking to the lived experience of people in the world. Descartes, Hume, Kant, Nietzsche and the existentialists, James and Freud and the psychologists, and lately the illustrious Jordan Peterson and his detractors and admirers alike have all had a lot of smart stuff to say about this. You'll know them by their fruits, you might say. 

And as for the ideology issue, it seems like a bit of a straw man of capitalism and the level of discourse surrounding it. I haven't talked to many staunchly conservative or libertarian people, but at least some of them don't have robot voices, nor do they pretend everyone takes a super narrow view of self-interest. Or if he's talking about Adam Smith and the American Federalists, who were so into theories of political self-interest, well, a) the structures they've put in place have held up so far when no other ideology has, really; b) they had a tremendous dare I say nuance in their thinking--Adam Smith has a long book of Sentiment which no one reads any more--and were incredibly learned in classics which few people have any inkling of, save for certain proverbs that trickle down to us today, so whatever ideology they espoused, it is much richer than what seems to be meant by capitalism in the US today as the article characterizes it. And when you look at stuff Jefferson was writing in his letters (cited in the Righteous Mind, which I highly recommend skimming through at your local library), he clearly had a notion that head and heart each have their sphere of influence, so interest had a fairly broad range of applications for him, as it should. It's always a bad trap to fall into, conjuring up opponents and then giving them weak and shallow arguments which you can delight in refuting while displaying your of course much broader understanding--but it's a tempting one all the same. You see the mote in your neighbor's eye, and there's a great big beam sticking in your own.

Last, I'll just say that it was a pretty good article, so I'll try and share it around, sure! I like the word eudaimonia, too, and would say looking at Socrates' relationship to his daemon is a good place to start.

Viva America, amigos!

Sunday, February 4, 2018

Interviews with three Spokane authors

Conceived as an ongoing project to live at Spark, this ended up being something I worked on just during the summer, but let's say it goes here I can find anywhere else for it--


Writing Seen
serving writers and readers in Spokane


About this page

Since coming to Spokane and to Spark, I’ve met so many talented writers and inquisitive readers: you can find both of them on and around that first bookshelf as you come in the front door, the one labeled LOCAL AUTHORS.

I’ve been reading through that shelf, and asking the people I meet some questions, and writing, of course. You can find me there on Tuesday afternoons for Drop in & Write; or, if your writing is there, you may find me emailing you to invite you to talk about it with me and to share ideas about whatever other projects you may be working on.

Many people I’ve talked to have expressed an inkling, an empty feeling, a sense of an absence about the writing scene here in Spokane, and a wish for more connection. To me this suggests that there is even more great writing happening than what is contained by the shelf I like to linger by. I would like for this website, like Drop in & Write, like Spark itself, to be a place dedicated to bringing more of those writers and readers together, making that writing scene more visible and accessible.

So as a creative outlet and a gathering place, here it is, for all who may be interested.


About me

I love reading, writing, and traveling. I am a substitute teacher, I would say I am a pretty good one, and a careful reader, a decent writer, a fortunate traveler. - Wesley Schantz (contact)


(tabs/links)
-authors (link to a list pulled from librarika, then with links to each author’s website/blog?)
-readings and conversations (July essay below)
-grants, jobs, contests, journals (again, we can collect these from all over)
-courses (offered by local organizations, schools, or online by local writers)



(featured essay for July)
Is There a Soul? and Essays by Madeline McNeill - her website







“I called it Is There a Soul? because…” A long pause. “I wanted it to indicate that I am very much thinking about soul, about spiritual experience, rooted in felt experiences. I wanted to go to the heart of it.”

The question still gives the author pause. It is a living question, and her answer demonstrates the care with which she has treated it in her work.

Madeline McNeill describes herself as a singer and a body philosopher. She realized what she was doing was philosophy after an epiphany born of a period of intensive self-massage and self-reflection. Massage, she discovered, was able not only to relieve the tension in her core muscles, improving her singing, but also to trigger a new freedom in her thinking. What at first seemed like a breakdown of her previously held structure of thought gradually resolved itself into new structures and creative work, with a new language to talk about it.

