I recently received a lovely one-volume Oxford Complete Works of Shakespeare, as Shakespeare has long been a favorite playwright of mine. Despite having lived more than four hundred years ago, his plays speak to modern concerns about militarism (Coriolanus), relations between church and state (King Henry VIII, King John), the difference between fantasy and reality (The Tempest, A Winter's Tale, A Midsummer Night's Dream), the problems of feminism (Taming of the Shrew, All's Well That Ends Well), the problems of legitimacy of authority (all of the historical plays, especially Richard II and Richard III, as well as Henry V, besides Macbeth and Hamlet, and other plays besides this), racism (The Merchant of Venice, Othello), problems in dealing with old age (King Lear), the problems of premature romance (Romeo & Juliet), the effects of moral depravity on society (Trolius and Cressida, Measure For Measure), the difficulties in maintaining one's morality in a corrupt society (Measure For Measure as well as Perseus) and so on and so forth. Rare among fiction authors, there are few areas of human behavior that Shakespeare does not touch on in his 40 plays (this includes the 36 plays of his first folio, Perseus, The Two Noble Kinsmen, Edward III, and the long lost Cardenio).
However, today I would like to discuss an odd character perhaps best exemplified in Twelfth Night's Feste and King Lear's Fool, something that this society could probably use more of. That is the phenomenon of the wise fool. Both of these characters are the wisest and most clear-headed of all the characters in their respective plays. The fool had a valuable place in the society of the Middle Ages and the early modern period. The fool, rare among people, had freedom of speech, and was expected to make witty and sarcastic comments about rulers and courtiers alike. In a society (not unlike many parts of our own society) where flattery of leaders was treasured and bluntspoken honesty was not, the fool could speak the truth, and would find his words laughed at and appreciated rather than punished and censured. This is because the fool had no political ambitions, and his honesty and skill at witty sarcasm earned him his keep, rather than the decietful words of lying advisors with their own personal agendas. A wise ruler paid close attention to his fool, and woe falls to the ruler who does not keep an honest fool (like Richard II) or does not pay sufficient attention to his fool (King Lear).
Indeed, Shakespeare's plays are set up so that those characters who mock fools, even in comedies (Twelfth Night's Malvolio) end up badly. This is because Shakespeare's fools, though their language is sometimes cryptic (though most often not terribly difficult to discover), are quite honest truthtellers. Perhaps Shakespeare saw himself as a bit of a fool--his job being to entertain the public, but also seeing himself as a wise and knowledgeable spectator of human behavior, capable of delivering great insight to those who took his words seriously. Indeed, it is the disguising of great wisdom in the guise of folly (because most people, except the most tiresome and serious among us, will choose frivolity and entertainment over serious subjects) that allows his points to sink home so well, and accounts for his lasting fame and his appeal to scholarly minds and constant reinterpretations (witness the recent movies Ten Things I Hate About You, O, She's The Man, besides the various Kenneth Barnaugh adaptations of Shakespeare's plays). Shakespeare neither bored his audience by being too serious (he would throw in passionate lovers, mistaken identities, fighting, songs, and spectacles to keep the peanut gallery entertained), but he never sold out to merely creating worthless entertainment. Even his most superficial of plays contains much of depth and interest that is worthy of serious reflection. This is because Shakespeare himself was quite astute in viewing people and had a solid grounding in classical literature from the sacred (the Bible), to historical works in his own language (Holinshed's Chronicles), as well as classic literature in several languages (Latin, Italian, and French, at the very least).
