What came to mind was the image of Thich Nhat Hanh and his students in Vietnam in the 1960s (from the book Love in Action: Writings on Nonviolent Social Change), finding balance -- practicing daily meditation while hearing the sounds of war and then going out to aid war-torn villages, rebuilding schools and establishing medical centers.
Thanks for this, Amanda. I will have to read this. I loved “The Raft Is Not the Shore” — a book length conversation between Thich Nhat Hanh and Daniel Berrigan. So much love in action. Appreciate you.
I appreciate your expression so much. Unfortunately the Merwyn poem was/ unintelligible to me. It feels like being hard to understand for the sake of that- I enjoy your choices, this one is irritating . Maybe that’s a value too - I appreciate your thoughts on McWhorter’s ridiculous ignorant response to the protesters, to me I do t get any value from Merwyn’s poem.
In defense of Merwin, and of what he is doing in this poem as in so many of his others: I do not believe he is being willfully obscure. He had a lifelong fascination with all of what lies just beyond the limitations of our understanding and our perception. For him, the "blank spaces," the silences, all of the realms of uncertainty and invisibility, are with us always even if we are not registering them, and are if anything more to be respected and attended to than the familiar sights and sounds we apprehend directly through our senses. In this poem he does those absences the honor of trying to speak to them directly, and in so doing arrives, at the end of the poem, at a "recognition" that all of these absences may be perhaps best understood as a manifestation of a single larger presence, one that is plausibly more real and "true" than the world we frame through our everyday language and perception, part of what Devin describes as a "fullness" that is worthy of our attention.
I agree with your premise but not, I’m afraid, your conclusion. Merwin and Cage do indeed offer an opportunity for humility and attention, for genuine listening. The way in has profound implications. It’s what happens when you’re there that makes the difference, and what comes out of it. Without having read the NYT piece, just based on your reporting, here’s where I think McWhorter is coming from. He has heard the protestors and knows exactly what their position is. I think that’s a fair assumption. He doesn’t need John Cage for that. And whether he agrees with them or not, he believes it’s not his job as an educator to advocate one political position or another. In fact, he knows that whatever the goals of the protests, their methods as he experiences them are antithetical to those of the university, in the way he understands it. Not their message, which deserves due consideration, but their method, which is to demand conformity. You say the *opposite* of dissent is conformity. Well, it may be, particularly vis a vis those invested in whatever the status quo happens to be, but from an educator’s point of view, properly understood, the status quo has its argument (and the university administration may represent that), the protestors have their argument, and others as well who may disagree with both the status quo and the protesters have their arguments. A good teacher, in my view, will make an effort to air all of them, not be merely a mouthpiece for the administration, keep his own beliefs either out of the conversation completely, or at least as fair game amongst other beliefs, and not let the classroom become a vehicle for political activism, particularly his/her own. Every perspective requires and deserves reflection, interrogation and debate in order to come closer to a clear and truthful understanding. So given that, I understand McWhorter’s view that the protests on campus, to the extent that they are noisy and disruptive, are a form of ‘abuse’. Education really does require ‘peace’ (eg. birdsong and people walking by) for learning to actually take place, ie. for the mind to entertain and grapple with diverse views and draw considered conclusions, and universities do (or should) uniquely offer that opportunity, and if one has decided that there is only one perspective that others must conform to, as the protesters have, one has closed oneself off from education, in particular with the aim (or effect) of depriving others of that opportunity. In that sense, I see McWhorter’s refusal to listen to the Cage piece as itself a form of protest. If he were to give the Cage piece the respect it deserves, yes, he should have listened to it. Doing so would not have been more in keeping with the ideals of a good education. Upon reflection, I suspect he would agree. He with his class just would have come out of it with something different.
Thank you Devin. Your listening, your teaching, and your voice are so important.