Is There a Soul? records her inner dialogue as a conversation between a student and a teacher as they go on posing and responding to questions. The reader, in turn, becomes engaged with these voices on the page in a process Madeline calls sub-posturing, subtly forming the words within core muscles. As we read silently, we say each word, each phrase to ourselves, deep beneath the surface of spoken language, but nevertheless evoking them through the body, not merely revising them as thoughts within the mind. In a manner, this very act of reading, viewed from the perspective of body philosophy, is already “moving toward body spirituality,” a paradigm that gives readers a new way of thinking about Christianity’s core tenet, the incarnation of the word. I am reminded that spirit comes from a word meaning breath, and soul from a word meaning butterfly (pneuma, psyche)-- things which hover on the threshold of intangibleness.

“Can I use the word soul or spirituality like this? Can I reclaim the soul for the body?”

She asks the essential questions anew, then says with the confidence of her lived experience, “Self is body, and mind is an exercise,” as is soul, an experience of consciousness. Operating within parameters, soul is neither infinite nor eternal, any more than any one of its emotive expressions is: love, will, peace--each has its limit, under this framework.

As Madeline puts it, “It is unhealthy to step off a cliff and think you can fly.” She laughs wryly at the way society holds forth notions of infinite love or goodness for those with the leisure to pursue them while the lower classes are left to feel responsible for their own negative “body emotions...It’s so messed up.” Thus, she insists on the “radical, activist component” of body philosophy.

In our talk, the tensions between collaboration and independence, completion and ongoing reflection are also recurrent themes. For Madeline, the classical philosophical form is at once easy and natural; she submitted the first drafts as part of a writing course, received positive feedback, and got in touch with an editor at EWU, Amanda Maule, who helped shape the book into its current form. However, unlike Platonic dialogues, her speakers are both female. In the cover art, she had the stock image adapted to remove the Adam’s apple. Since then, she has continued elaborating her ideas in a series of essays, and even inserted a section on beauty into the published book. She has also considered staging the work as a play or adapting it as a film, and is in contact with a group of dancers who may be interested in performing it.



(August)
West of You by Mel Murphy - her amazon site

(I forgot to take pictures that day, so here's one from Spark)



By the front door of the Rocket Bakery on Garland, on one of those big community boards covered with announcements, there’s a flyer (like the one you can also see at Spark) advertising free stories on Audible. Sitting with me at the corner table, author Mel Murphy recounts the process of creating those stories which have been such a revelation for me to listen to and to read.

West of You was published in 2015 in the midst of her many moves between cities in the Northwest and stints in Nevada. After years of submitting stories to contests and literary magazines only to be disillusioned, Murphy began to self-publish in print and online.

She has been impressed by the quality of voice talent and production her work has received on Audible, where short stories are something of a rarity. She reflects that even if she is giving away stories by making them freely available online, something which initially made her skittish at the thought of her ideas being stolen, she now looks at it differently: “At least somebody would be reading them.”

I have been and I highly recommend them. For anyone who takes writing seriously as a vocation and aspires to it as a profession; for anyone who has manuscripts of novels and screenplays and other projects waiting to see the light; for anyone who loves writing and wants to read something good, Mel’s short fiction, like “The War with Canada” which was shortlisted for a Bridport Prize, will provoke both admiration and controversy, awe at something strange and wonderful, but also a recognition of something eerily familiar.

Mel’s stories so insistently immerse the reader in her characters’ uncomfortable personal situations and in settings bespeaking a withering social critique. As we talk, we continually come back to the context of trying make a living as a writer in this time and place. We like this area. “It has trees, it has water.” She reflects wryly on the likelihood that she and others will soon be priced out of this town and pushed further inland, as they have been ousted from Seattle and Portland. “I feel like I’m ahead of a curve for the first time, you know? And pretty soon I’ll have to move on to Boise.”

In her fiction, this fatalism is moderated to some extent by a similar note of black humor. In the closing story, “Land of Nod,” Murphy imagines a cohort of freedom fighters sabotaging the inevitable march of a plutocratic regime, but the hope is ambiguous. “It’s the old question: is greed hardwired or can it be outweighed by altruism?” In other stories, like “Object of Desire,” the question might be reframed along these lines: Is the beauty of a work of art or a human being enough to ensure we value them for their own sake, or is it all reducible to money and power?

Her outlook is bleak. But still, time and again, there is a reassertion of the possibility of small victories, reconquests of dignity by characters whose very existence is imperilled by the ignorance and greed of their neighbors. The realization of the bravery within themselves to survive their daily life and the determination to get out, constitutes an epiphany.



(September)
Mark L. Anderson (who's since been named Spokane poet laureate!)
I Spent My Summer Nights on the Patio of the Old Empyrean [154 S Madison]



because we wanted to save rock and roll
we wanted to save poetry

Mark Anderson writes.