It is a shame we in our modern society suffer from a lack of wise fools. That is not to say we do not have fools (I would consider myself one, and in various fashions I am sure others would agree--some in the friendlier sense of a Feste, others perhaps in a more Proverbial sense for those more hostile). Our society has no lack of people who speak and write as experts on subjects, but these people all seem to be motivated by some kind of positional ambition or some kind of ulterior motives and thus are difficult to trust. Instead of the reminders of King Lear's fool about the need for social justice, we have films made by politically ambitious actors ("Syriana") or dramatically challenged failed politicians ("An Inconvenient Truth"). In short, we have plenty of self-proclaimed wise men, and plenty of fools, but no wise fools whose truth-telling is divorced from political spin and the need to dissemble for one's own ambitions of wealth, power, and influence. The wise fool is necessary precisely because he is free of such concerns, and so can fulfill the request of David in Psalm 141:5 to provide stinging, but ultimately beneficial, truth. A wise fool specializes in constructive critism--never going overboard either with flattery or with railing and hostile accusations. Personally, it is a balance I myself wish to find--someday...
Thursday, June 22, 2006
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Brief Father's Day Reflections....
This Father's Day Ihad the chance to see my best friend and his daughter, just over a year old, just learning how to walk, and very curious about her surroundings. As a frequent spectator of other people, it was interesting to see the trust that was there between parent and child. The little one would run out a slight distance (no more than fifteen feet) and then run back to be held safely. Such things are deeply touching, and a reflection of how life ought to be.
It was nice to spend father's day with my friends, even if my tennis game was cancelled on account of lightning. Spending time with friends (at any rate, not spending it alone in social misanthropy) is a valuable thing, and I am thankful to have friends. It is especially valuable on a day like Father's Day, where for the first time I must mourn the passing of my father, rather than buy him dryly humorous and somewhat mocking father's day cards that poke fun of the passage of time. That said, it is late, and though there is much I wish to say, there is no time, so I must bid farewell until another day.
P.S. Anonymous posting is now disabled. Nathan out.
It was nice to spend father's day with my friends, even if my tennis game was cancelled on account of lightning. Spending time with friends (at any rate, not spending it alone in social misanthropy) is a valuable thing, and I am thankful to have friends. It is especially valuable on a day like Father's Day, where for the first time I must mourn the passing of my father, rather than buy him dryly humorous and somewhat mocking father's day cards that poke fun of the passage of time. That said, it is late, and though there is much I wish to say, there is no time, so I must bid farewell until another day.
P.S. Anonymous posting is now disabled. Nathan out.
Tuesday, June 06, 2006
Coming From Where I'm From
In communication, it is vitally important to know one's audience. If one is going to communicate effectively to others, one has to know the hopes and fears of those one is speaking with (or writing to), what issues (and words) set them off, and the motivations and experiences of the audience. Often, what works very well for one person or group of people may fail miserably with a different audience. In speaking, or in targeted writing (e-mails, letters, etc.), one has a definite audience in mind, and should write or speak accordingly. In cases such as this blog, for example, it is notoriously difficult to know exactly who my audience is. In such a case as this I know my audience generally from comments (thank you, brave respondents) as well as from the occasional complaints, often relayed via third parties (I would hope I am not that unapproachable of a person). If it were possible, I would speak in a way that would be true to my own experiences as well as avoid causing offense to those whose generational persepctive and personal experiences do not match with my own. To a large extent, this is not possible, and so I leave room for those who take issue with my words to speak to me and request clarification or explanation.
I recently had a rather stern debate with an older person before services. Now, I am not the sort of person who goes looking for debates, but I do tend to be somewhat prickly when people begin insulting my generation (of which I am a vociferous and fierce defender). So a somewhat cranky older person decides to take a swipe at me and comment that he is fifty years older than me, asking me if I had anything to tell him. I asked him if his time was well spent, and he proceeded to go into a litany about how young people lack discline and a sense of obedience to their elders, and gave the rather tired comment that our generation feels overly entitled (while this may be true in large part, I concede, I have to say we learned from the best in the previous generation, made of up largely whiny middle aged people, including this gentleman, who themselves have felt entitled their entire lives, and show little sign of stopping now). In the end, as we verbally fenced about his military experiences (I decided to charitably pass on without mention on his litigious ways of suing and appealing for early social security and medicare so that he can receive his living and health insurance off of my diligent labor) and about the situations and conditions where obedience to God and man is necessary (we both agreed that obedience to God is not contingent on everything, and agreed that where man's commands contradict God's we are duty bound to disobey the orders of human beings), we were not particularly far apart as far as where we stood.
