Pleasure is fundamentally the intensified awareness of reality, and springs from a passionate openness to the world and love of it.
---Hannah Arendt
~
I think that that is my favourite one line from Hannah and I don't think I'd swap it for anything else. I can understand the darkness, the bitterness of people who have had to go through terrible, unbearable pain, grief or loss. And there's a sadness which, like the snow in Ireland, is general all over. And perhaps without religion and her mysteries, without a living contact with nature, we find all types of subsitute forms that can answer this need for depth, for profundity. But I can't help but think that a part of this morose spirit is fake, is really self-inflicted, and quite needless and probably pointless as well (Beth's point).
~
I was going to write about costume and fashion and its relation to capitalism (loads of Braudel quotes) but my attention was caught by something someone said about grace-and what use are the words of philosophers, historians, or theologians to me in this regard? What is the point of talking about grace from the outside?
.
There are levels of grace, a hierarchy of them. One says grace for the food one receives, one can recognize the grace of a dancer; in both it seems there is the sense of proportion, a recognition of balance. Equally, there is a sense of gift and reciprocity, one might even say etiquette: one has the good grace to accept or return a compliment. The gifted artist gives something of his gifts away and this leads to us being thankful for being brought into the circle of admirers
.
However, on the other hand, is it not the case that grace is completely disproportionate to what we expect or can comprehend? So, whilst grace is the very ability to be thankful for what is not ours (Rumi would say free will is the capacity to be thankful for God's Beneficence) is it also not an awareness that our response will always be lacking?
.
Two further points. I don't think one can ever reflect on grace without the notion of thankfulness. To 'truly bless', as Auden might say, is not such an easy thing. Many are stuck in 'la'. For the entirely self-made man nothing is 'given', all is possessed or coveted. Only an awareness of what is given to us -life itself-can lead to grace. Secondly, is grace the ability to not be weighed down by our own gravity? Grace is a 'descent' but by it being so it allows an ascent-and that too is a recognition of something beyond one's narrow horizons: lightness , in both senses of the word
There are levels of grace, a hierarchy of them. One says grace for the food one receives, one can recognize the grace of a dancer; in both it seems there is the sense of proportion, a recognition of balance. Equally, there is a sense of gift and reciprocity, one might even say etiquette: one has the good grace to accept or return a compliment. The gifted artist gives something of his gifts away and this leads to us being thankful for being brought into the circle of admirers
.
However, on the other hand, is it not the case that grace is completely disproportionate to what we expect or can comprehend? So, whilst grace is the very ability to be thankful for what is not ours (Rumi would say free will is the capacity to be thankful for God's Beneficence) is it also not an awareness that our response will always be lacking?
.
Two further points. I don't think one can ever reflect on grace without the notion of thankfulness. To 'truly bless', as Auden might say, is not such an easy thing. Many are stuck in 'la'. For the entirely self-made man nothing is 'given', all is possessed or coveted. Only an awareness of what is given to us -life itself-can lead to grace. Secondly, is grace the ability to not be weighed down by our own gravity? Grace is a 'descent' but by it being so it allows an ascent-and that too is a recognition of something beyond one's narrow horizons: lightness , in both senses of the word
.
Perhaps we humans,
have wanted God most as a witness
to acts of choice made in solitude.
Acts of memory,
of sacrifice. Wanted
that great single eye to see us ,
steadfast as we flowed by.
Yet there are other acts
not even vanity,
or anxious hope to please, knows of-
bone doings, leaps of nerves, heart-
cries of communion: if there is bliss
it has been already
and will be; out -
reaching, utterly
Blind
to itself,
flooded
with otherness
have wanted God most as a witness
to acts of choice made in solitude.
Acts of memory,
of sacrifice. Wanted
that great single eye to see us ,
steadfast as we flowed by.
Yet there are other acts
not even vanity,
or anxious hope to please, knows of-
bone doings, leaps of nerves, heart-
cries of communion: if there is bliss
it has been already
and will be; out -
reaching, utterly
Blind
to itself,
flooded
with otherness
16 comments:
grace is really the thing, isn't it. spent lots of time contemplating grace too and yes, thankfulness, but none such that relies on "mutual reciprocation" and so on. Read it somewhere, maybe Faulkner? about why grace is so important...grace and something else.
That Hemingway one, Grace is guts under pressure, there is something to it, displays the sort of sublimated strength in the act of grace it self/itself. but i was looking for another quote i have forgotten just now.
very much liked the Calasso in your other piece, he's always so good for such kinds of insights. do you know someone who writes similarly? the fashion book by Simmel is just wonderful.
thanks Anton..never did find that Simmel book, and I doubt I'd have the time to read it even if I did.
Yes, thinking about what you're saying does make me think that there's a type of strength to it. Perhaps it's the strength, the grace, to let go, to overlook, put to one side?
i've only read bits of Calasso, but my sister is very fond of Cadmus and Harmony.
Insights? Dunno. Think John Berger writes fabulously.
i don't know really, yes maybe the strength to put aside. sort of indirect, persistent strength.
by now it came back to my mind, Kertesz said it in his fateless book, it is grace that made him survive, acts of coincidental grace - or mercy in this sense maybe rather and the idea that in the next second it all could be different. yes cadmus and harmony, there are some great essays in the 49 steps, maybe that's your kind of thing. kasch is also very good but different. yes john Berger. he writes well, but somethign always makes my brain itch when i read him, always the suspicion there are some ugly straits of conservativism behind all his writings. hmm difficult. I think calasso is far better. deeper insights and less morality. less judgement. and unusual connections between all kinds of thinkers.
yes no time, i know, but shame though no one ever can read those great books anymore.
