Paul Harrison: Elements of Pantheism

 I really wanted to get on board with this.  Something about me is tired of the search, and just wants a label to hang my hat on.  I've tried everything, as is clear, and will continue to.  But pantheism, at least as described here, just isn't it.  Perhaps Harrison's term "panentheism" is close, but still not right.  The word that occurs to me is "toothless".  This approach to the divine is almost meaningless, if technically accurate.  I don't want to give up and simply exist, although there are definite arguments to be made for that.  I want my interaction with whatever is bigger than me to be reciprocal.  I don't merely want to know about it, I want to interact with it in a meaningful way.  And so I continue to search for the path that leads me there.  Perhaps that search is the only meaningful interaticion that is possible.  Perhaps not. 

Eça de Queirós: The Relic

 My expectations were low for this book after reading the editor's less than glowing introduction.  According to her, this is a middling book in which the author's genius can be glimpsed, but not seen in full.  Expecting a disjointed, slapdash story, however, I was pleasantly surprised by both the concept and the style.  The idea of a religious triptych is charming, and the effect is successful. Combining the realist style with the supernatural vision was perfectly effective, and the rogueish narrator is more relatable than similar characters in Stendahl etc al.  His disdain for the church is no doubt reflective of the author's own, and possibly his carnal nature too. There is an underlying admission that there is something to it all, however, and it is that which takes the book to each of its interesting waypoints.  Perhaps most interesting--and eerily prescient--of these moments is a dialogue the narrator has with Lucifer in which he says, "Don't bemoan the holocausts of Moloch.  There will be holocausts of Jews someday" (87).  in 1887.  Brrr.

Yes, religion is a farce.  And yet what other account can be given of the visions that we receive, and the moments of fate that bring us to equilibirum?  As the devil says in response to the above description of religious rises and falls, "What do I can one way or the other, Raposo? They are transient.  I am not."

Davis, Jenkins, and Hunt: The Pact

 It's no wonder that my students' reaction to this book was overwhelmingly positive.  It has "accessible" written all over it: writing style, structure, content, and relevance.  I can think of dozens of young men in my classes this year alone who would benefit from reading the story of coming of age among economic and other difficulties, overcoming, and paying it forward.  Even those things that a critic might consider flaws--some narrative cohesion is lacking, and the gentlemen in question are not exactly poets--contribute to its teachability and charm.  No notes; would and will teach again.

 

Mutiny on the Bounty

It is no wonder that this story has multiple adaptations.  It has everything: epic scope, human drama, the  battle between good and evil, and the ultimate triumph of the former.  I would even go so far to say that it is not yet milked for all its value; the story of Pitcairn island only began with this story, and I would love to know more about what happened thereafter.  

Silly me, I assumed that the better movie version would be the more modern, ambitious, and Brandoed of the two.  It is clear that his power and emotions ran away with him during filming, though.  Focusing so much on the romance, and the resulting blow to pacing and narrative, was clearly his fault.  And there are character choices that make his version of Fletcher Christian suffer in comparison to Gable's: a certain foppery and affectation that reduce the stakes of his choices among them.  

But overall I think the credit for the earlier version's ultimate superiority can be given to the editors, rather than the performers.  Even if Laughton's version of Bligh descends into caricature rather too often, the tight pacing and streamlined script of the 1930s version are what ultimately make it the better of the two.

But was it great?  I can't bring myself to go that far.  Surely the cinematography is a marvel (in both versions), and one struggles to imagine how the filming of either was even possible with existing techniques and technologies.  However, I maintain that a movie can only ever rise to the level of its concept, and in both cases the intention was just to tell a story, not to reflect a larger truth.  Good, but Great was never going to be in reach.

Ian Fleming: Casino Royale

 My brother-in-law's assertion that this book is better than the movies based upon it cannot be evaluated here, insofar as I have never seen the movies in question.  What seems certain, however, is that it is wildly different from any spy movie I have ever seen--the Bond movies included.  In the cinematic versions, the hero prevails through almost inhuman skill and cunning.  He is aware at all times of his surroundings, and knows from experience and instinct the best way to succeed.  He then applies his perfect marksmanship, well-honed body, and sexual prowess to ensure that outcome.  He is the alpha male ideal of mastery, in and out of bed.

