Anne Frank, Edward F. Green and Donald Trump
This is a theoretical paper, but not in the sense of being for an academic audience. I wrote it to drown out the deluge of reporting on Donald Trump running for the Republican nomination for president. In this country, he is mentioned in more newspaper articles than any other individual, as his latest statements take precedence over natural or geo-political activities that can affect, and destroy, the lives of thousands.
He has been called a demagogue by those who are polite, and the reincarnation of Hitler, by those who hate him. Well, he does have similarities to Hitler, but could it be the Hitler of 1932 who was offering hope for the restoration of dignity to his constituents, and was adored by the majority of Germans right until the tide of war turned?
Anne Frank, the other real human being of my trio, has become the face of hopeful innocence whose enduring persona only exists because of Hitler and his legacy of evil of The Holocaust. Both Hitler and Trump represent a resolution of the tensions of their times, the understanding of which are diminished by the focus on the individual. "Bigger than life" is a description of those whose actions and public perception do indeed obfuscate "life" meaning the mundane forces that have shaped the societies of such people. This is the meaning of the saying, "if he didn't actually exist, we would have had to invent him." Really, we did invent them or the mold for someone like the person who filled the role. .But while the drama is being played out, all we see is the person, now illuminated by a spotlight that throws vital background into darkness. So in the midst of volatile times such as we are now living through, fiction allows a clearer view of the unfolding of actual events.. By chronicling them, influencing the course of history.
As Abraham Lincoln purportedly said to the writer, of "Uncle Tom's Cabin," "so you are the little woman who wrote the book that started this great war." Whether he said the words or not, the suffering of fictional Uncle Tom, and his wife and children, did contribute to the expansion of abolitionist sentiment, the driving force of succession and ultimately civil war.
Explanatory concepts of causality, although written by knowledgeable historians rarely affect the course of history. This brings me to Mr. Green, (whom I added a first and middle name for verisimilitude) justified by my infinitesimally small part in creating him. For this I must take a digression that began on a tennis court in 1995:
I played occasionally with a man on the Riverside courts in
Manhattan, Jeff Baron, who one day asked if I would take a look at a draft a of his
manuscript for a play. I took it as a complement, since while only in his early thirties he had been a professional
writer for a popular television show, this unlike so many in this city who
have worked on screenplays or novels that have provided dreams of success that
sustained their less rewarding occupations for their entire lives.
I read it, then once again with more care. In my three page analysis
I complemented him on his vivid writing, and then wrote, "If you leave
it as it is, it will surely be a success among gays, but if you
want to go beyond this, you have to tone down your premise that
rejection of homosexuality is tantamount to the Nazi genocide of Jews."
Several years later, after the play, "Visiting Mr. Green" had
been translated into 23 languages with 400 productions in 45
countries, at a reading by the star, Eli Wallach in the General
Assembly building of the United Nations, I remarked that it had changed
since its earliest tryout in a summer stock performance. Jeff responded, "Al, did you think I hadn't paid attention to your criticism?"
Well, not too much attention. As
this play that helped change the course of western values still conveyed
the message that while rejecting homosexual orientation was similar to
the Nazi's hatred of Jews, it was a benign defect for the individual, who, if having a good heart, could transcend their experiences to become accepting of those who are different.
"Visiting Mr. Green" and "Uncle Tom's Cabin" can be seen as energizing what had been a more limited movement. Given how societies work, when enough individuals become motivated it is reflected in the political system, sometimes taking years; other times, as when the lifeless body of a single three year old was washed ashore on a beach, the most advanced federation of nations, the European Union, turned on a dime to open closed doors to vast numbers of refugees.
This event of the last year can not be explained by rational thought, or quantitative economic interests, but only by forces previously not well articulated. However, just as the child's death opened the floodgates of sympathy that could have changed the demographic makeup of Europe, the fragility of this decision was illustrated by it being slammed shut only months afterwards; with the unfortunate effect of increased support for right wing extremist parties throughout the region.
It is understanding of these forces, somewhat encapsulated by the word "zeitgeist"-- literally spirit of the times-- that must be raised above the cacophony of partisan sound bites if we are ever to understand and address the larger issues of our world.
I will explain exactly how to achieve this in the next installment!
(smiley face implied)
Wednesday, December 30, 2015
Monday, December 28, 2015
Have we saved the world yet? Intro
"The arc of history is long but bends towards justice."
What is the motivation for someone well past his prime, with no academic credentials, to presume to write something will answer the joking question of the 94 year old friend who hosts our post tennis group at McDonalds restaurant, "Have we saved the world, yet?"
One explanation is that what I have to say has not been said, or if so very very quietly, and often in a tone that either actually, or by imputation, is seen as abnormal, meaning invidiously not of the norms of society. Abnormal is only bad when the norms are promotive of consensually desired ends - and certainly not good when they prevent the kind of conversation that may redress the defects of any given society.
I am writing this "book" (you are reading an introduction) at a moment in history that augurs a flex-point in the "post holocaust era of redemption", a concept that hasn't become "a thing"; such as global warming that encompasses technology, demographics and politics at every level in all countries. With global warming, there are melting glaciers and ancient temperature indications that allow objective analysis. What I'm presenting is as real, but unlike the measure of temperature variation, the manifestations are amorphous, and have become so much part of the most rancorous aspects of the culture wars that they only exacerbate partisan antagonism, rather than advance investigation of the deeper dynamics. My task, well over my pay grade and talents, is audacious. Rightly to be left to academics if it weren't that this hallowed turf too has become part of the very phenomenon I'm articulating. This will be the subject of its own chapter in my hypothetical book.