That is not to say that there were not levels of disagreement (he tended to look nostalgically on certain rather authoritarian figures that I feel much more ambivalent about, and he gave less room for legitimate dissent), but our differences were more about words than about beliefs. The way he expressed himself about the ideal younger generation struck me as seeking a mindless and robotic obedience, and no one should expect anything mindless about anything I do. "Because I said so" does not suffice as a reason, and it is good to some extent that the culture of deference is no more. That said, the general collapse of credibility among authority figures is not without extreme difficulties and major problems. It would be nice if leaders could be trusted, but as they cannot be trusted, we should act accordingly and not pretend otherwise. We must judge orders and the actions of others on a case-by-case basis, and cannot assume that others have our best interests at heart without proof.
It is here where the differences between us were most profound. Our differences in language (which were largely reflective of generational differences, but in my case colored rather strongly by personal experience) were reflective of the differences in trust between the two of us. His trust allows him to grant a wide latitude towards authority figures, where as my mistrust does not. To him, until proven otherwise, leaders exert their power for good. To me, until proven otherwise, those with power are an active threat to my well-being and security. Even to the extent that both of us agree that obedience to man's laws (and, less seriously, orders and requests from other authority figures like bosses and so forth) where they do not contradict God's laws (and both of us do agree on that point), the emphasis we choose to make and the level of trust forms a huge and rather suspicious gulf. He (and no doubt others who share his perspective) sees my suspicion (and that of other young people) as rebelliousness, a lack of discipline, and a lack of the honor and respect he feels entitled to.
As a young person, I am all to aware (if not particularly thrilled) with the fact that it is necessary for me to pay my dues and show myself worthy of respect, especially as there is a natural suspicion of older people for me as well as the age group I represent. That said, there are mutual expecations. I expect others to pay their dues as well. If older generations wish to be respected by young people, there are obligations they must meet as well. These include wise counsel (demonstrated not merely in words, but in actions, because I find it difficult in my life to find anyone who sets a positive example for me to follow in many areas). They also include opportunities for mentoring (again, I have a difficult time finding anyone who could be a worthy mentor). They also include a commitment to providing opportunities for responsibility (this is an area in which older generations have, in my experience, shown themselves worthy) as well as provide honor and respect for a job well done, rather than only insults and ridicule and censure. It is easier to give honor and respect when it is due when one receives it when it is due also.
It is difficult for me to convey my own life experiences in ways that older generations would understand, and the reverse is certainly true. Their life experiences and social environment is much different from my own, and I do not know if the gap can be bridged based on the current sort of communication that goes on. What they have as memories, often nostalgic memories, are for me historical knowledge that bring no joy and are often tinged with more than a little envy and regret. Both sides of the gulf have expectations of the other that are not fulfilled, and there seems to be little way of communicating the mutual unmet needs and wants across the distance of language and time unless both are willing to step halfway. When and if that happens, who can know? For now, though, it appears my interlocutor and I are stuck on opposite sides looking warily at each other, each waiting for the other to take the first step.
