Tuesday, November 15

The Story of B

Last night as I forced myself to go to bed because I knew I had class in the morning, I was disturbed by the clock at my bedside. I have a clock by my bed in order to wake me up in time for class. While it is a brand new clock, it works in the same way as older clocks: it makes a ticking sound constantly (this is what disturbed me last night. I can still hear it as a part of the background noise that I never pay attention to even now- along with the hum of the refrigerator and the soft grinding sound going on inside my laptop and a sound I can't identify that may be related to the air conditioning of the dorm) and its alarm functions mechanically- by a hammer banging in to two bells very rapidly (and obnoxiously).

There is a poem by Pedro Arrupe that I'd like to share-

Nothing is more practical than
finding God, that is, than
falling in love
in a quite absolute, final way.
What you are in love with,
what siezes your imagination,
will affect everything. It will decide
what will get you out of bed
in the morning,
what you do with your evenings,
how you spend your weekends,
what you read, who you know,
what breaks your heart,
and what amazes you with
joy and gratitude.
Fall in love, stay in love,
and it will decide everything.

What I love should be what gets me out of bed in the morning, but it hit me this morning that I do not love being forced to wake up at a certain time to go listen to someone talk at me about things I'm not even awake enough to care about. Of course this isn't the first time this has hit me; it was just rather poignant this morning. Waking up to the terror of an alarming sound is no way to start a day, but it is the only way to rip me out of my natural sleeping cycle. Perhaps it's not such a good thing to be ripped out of my natural sleeping cycle.

I just read The Story of B by Daniel Quinn. It is the sequel to Ishmael (there is also a third in the series, which I will read soon). In it, a priest is sent to spy on the possible antichrist, B. *Partial Spoiler Warning* B does turn out to be the antichrist- not only the antichrist, but the antibuddha, the antimuhammad, and the antithesis of any other person who attempted to lead people to salvation. People seek such salvation because of the suffering caused by our culture- poverty, hunger, isolation. Notice I did not say that this suffering is present because all of humanity has fallen, only our culture. Our culture, as I am using the word, spans most of the world and is composed of people who believe that the earth belongs to us (our culture) and that we may use it however we want. In effect, this most fundamentally plays out in our method of agriculture, in which everything that is our food is preserved and proliferated and everything that does not directly feed us, or that which threatens our food in any way, is destroyed as completely as possible. This way of living eventually leads to its own downfall because it is an unstable way to live, and evolutionarily speaking, unstable methods pass away and stable ones persist. It has taken a long time (relative to our perspective) for the signs of our culture breaking down to surface, but surface they certainly have. Humans did not always live this way, and they don't need to. Salvation from this world is not needed. What is needed is the abandonment of our culture. Humans didn't always have to be woken up by obnoxious and startling bells; humans used to be thrilled about their life in this world, here and now. And that is why B is the antichrist- B tells us we don't need salvation, and that is blasphemous. It is also true.

The priest in the story describes the possession of faith being in one degree, but the losing of faith being in fifty degrees. That is, there is one degree in which you have absolute faith, but there a gradual process of one's faith being chipped away over time. Eventually, though, it is possible to reach the fiftieth degree, at which point, all of your faith is gone. I'm not sure where I am at, but my guess is somewhere in the forties. The faith I am losing is the faith in the need for a salvation and a salvific God. This is a faith that sets us apart as being above and in possession of the rest of Nature and also serves as an escape from this world, directing us away from the present. We are a part of Nature- we are Nature- it is not possible for us to get away from Nature, and it is unnecessary to get closer to Nature. To paraphrase the book (all of this is a paraphrase of the book, by the way), we are just as "close" to Nature when we are in a movie theater as when we are in the middle of a forest. It cannot be escaped. To fight against Nature is to fight against ourselves, and to be in communion with Nature is nothing more than to be human. I don't mean this in any idealistic or hippie "back to the land" sort of communion. We are dependent on nature for our existence. It is our source of food. We could not be without food. And we will one day return the favor by becoming food ourselves. That's how things work. But as humans, we have the benefit of being able to see that that is how things work, and through that, we can experience the world as a spiritual place. This is the one religion every culture outside our own shares- animism. Sorry, that was a really quick summary, and I'm sure I did not express what I was trying to say very well. But, hey, maybe that just means you have to read the book yourself (it is an enjoyable read).
The way of life I see forming before me as ideal is a sort of tribalism in which the tribe is largely self-sufficient. Of course, there is a fundamental difficulty in jumpstarting a tribe in our culture- locating potential tribe members. I have the rather lofty goal of removing myself completely from use of money, but I do know that this will be a gradual process of dropping out, and the important thing is to minimize reliance on the system. A former classmate of mine, Mario, questioned my goals a while ago, saying that I'd just become part of the problem (that I'd burden the rest of society with my choice of monetary poverty), but it is certainly not my intent to burden society. I wish to have zero effect on the health of society- there is enough stress already; it's already going to crumble regardless of what I burden it with. With that foreknowledge in mind, my intent is to remove myself from the processes that are at odds with the health (the rapidly declining health, I might add) of the earth and hopefully share with more people a vision for how things could work after our culture completes its fall. That vision is still in its infancy, in my mind at least, but it is growing in fullness with every passing day.