His is one of the first four or five poems in Railtown Almanac. (The poems are printed alphabetically by author.) It struck me at once as being just the thing I was looking for, though I didn’t know I was looking for anything when I took the volume from among the zines and chapbooks on the bottom shelf.

Maybe this is a way in which poetry gets saved, by people reading it without knowing or expecting too much and then encountering, suddenly, everything. Maybe this is how it saves itself, by letting us know we are missing something when we weren’t aware of it ourselves.

The long title reminded me of some of the tracks on Sufjan’s Illinois album, so even as someone not from around here I could feel a real nostalgia of my own for the kind of place Anderson was conjuring. The mixture of earnestness and irony in the repeated becauses appealed to me; I loved how concrete images of a time and place now vanished balanced the grasping for more universal meaning, never letting the earnestness ring shallow, the irony become self-assured, the meaning seem either too sensually ephemeral or too rigorously abstract.

Like Francesca and Paolo, I read no more that day. Even after reading the rest of the anthology later, I think “I Spent My Summer Nights” stands out.

The story behind the poem is already there, metaphorically, in its imagery of bricks, trains, and the quicksands of time. At nineteen Anderson started coming to Empyrean. At that time there was a very small, anarchic spoken-word poetry scene around here. Sometimes half the people onstage or in the audience would be half-naked, or could at least brag about having been to shows like that in the region. The Empyrean was the only place in Spokane offering a venue for anything of the sort, and Anderson was enchanted. “I kept coming back,” he says simply. He had always been into poetry; now he got into it “a little more and a little more, and pretty soon that was my life.”

The Empyrean closed its doors in 2011, a casualty of the recession. Nevertheless, generations of artists had laid the groundwork for the live music and poetry scenes to thrive today. Now that more venues are welcoming more diverse new talent, the cycle of boom and bust that claimed the Empyrean seems to have been, if not broken, then mitigated for the moment. Surveying the multifaceted offerings, Anderson suggests that there is perhaps less cross-over now between poets and musicians, but within poetry, between slam poets and others in the wider literary scene, there is still plenty of cross-fertilization, despite each event catering to a more distinct audience.

Among the new venues are Boots, where Anderson now works, and the Bartlett, where he used to be active participating in slams. With Kurt Olson, a fellow poet from the days of the Empyrean, Anderson started and restarted open mic shows, trying to make up for what they had lost, over the course of several years. He would “run it into the ground,” and then they would get the project going again but with a little more framework, a little less “everything goes,” until by and by they had come up with Broken Mic’s current format.

Like what happens when you write poetry according to a formal meter or rhyme scheme, Broken Mic provides some limits within which poets channel their creative freedom into art. There are three rules. The first they call “Sanctuary,” meaning there is no censorship, but nothing dangerous or threatening will be permitted, either. They have almost never needed to enforce that one. Rule 2: Everyone who signs up gets three minutes, then they’re cut off. Rule 3 (“more of a philosophy”): What you put in is what you get out. About ten or fifteen of the writers featured in Railtown Almanac have put their Wednesday nights into it regularly, by Anderson’s count.

In fact, the open mic scene looks to be thriving. Spokane will be hosting the Individual World Poetry Slam this year. Actually it’s more of a national than world-wide event, Anderson explains, though there are some entrants from other English-speaking countries. How do you judge a poet, to say nothing of choosing a world champ? (Besides putting some laurel on their head). Originally the scores were a joke, but now people take them more seriously. Slam poets are scored on performance, content, and originality. Five random people from audience serve as judges. “You’re trying to find people who’ve never been to a slam before to be your judges.” The idea is to “engage people, so that they’re rooting for a poet, trying to pay attention to who’s winning,” and in turn it pushes poets to consider their audience. Success onstage can translate to the page, as Anderson’s own poem demonstrates. He also cites Patricia Smith, who would blow away the competition when she performed in slams, and who is now recognized as a major American poet in literary and academic circles.

Slam poetry for Anderson was a place to start, but it’s not what sustains him now. Why isn’t he competing anymore? Because it no longer feels genuine for him up there. “It used to be the biggest thing, like being a rockstar.” He is more in background of Broken Mic now, not hosting anymore. “It was a good time to pass it on, good for it grow organically away.” In his poetry he composes pieces that will read equally effectively both on the page and aloud. He usually has some kind of a picture of audience in mind, internalizing the reader/listener in his work.