I recently had a rather stern debate with an older person before services. Now, I am not the sort of person who goes looking for debates, but I do tend to be somewhat prickly when people begin insulting my generation (of which I am a vociferous and fierce defender). So a somewhat cranky older person decides to take a swipe at me and comment that he is fifty years older than me, asking me if I had anything to tell him. I asked him if his time was well spent, and he proceeded to go into a litany about how young people lack discline and a sense of obedience to their elders, and gave the rather tired comment that our generation feels overly entitled (while this may be true in large part, I concede, I have to say we learned from the best in the previous generation, made of up largely whiny middle aged people, including this gentleman, who themselves have felt entitled their entire lives, and show little sign of stopping now). In the end, as we verbally fenced about his military experiences (I decided to charitably pass on without mention on his litigious ways of suing and appealing for early social security and medicare so that he can receive his living and health insurance off of my diligent labor) and about the situations and conditions where obedience to God and man is necessary (we both agreed that obedience to God is not contingent on everything, and agreed that where man's commands contradict God's we are duty bound to disobey the orders of human beings), we were not particularly far apart as far as where we stood.
That is not to say that there were not levels of disagreement (he tended to look nostalgically on certain rather authoritarian figures that I feel much more ambivalent about, and he gave less room for legitimate dissent), but our differences were more about words than about beliefs. The way he expressed himself about the ideal younger generation struck me as seeking a mindless and robotic obedience, and no one should expect anything mindless about anything I do. "Because I said so" does not suffice as a reason, and it is good to some extent that the culture of deference is no more. That said, the general collapse of credibility among authority figures is not without extreme difficulties and major problems. It would be nice if leaders could be trusted, but as they cannot be trusted, we should act accordingly and not pretend otherwise. We must judge orders and the actions of others on a case-by-case basis, and cannot assume that others have our best interests at heart without proof.
It is here where the differences between us were most profound. Our differences in language (which were largely reflective of generational differences, but in my case colored rather strongly by personal experience) were reflective of the differences in trust between the two of us. His trust allows him to grant a wide latitude towards authority figures, where as my mistrust does not. To him, until proven otherwise, leaders exert their power for good. To me, until proven otherwise, those with power are an active threat to my well-being and security. Even to the extent that both of us agree that obedience to man's laws (and, less seriously, orders and requests from other authority figures like bosses and so forth) where they do not contradict God's laws (and both of us do agree on that point), the emphasis we choose to make and the level of trust forms a huge and rather suspicious gulf. He (and no doubt others who share his perspective) sees my suspicion (and that of other young people) as rebelliousness, a lack of discipline, and a lack of the honor and respect he feels entitled to.
As a young person, I am all to aware (if not particularly thrilled) with the fact that it is necessary for me to pay my dues and show myself worthy of respect, especially as there is a natural suspicion of older people for me as well as the age group I represent. That said, there are mutual expecations. I expect others to pay their dues as well. If older generations wish to be respected by young people, there are obligations they must meet as well. These include wise counsel (demonstrated not merely in words, but in actions, because I find it difficult in my life to find anyone who sets a positive example for me to follow in many areas). They also include opportunities for mentoring (again, I have a difficult time finding anyone who could be a worthy mentor). They also include a commitment to providing opportunities for responsibility (this is an area in which older generations have, in my experience, shown themselves worthy) as well as provide honor and respect for a job well done, rather than only insults and ridicule and censure. It is easier to give honor and respect when it is due when one receives it when it is due also.
It is difficult for me to convey my own life experiences in ways that older generations would understand, and the reverse is certainly true. Their life experiences and social environment is much different from my own, and I do not know if the gap can be bridged based on the current sort of communication that goes on. What they have as memories, often nostalgic memories, are for me historical knowledge that bring no joy and are often tinged with more than a little envy and regret. Both sides of the gulf have expectations of the other that are not fulfilled, and there seems to be little way of communicating the mutual unmet needs and wants across the distance of language and time unless both are willing to step halfway. When and if that happens, who can know? For now, though, it appears my interlocutor and I are stuck on opposite sides looking warily at each other, each waiting for the other to take the first step.