8 comments:

  1. WARNING::This reply may contain sarcasm unsuitable for those with less than two hours sleep...

    I've never heard a more exquisite rationale for being lazy! "Perhaps it's not such a good thing to be ripped out of my natural sleeping cycle." I'm gonna puke!! Your "natural" sleeping cycle would put you in bed shortly after dark and wake you up at dawn. You know that when you start up, or join, that commune you keep hinting at, you're gonna have to get up early to milk the goats (or maybe just try to convince them to give you milk). Until then, get your butt into bed at a reasonalbe hour and you won't have to worry about sleeping in, or sleepwalking to, class.

    I mean, if you're gonna sleep through the morning, at least make it due to late night beer and Monty Python, NOT some anti-social, atheist author. What ARE those Jesuits doing to you!!??

    Long live the Knights-who-say-Ni!

    ReplyDelete
  2. It's funny- I first read your comment after getting back from the SOA protest, which means I had gotten very little sleep. And now I've read it relatively well rested (8 hours of sleep (turned off the alarm before it went off)). But I can't seem to find a time when your sarcasm is "suitable". How do I respond to sarcasm? With more sarcasm? Or is that the point- it doesn't allow me to respond easily. The only way I can find is to take your words at face value (ie seriously) and respond to what you said. I never said that I want to sleep through every morning, but sometimes, yes, I do enjoy staying up late and would consequently enjoy sleeping in. On the whole, however, I would love to be able to go to bed after sunset and wake up at dawn. I stay up so late because the things I do during that time, things I actually want to be doing, cannot fit in to daylight time, which is occupied by things that I'm told to do, so to speak.

    Please elaborate on how Daniel Quinn, the author to which you refer, is antisocial. I don't see it. I can see where you'd think he's atheist. He doesn't give his personal philosophy or theology in the book, it's a novel in which he describes animism (a religion). I don't know if this matters to you, but after reading that book, I've been able to pray for the first time in a long time. It effectively pulled me out of my brief stay in atheism.

    I know monty python is a quality movie, and I understand some people enjoy beating up their livers (personally, I don't enjoy the idea of intentionally poisoning my body), but that's no reason to slam my choice of reading.

    None of this is a direct result of the Jesuits. It was the foreman at the construction company that recommended I read Daniel Quinn. I suppose the Jesuits have taught me to be reflective and always discerning, and this is a part of that. Regardless, please don't blame the Jesuits. This is my education (you know, that one that I'm mysteriously producing by myself). Bringing up the Jesuits was a red herring. Please direct your attacks at me when the subject being attacked is solely taken up and carried out by me.

    Long live shrubbery!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'd think that you'd probably be better prepared to read my commentary (aka sarcasm) when in need of some kind of a purge. I'd suggest when sitting on the "terlet", with a puking can and kleenex in close proximity. Then when your body spontaneously and explosively rejects my Danfoolery all portals of exit will be properly situated.