This is why what I describe is not a blog article, or an essay, but structurally a "book" or "thesis" meaning something that aspires to present a different perspective that must first describe elements that will be examined; this in order to make a case that there must be a larger conceptual context, a more useful paradigm to explain the cited phenomon.
While the introduction to the first chapter could be entitled "when homosexuality became gay;" my "thesis" is more encompassing, as it must include the long and continuing movement to end Jim Crow domination of Blacks* in America of the mid twentieth century. The central impact to this country from the importation of African slaves is part of this thesis only because I argue, it, like the gay rights movement, although only a short half century old, are now both part of an unspoken western world mentality that fits a pattern that is perhaps as dangerous as the threat of climate change.
Another, is women's rights, especially the fight for access to abortions. The abortion issue is one of values, with no disagreement among advocates of the science of terminating a pregnancy, meaning the ending of life of an unborn human while still in the uterus either before or after the point of viability. The two sides have taken agreed upon truths as their motto, as the act does entail both ending of "life" and the exercise of "choice." The very names of the contending political groups focus on one with the assumption that it negates the other, where it is actually the debate of which of these should gain legal-political ascendancy.
Homosexuality and abortion, are different from race -- in the U.S. focusing around issues relating to Negros. The very use of this "N-word" for many is the end of the conversation, as it is not consistent with the social norms that have evolved. My contention is that these social norms obviate, make impossible, going beyond what has replaced racial, gender and sexual orientation stereotypes of the pre 1960 era-- to establishing an entire new taxonomy of terms. While replacing those terms that had the effect of insulting or denigrating people who were the object of invidious discrimination, over the decades they have elevated political discourse above scientific investigation. .
---------------------------
*I will use, when plausible, the earliest term and most precise term even when archaic or seen as a slur, such as homosexual for gay, or Negro for now current words, Blacks and African American, both terms inherently loaded by political movements. The purpose of this book is to understand why our society has discarded a neutral descriptor to one that reflects a political ideology, irrespective of how universally it has been adopted. To clarify: "abortion" is subject to extensive debate often with their own terminology (liberals will never use "abortion on demand")without changing the word of the actual procedure. This will be explored in a separate chapter.
What is the motivation for someone well past his prime, with no academic credentials, to presume to write something will answer the joking question of the 94 year old friend who hosts our post tennis group at McDonalds restaurant, "Have we saved the world, yet?"
One explanation is that what I have to say has not been said, or if so very very quietly, and often in a tone that either actually, or by imputation, is seen as abnormal, meaning invidiously not of the norms of society. Abnormal is only bad when the norms are promotive of consensually desired ends - and certainly not good when they prevent the kind of conversation that may redress the defects of any given society.
I am writing this "book" (you are reading an introduction) at a moment in history that augurs a flex-point in the "post holocaust era of redemption", a concept that hasn't become "a thing"; such as global warming that encompasses technology, demographics and politics at every level in all countries. With global warming, there are melting glaciers and ancient temperature indications that allow objective analysis. What I'm presenting is as real, but unlike the measure of temperature variation, the manifestations are amorphous, and have become so much part of the most rancorous aspects of the culture wars that they only exacerbate partisan antagonism, rather than advance investigation of the deeper dynamics. My task, well over my pay grade and talents, is audacious. Rightly to be left to academics if it weren't that this hallowed turf too has become part of the very phenomenon I'm articulating. This will be the subject of its own chapter in my hypothetical book.
This is why what I describe is not a blog article, or an essay, but structurally a "book" or "thesis" meaning something that aspires to present a different perspective that must first describe elements that will be examined; this in order to make a case that there must be a larger conceptual context, a more useful paradigm to explain the cited phenomon.
While the introduction to the first chapter could be entitled "when homosexuality became gay;" my "thesis" is more encompassing, as it must include the long and continuing movement to end Jim Crow domination of Blacks* in America of the mid twentieth century. The central impact to this country from the importation of African slaves is part of this thesis only because I argue, it, like the gay rights movement, although only a short half century old, are now both part of an unspoken western world mentality that fits a pattern that is perhaps as dangerous as the threat of climate change.
Another, is women's rights, especially the fight for access to abortions. The abortion issue is one of values, with no disagreement among advocates of the science of terminating a pregnancy, meaning the ending of life of an unborn human while still in the uterus either before or after the point of viability. The two sides have taken agreed upon truths as their motto, as the act does entail both ending of "life" and the exercise of "choice." The very names of the contending political groups focus on one with the assumption that it negates the other, where it is actually the debate of which of these should gain legal-political ascendancy.
Homosexuality and abortion, are different from race -- in the U.S. focusing around issues relating to Negros. The very use of this "N-word" for many is the end of the conversation, as it is not consistent with the social norms that have evolved. My contention is that these social norms obviate, make impossible, going beyond what has replaced racial, gender and sexual orientation stereotypes of the pre 1960 era-- to establishing an entire new taxonomy of terms. While replacing those terms that had the effect of insulting or denigrating people who were the object of invidious discrimination, over the decades they have elevated political discourse above scientific investigation. .
---------------------------
*I will use, when plausible, the earliest term and most precise term even when archaic or seen as a slur, such as homosexual for gay, or Negro for now current words, Blacks and African American, both terms inherently loaded by political movements. The purpose of this book is to understand why our society has discarded a neutral descriptor to one that reflects a political ideology, irrespective of how universally it has been adopted. To clarify: "abortion" is subject to extensive debate often with their own terminology (liberals will never use "abortion on demand")without changing the word of the actual procedure. This will be explored in a separate chapter.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)