He has also been exploring the philosophy of language games. To take an example, I am struck again by how poetry reveals completely new meaning in the most ordinary words as we discuss the ambiguity of the pronoun “we” in his poem. “We” could be people who were there with him, literally; it could also be the poet and any reader who reads the poem, who has been there in the sense of the idiom, “Yeah, tell me about it. I’ve been there.” For everyone has a version of this story, equally valid. Human life, like summer, is fleeting. We all have a need to deal with the desperation that comes with realizing this, and we have all felt a youthful sense of urgency about it.

One other possibility is that “we” are anyone who can look back and laugh. Wanting “to save poetry” is hilarious, we agree. The next line is

because everyone laughed at us

It’s no fun explaining a joke, but still I ask Anderson to humor me. He goes on: “I have some distance from that feeling of being just on the forefront, of doing the coolest thing that’s ever been done. Every generation thinks they’re the one, everyone who stumbles into the basement rock show feels they’re the one” who is going to save poetry.

That word “save” has a particular weight, too--economic, theological, and aesthetic. In the midst of laughing at ourselves, sometimes poets and readers of poetry do get concerned that “poetry is not reaching out and grabbing people.”

Can poetry grab you in a classroom, or from the bottom shelf of a library? Or must it be down in a basement or out on a patio? Must poetry come as a discovery in the world?

“Huge personal engagement to an art form,” Anderson believes, comes with “feeling that there are stakes for you with an art.” Commonly it’s music that moves people this way, more so than poetry, he suggests. Music--whether mainstream, indie, or classical--moves us, and it makes sense that poetry, which we hear like music, only less often, would do the same, only less often.

If the only experience we had of music was reading sheet notation in school, people probably wouldn’t be as excited about it.

“We tend to try to form our identity counter to who we’re supposed to be at school or at work, but this is not to say there aren’t seeds from those places,” Anderson says. Part of what he does now is visiting schools and colleges, talking, performing, organizing and spreading the word.

Saturday, February 3, 2018

The Righteous Mind and From Under the Rubble, plus a podcast

In The Righteous Mind, Jonathan Haidt helpfully summarizes his points neatly as he goes, and he compresses a convincing hypothesis supported by a myriad of wide-ranging studies into a few concrete images: the elephant of emotive intuition and the rider of post-hoc rationalization, or again the individual as 90% chimp and 10% bee. In the light of the later image, apropos of our "hivishness," the Dionysian counterpart, if you like, to our individual construction of meaning, I was struck by the aptness of the following quotes:

In The Direction of Change, in Solzhenitsyn's anthology From Under the Rubble, the anonymous A. B. writes: "But as we already know, the fallacy of all revolutions is that they are strong and concrete on the negative and destructive side, and limp and abstract on the positive and creative side. This is how Dostoevsky defined the underlying cause: 'The bee knows the formula of its hive and the ant the formula of its anthills, but man does not know his formula.' The reason why man does not know his formula is that, unlike the bee and the ant, which are not free, man is free. Freedom is man's formula, bu he will never find it so long as he seeks it in parties and ideologies, however good they may be in themselves."

And he goes on: "This freedom is not man's 'natural' inheritance, but rather the aim of his life and a 'supernatural' gift. 'Servitude to sin' is how Christianity defines the normal condition of man's soul and it summons man to free himself from this servitude." (147)

In the following piece by Evgeny Barabanov, Schism Between the Church and the World, another echo of that Raskolnikovian phrase, "to speak a new word": "The Church closes up on itself, hoping to wait out the siege, then suddenly revolts and hurls anathemas, but ends up by trying to speak in that alien language imposed form outside. But how, in those circumstances, is it possible to speak about things that have been expressed only in the unchangeable language of Christian Hellenism or medieval scholasticism?...But then it is a long time since the Church seemed once and for all to renounce any desire to create cultural values or a new language for religious culture itself. It seemed to have overstrained itself in the period of its medieval supremacy." (190)

I thought about that a bit, how if we speak of the Church as a body, it is certainly one with its own elephant and a rider perched atop. How if we speak of it as a paradox of freedom and servitude, answering to our own lived experience, it at least makes it more difficult to dismiss as a simply superstitious/oppressive reliquary. And if it is a kind of personality, made in our image, then it, too, need only strive to turn the other cheek, to write in the dust, in response to those most subtle critiques of, say, Pullman.

More on that another time, no doubt. Here's the next installment in the podcast conversation with Alex Schmid: episode 021.