    Merriam-Webster (www.m-w.com) defines antisocial as "2. hostile or harmful to organized society." I guess, that definition may not describe him, buy might describe some of the ideas you've embraced about organized society, although your external self, from what I've experienced, doesn't seem yet to fit the bill. You currently seem more like one suspicious or cynical of organized society. Or more accurately, society as it is currently organized. So, I'll retract the anti-social description.

    But don't kid yourself that authors don't give their own personal philosophies in what they write. Everything that an author writes originates in his or her will to move an idea from their intellect to the page. And whatever theme a book champions is the author's philosophy, unless that author is nothing but greedy and a hypocrite writing not that which they believe, but that which sells.

    I'm happy to hear that you've begun to seek again. There is only one Way to get the answers you seek. Seek and ye shall find; knock and it shall be opened. The Author of Life became the main character in the story of creation, so that we could again relate to God in a personal way lost in "the fall." The Christian theory, replete with 2000 years of mind-boggling success stories, is so gloriously perfect that meditation upon it (during the intermission in "the Holy Grail" among other times) inspires in me canticles of praise such as expressed in that good 'ol Protestant hymn "How Great Thou Art". It's no accident that societies where Christianity is allowed unfettered freedom to flourish are measurably more peaceful and just than those where Christianity is suppressed or persecuted.

    You may never get used to it, but Jesuits have been the subject of much Catholic humor over the years. Making jokes referencing them is the most pacifist way of dealing with some of their "evangelization" methods. I mean, being a punchline is the mildest of responses to a group of Catholic religious who'd host "The Vagina Monologues"!!

    Mmmmmmm, I can smell the turkey now!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dear Tom,

    I see that you have read The Story of B by Daniel Quinn. If you're ever interested in seeking out other "like-minded" Ishmael readers, please feel free to visit IshCon. www.ishcon.org

    Keep up the great work!

    Curt

    ReplyDelete
  5. Uncle Dan,
    Sorry- I misspoke about the author's personal philosophy thing. I knew that, I just didn't develop the point I was trying to make. From what the book says, we can then assume that Daniel Quinn is an animist (to use the only name available). In the book he also says (through one of the characters) that it is irrelevant whether a particular animist culture believed in many gods, one god, or no god. Animism does not necessarily have a theology, but it is a religion. This ambiguity in the number or presence of gods in animism is what led me to say that the author does not disclose his personal view. That is what I should have said.

    When I said that I had prayed for the first time in a while, it was probably not what you would have called prayer. I did not pray to God, per se, especially not the Christian (and Jewish and Muslim) God that everyone else was praying to. I ended up leaving the Catholic Church primarily because of their lack of a full love and acceptance of homosexuals (and I'm not talking about the homosexuals virtually castrated by a morality that mandates them to a celibate life because the Church thinks they're objectively disordered). And now, I've ended up leaving Christianity because of its justification of human domination of the earth. I assume the "unfettered freedom" in which Christianity is allowed to flourish is in reference to the United States, which, not so coincidentally, is also the leader in dominating the earth, turning every last living subject into a dead object like money.

    Sure, Jesuits could be mocked. I think the two of us would mock them for different reasons. I'm not sure you understand what the word pacifism means, because I don't think jokes were one of the tactics used by Gandhi or MLK. I have yet to see the Vagina Monologues; have you? But from what I hear, it is a wonderful seminar in enriching and encouraging the equality of women and men. I know I'll be going to see it this february. You can come with me if you want.

    Weren't the sweet potatoes delicious?!

    ReplyDelete
  6. The sweet potatoes were awesome! I like the chunky-applesauce character they possessed. My brother Mike whips his yams (don't go there!) which makes 'em too smooth. Your mammy hit a home run with them, most indubitably.