Thanks always, Emily
What came to mind was the image of Thich Nhat Hanh and his students in Vietnam in the 1960s (from the book Love in Action: Writings on Nonviolent Social Change), finding balance -- practicing daily meditation while hearing the sounds of war and then going out to aid war-torn villages, rebuilding schools and establishing medical centers.
https://www.parallax.org/product/love-in-action/#product-content
Good to hear your voice and that of W.S. Merwin and Joseph Hawley and that of the nonviolent protesters this morning. Love in action.
Thanks for this, Amanda. I will have to read this. I loved “The Raft Is Not the Shore” — a book length conversation between Thich Nhat Hanh and Daniel Berrigan. So much love in action. Appreciate you.
“humility as an entrance into a poem” could be the motto of your project here, and it’s quite lovely
Thanks, Jonathan
I appreciate your expression so much. Unfortunately the Merwyn poem was/ unintelligible to me. It feels like being hard to understand for the sake of that- I enjoy your choices, this one is irritating . Maybe that’s a value too - I appreciate your thoughts on McWhorter’s ridiculous ignorant response to the protesters, to me I do t get any value from Merwyn’s poem.
In defense of Merwin, and of what he is doing in this poem as in so many of his others: I do not believe he is being willfully obscure. He had a lifelong fascination with all of what lies just beyond the limitations of our understanding and our perception. For him, the "blank spaces," the silences, all of the realms of uncertainty and invisibility, are with us always even if we are not registering them, and are if anything more to be respected and attended to than the familiar sights and sounds we apprehend directly through our senses. In this poem he does those absences the honor of trying to speak to them directly, and in so doing arrives, at the end of the poem, at a "recognition" that all of these absences may be perhaps best understood as a manifestation of a single larger presence, one that is plausibly more real and "true" than the world we frame through our everyday language and perception, part of what Devin describes as a "fullness" that is worthy of our attention.
Great read on protest lawlessness https://tinyurl.com/ye2629md
I agree with your premise but not, I’m afraid, your conclusion. Merwin and Cage do indeed offer an opportunity for humility and attention, for genuine listening. The way in has profound implications. It’s what happens when you’re there that makes the difference, and what comes out of it. Without having read the NYT piece, just based on your reporting, here’s where I think McWhorter is coming from. He has heard the protestors and knows exactly what their position is. I think that’s a fair assumption. He doesn’t need John Cage for that. And whether he agrees with them or not, he believes it’s not his job as an educator to advocate one political position or another. In fact, he knows that whatever the goals of the protests, their methods as he experiences them are antithetical to those of the university, in the way he understands it. Not their message, which deserves due consideration, but their method, which is to demand conformity. You say the *opposite* of dissent is conformity. Well, it may be, particularly vis a vis those invested in whatever the status quo happens to be, but from an educator’s point of view, properly understood, the status quo has its argument (and the university administration may represent that), the protestors have their argument, and others as well who may disagree with both the status quo and the protesters have their arguments. A good teacher, in my view, will make an effort to air all of them, not be merely a mouthpiece for the administration, keep his own beliefs either out of the conversation completely, or at least as fair game amongst other beliefs, and not let the classroom become a vehicle for political activism, particularly his/her own. Every perspective requires and deserves reflection, interrogation and debate in order to come closer to a clear and truthful understanding. So given that, I understand McWhorter’s view that the protests on campus, to the extent that they are noisy and disruptive, are a form of ‘abuse’. Education really does require ‘peace’ (eg. birdsong and people walking by) for learning to actually take place, ie. for the mind to entertain and grapple with diverse views and draw considered conclusions, and universities do (or should) uniquely offer that opportunity, and if one has decided that there is only one perspective that others must conform to, as the protesters have, one has closed oneself off from education, in particular with the aim (or effect) of depriving others of that opportunity. In that sense, I see McWhorter’s refusal to listen to the Cage piece as itself a form of protest. If he were to give the Cage piece the respect it deserves, yes, he should have listened to it. Doing so would not have been more in keeping with the ideals of a good education. Upon reflection, I suspect he would agree. He with his class just would have come out of it with something different.