Thursday, June 01, 2006
Growing Up Grimaldi
The Grimaldis are one of Europe's oldest dynasties, little princlets of Monaco. Recently, though, this wealthy microstate (much smaller than the new nation of Montenegro) has fallen somewhat on hard times. When Prince Ranier died, his son Albert took the throne. Albert has never married, and thus has no legitimate heirs. However, he now has to add another illegitimate child to the list (his second confirmed one to date), a 14 year old Palm Springs girl (I've seen her birth certificate, but there is no point in naming her) who is the daughter of a former waitress who conceived the regal love-child while on vacation in Monaco. The mother of Albert's first recognized heir is a Togolese (that is, inhabitant of Togo, a slender West African nation next to Ghana) flight attendant.
It seems that Mr. Grimaldi has rather unusual state for his baby mamas (and I use this in the technical sense). Here he is, a multi-millionare, among the wealthiest rulers on the face of the earth, and yet his children do not come from a wife (he is unmarried), nor even mistresses, but rather flings. At least one admirable thing may be said about him--he is rather egalitarian in his tastes of women (he even apparently shows no racial prejudices, in that at least one of his children is bi-racial). At least these positive things may be said about him, because although he appears to have no problem fathering children, he does have difficulty (from all appearances) in finding the right kind of woman to settle down with.
There are apparently not that many classy and eligible ladies who would wish to marry a prince these days, I assume. His mother was Grace Kelly, an actress to be sure, but a classy and elegant one. Even beyond marriage, though, it appears that Prince Albert has a hard time finding someone worth dating or courting. I'm sure he could take the advice the rather fluffy rom-com (that is, romantic comedy) "The Prince and Me" and find a nice college girl to date. After all, his eldest child will, in the next few years, be looking at college, and will be flagrantly inelegible for financial aid now that she is the recognized daughter of the Prince of Monaco. So, while the Prince (we presume, or his handlers) is looking around at nice colleges for his firstborn daughter, perhaps he could find a classy lady for himself. After all, in this day and age, bastardy can get rather expensive.
I do feel bad for the young lady, though. She has all sorts of reporters and investigators around her school. Hopefully she can receive some sort of renumeration for what is likely to be a lot of unfriendly attention. As for the Prince, let us hope that his wild days are over. Child support is expensive, especialy when you're worth hundreds of millions of dollars. One hopes that, even if belatedly, Albert will prove to be a good father. He certainly looks to have some practice to come in the near future in that regard.
It seems that Mr. Grimaldi has rather unusual state for his baby mamas (and I use this in the technical sense). Here he is, a multi-millionare, among the wealthiest rulers on the face of the earth, and yet his children do not come from a wife (he is unmarried), nor even mistresses, but rather flings. At least one admirable thing may be said about him--he is rather egalitarian in his tastes of women (he even apparently shows no racial prejudices, in that at least one of his children is bi-racial). At least these positive things may be said about him, because although he appears to have no problem fathering children, he does have difficulty (from all appearances) in finding the right kind of woman to settle down with.
There are apparently not that many classy and eligible ladies who would wish to marry a prince these days, I assume. His mother was Grace Kelly, an actress to be sure, but a classy and elegant one. Even beyond marriage, though, it appears that Prince Albert has a hard time finding someone worth dating or courting. I'm sure he could take the advice the rather fluffy rom-com (that is, romantic comedy) "The Prince and Me" and find a nice college girl to date. After all, his eldest child will, in the next few years, be looking at college, and will be flagrantly inelegible for financial aid now that she is the recognized daughter of the Prince of Monaco. So, while the Prince (we presume, or his handlers) is looking around at nice colleges for his firstborn daughter, perhaps he could find a classy lady for himself. After all, in this day and age, bastardy can get rather expensive.
I do feel bad for the young lady, though. She has all sorts of reporters and investigators around her school. Hopefully she can receive some sort of renumeration for what is likely to be a lot of unfriendly attention. As for the Prince, let us hope that his wild days are over. Child support is expensive, especialy when you're worth hundreds of millions of dollars. One hopes that, even if belatedly, Albert will prove to be a good father. He certainly looks to have some practice to come in the near future in that regard.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