The Bond in this book is nothing of the sort.  His only talent seems to be a high threshhold for pain, and he is consistently taken by surprise, caught flat-footed, and the victim of higher machinations.  In fact, were it not for consistent intervention by his more competent team and, ultimately, a deus ex machina, he would not have made  it past the first chapter.  This is, of course, a more realistic picture of life.  The only thing we can hope for is that our iron will can get us through the perils of existence.  It is not, however, edifying.  The endorphins released by the alpha male fantasy remain unreleased, and one is left only with the accurate, but unsatisfying realization that neither we nor any other man are golden, and ultimately all that awaits us is pain and betrayal.

Robert J. Sternberg, Ph. D.: Love is a Story

 This model of relationships, to the extent such things can be analyzed, is as good as any.  Humans are story machines; we exist to narrate, to make sense of things and find a map through what is in reality a cloud of atoms.  Sternberg's model acknowledges this humanity, and applies it first at the macro level, proposing a story about stories that one can use to illustrate and reflect one's own experiences.  Each of his proposed models is rather like a tarot card that one can turn up and see as an answer to the mystery of our connections.

His deck, however, the taxonomy of approaches to relationships, is flawed in its cisheteronormativity, but the approach is sound.  Begin by asking, "What have experience and society, combined with my won innate nature, led me to believe about--and seek from--relationships?"  There are certain of his models that come close to describing my own beliefs and experiences.  Even if I limit myself to what he offers, it is useful to notice that part of my own dissatisfaction and frustration with love comes from the conflict between what I believe (something adjacent to his "garden" story) and what I end  up with (something more like his "sacrifice" story).  But this realization is the booby prize, in a way.  Knowing that what I have found is not what I want is small solace.  Knowing why I have attracted or pursued stories that do not align with what would make me happy would be a much more useful bit of information.

And so I add my own version to his list.  Love is a Brotherhood.  It is a battle, but not between the parties.  Rather it is a combination of forces against the encroaching void for mutual protection and advancement.  Whether this story is healthy or not is open to debate (my therapist thinks not).  But it at least gives me a concrete framework to lay over my own choices, and reflect.

Ultiimately, however, Love is a Story is itself a story: another layer of narrative on top of reality that can be useful or not, depending on whether one sees it as a map or a mirror.

Joan Bauer: Rules of the Road

 What a charming and inspiring book.  I wish that I had read it as a teenager, finding my place in the world, and searching for the strength to do for myself what should have been done for me.  How sad for me that no mentor has yet appeared to lend me strength and wisdom, but such fairy godmothers only ever appear in stories.  

Nonetheless, perhaps teaching this book to my students will give them something of what I needed at their age.  And may I continue to be that person for them, to the best of my ability.

I Ching

 This book has long held a fascination for me, not so much for its power, but for its approach.  The natural cycle of things, observable in every aspect of existence, follows definite patterns.  To perceive these patterns, and move with them, is as close to virtue as I know.  It is, of course, not a book to be read, per se.  Rather I prefer to let it read me.  Accordingly, this written response is not a typical reaction.  I may never read the entire book, and do not intend to keep strict track of which hexagrams have come up for me as though it was a collection of baseball cards.  The commentary and explication in this edition by Hua-Ching Ni were invaluable, and offered a depth that will no doubt continue to yield insight.  But for now, I simply record the books response to my inquiry:

"What is the most important principle for me to apply at this point in my spiritual awakening?"

As ever, the answer does not disappoint:

Hexagram 21: Shih Ho, Biting through hardship.  The task ahead is difficult, and must be met with two forces, brought together to meet in the middle.  The task is, of course, that of existence and awakening.  The forces are that from above, the Yang, and that from below, the Yin.  As with the jaws, the above is resolute, immobile, unchanging; the below is fluid, adaptable.  Bringing them together will bring in order: pain, poison, gold, and finally success.

The challenge of facing my existence, ceasing to avoid it, and embracing the challenge of maintaining equilibrium--especially in the classroom--is no small task.  But it can be accomplished, and will bring about the result:

Hexagram 40: Hsieh, dissolution of the problem.  Ni here reference a story from Chuang Tzu that I have long held dear: the butcher's knife does not dull, because in his mind the joint are already separated.  My confidence in the eventual outcome, the true nature of reality as a whole and in my part individually, is justified.  All is unity, abundance, and perfection, and so shall it be revealed.