    I haven't seen it. I've read reviews aplenty about it. I can understand the reason they play at campuses alot. There's a period most of us go through that eschews standards, sexual mores being the the easiest one whose bonds we are to be "freed" from. And if one concludes that there is no God, then naturally there can be no standard from which to judge an action, especially something as intimately connected to a person as their sexual expression. The majority of humankind (with the greatest majority living life in a society where adults are more occupied with supplying their daily bread than being preoccupied with the crotchular region) embrace the idea of there being a standard. They may behave somewhat hypocritically in regards to their sexuality, what we call "sin", but they still in their conscience call it "sin". Although I haven't seen a crucifixion, I can still comment on "reports" of them made by witnesses. Therefore, from what I've read, it seems that the VM is just a bunch of tired old washed-up sad-skank feminists who get their jollies from being applauded for talking about their crotch. I could be wrong, but after you've seen it, please report back to me your opinion about the taste or tastelessness of a scene featuring conversations with a 6-year-old girl or the one of a teenager being introduced to her sexuality by an adult. That's Entertainment?? Regardless, it'll be an intellectual growth experience for you, at the very least. Now, if "A Man For All Seasons" come to SLU, I'm there, baby!

    I'm interested... have you concluded that Christianity is false? If you have, then I can understand you leaving it. Jesus, if that's his REAL name, made it pretty clear that there was no wiggle room about his teaching; accept or reject en toto, with the consequences spelled out.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Uncle,
    Vagina Monologues- directly from their website (www.vday.org if you want to go there)(the CNS refered to is the Cardinal Newman Society):

    MISINFORMATION: CNS describes "The Vagina Monologues" as a "vulgar play", "complete with a favorable reminiscence about a lesbian seduction of a 16-year-old girl" and "explicit discussions of sexuality and sexual encounters including lesbian activity and masturbation."

    REALITY: The monologue referred to reflects the real-life experience of a real woman who was interviewed by Eve Ensler. The monologue accurately reports the woman's experience.

    The pieces in "The Vagina Monologues" are all reflections of real women's experiences. Some of the stories are not politically correct, but they are all real. It is important to allow all of the voices of women to be heard, regardless of how we personally feel about their experiences, as violence against women happens everywhere affecting one in three women worldwide.

    "The Vagina Monologues" has been successful as a play in part because it inspires reflection and thought among audience members, and dialogue among people who have seen the play. The Vagina Monologues has proven vastly liberating because it gives voice to experiences and feelings not previously exposed in public, and reflects how shame and self-deprecating thoughts of women’s bodies has kept women separate from power and pleasure. The overwhelming response to the play was mobilized by grassroots organizations who recognize how negative attitudes towards women’s bodies contribute to violence perpetrated against women by men and by themselves.

    Violence against women happens everywhere affecting one in three women worldwide. V-Day envisions a world where women live safely and freely. Each year V-Day continues to grow and inspire women and men throughout the world to help create V-World, a place where women and girls are free from violence. V-Day will continue this mission until the violence stops.

    MISINFORMATION: "The play is a collection of monologues by women describing their personal stories, replete with vulgarity, frequent use of 'vagina' to represent women and femininity.

    REALITY: The word ‘vagina’ is indeed used frequently in the play – to break the silence and the censorship of a word that does indeed represent women both physical and metaphysically as a feminine being. If you can't say it, then you can't own it. If you can't own it, then you can't protect it. If it's violated, you can't protest or complain.

    In a major shift "The Vagina Monologues" and V-Day empowers women and men to hear and speak openly about sexual violence. Once women have had an opportunity to discuss experiences of violence in a venue of safety and security, they learn they are no longer alone with their pain.

    NOTE: It is always essential to read or see a play before commenting on its content. It is important to note that performances of "The Vagina Monologues" do not "show" anything in the literal sense - it is a fact-based series of monologues, spoken or read by the performers.

    ReplyDelete
  8. If a man were to put on a play about the male organ with the theme similar to the V-monologues, he would (rightly) be (except in San Francisco and other Sodomopolises) considered a pervert, and if he described his homosexual advances on underaged children he would (or should) be investigated and prosecuted for any crimes (you know, like those priests you probably think were properly charged, right?) he committed.

    I don't have to actually "see" the crucifix immersed in a jar of urine and cow's blood to understand that Andres Serrano has to have serious character flaws in order to hoard his own urine for weeks to produce his Piss Christ "esoteric" art... I just have to let my intellect register the proper disgust at his being proud of them.

    ReplyDelete