Yes, I've read some of those essays and I've read that book on myths. And I can see what you're getting at when you mention the word 'conservatism' (perhaps one might say the same about E.P.Thompson or strands of the left).
But whilst conservatism might on the whole be negative, I'm personally drawn to aspects of it. To conserve, to keep hold of things, to keep free from the flux of the world, from exchange value..to me this seems like a radical approach (I'm reminded of two great essays by Fuller on ruskin and Morris: the conservative radical and the radical conservative).
And , for me at least, it's the "unusual conenctions" that can turn me off. It's all a bit too flashy for me..as if one had to appear dazzlingly intelligent just for the sake of it.
less morality!
We live in times when questions of value, morality, seem secondary to a sort of technical intelligence, perhaps? The hypertrophy of the mind. Again, just a personal choice here. It's why I prefer Hollywood to the European films.
you know i dont know any films at all. only just a handful, so i can;t really judge. however i thought it charming how you were winding up yourself so much about Fitzcarraldo, after all it is onyl a film. re the comments at mr. khan, sure the nordic european traditions can think genius without madness, the wondeful light Jean Paul for instance. and Heidegger which is an example from the darker side of course, has zero genie-aestheticism at all.Calasso that's not superficial or flashy, his unusual connections. that's not to impress the reader how awfully smart he is. Probably if this were the case he would be read much more.
The older i get i tend to like conservative people more, for one can see them easier through and they mess with one's brain openly. what do you mean with the radical re conservativism, you mean it is radical to conserve certain things? which is called "wertkonservativ" in german, meanign to perserve some values (insert your definition or ensemble of things to preseved here). but not to be conservative does not mean one in consequence throws these things to be presevered all out of the window, no?
don't know the Fuller essays but will look at them if they cross my path. Ruskin and Morris, yes, very interesting people. i have those everyman library books, very charming.
Same here, Antonia. Therefore it's not a judgement, just my impression from a (very) limited sample. And, of course, there's the very strong possibility that I'm just not understanding these layers of meaning behind them. But when I see a film like Fassbinder's Four seasons or Pasolini's Mama Roma, I've got to say to myself: what is all this hype. Sometimes (or in some instances) I think it's a case of the Emperor's new clothes.
On your other point, i don't think it's a matter of *can* so much as a case of whether it usually does.
Yes, i'm not really saying that about calasso. More about a style of thought.
I don't know what you mean by "mess with your brain" , Anton.
In fact, that's what I'm trying to say: is intelligence awlays about the brain?
Radical conservative:
well, it seems to me that the dominant 'tradition' is to say that everything is flux, process. that the aim is the make and re-make the world, not understand it.
In such conditions, to say that there are things, values , that lie outside this conception, that resist such practices and methodologies, is really to say that some things are *given* to us.
('theology after wittgenstein'by Kerr is good on this)...the "muddy centre"
i'm not so sure about your last point. In reality they cannot be 'thrown out' , but I do think the *aim* is just that: creation ex nihilo.
yes, charm is just the word. For me this is a certain 'roundedness' against the fanaticism of certain tempers. To go around in circles!
and so to return to Herzog's film: that type of one-sidedness just doesn't interest me.
Chram, the last corner of the human world.
Arendt.
Take care,
b.
my last point about the thrown out was just some guessing on what you might mean, what you wanted to have preserved and i agree with you on that, things can't be thrown out even though people (would want to) wish that. However i am so long already involved in this discussion in philosophy, in this "process vs. everything else/the deviant" debate and i have always been of course on the evil side, pursuing Vico and stuff like that that i don't care anymore really, it goes without saying that some things just are resitant to the famous process or fall out of the doctrine/system.
well the genius, that's just a matter of interpretation, or of what is commonly canonical read (or translated), and that's mostly the mad genius types for they are oh so romantic. However i do think it does hugely injustice to all the friendlier stuff that is dusting away in the basements. people always tend to assume that the lighthearted things are not deep enough which is not true of course.
messing with the brain, so called leftish people, they read all the great theories and use all the big words and in the end you discover they are far worse, far more conservative than some real moderately straight conservatives.
so charm and grace it is then. not a too bad combination. add sprezzatura.
"discussion in philosophy". Yes, I can see why you might "not care" then. Most of it is really old hat-especially for someone of your amazing reading.
Antonia, where I differ with you, though, is that it doesn't go without saying. Far too many people (in my opinion) are swayed to believe in the inevitability of a 'falling away'.
"injustice"
again, I'll take your word for it. But i wonder -and that's my point really-if there isn't a part of us that wants to hear those extreme voices. "even the night is a sun"
If things are in the basement, could it be because there's a reason for keeping them there?
[C, if you're reading this, is it true that icons were kept int eh basement of the Natioanl Gallery?]
i don't know. I hear what you're saying about all the theoretical stuff and jargon. But it seems that part of that messing is really down to our own desire to create rigidly defined categories.
someone can be of the left and conservative. why not?!
And someone can be conservative in some ways but progressive in others.
incredible the way words have a hold on us. We see the word 'conservative' (or 'liberal') and think, straight away in terms of binaries..the same goes with other words as well..'the jew', 'the muslim', 'the west'...No?
Already this comment is too long, too laboured. Next time I'll just shake my head if I disagree with you:)
Thanks for your comments Antonia.
Always challenging, always eye-opening.
Best wishes,
b.
yes i think you are right it does not "go without saying" and i have to remind myself of that.
about the basement, well partly maybe we have at some times some sort of longing for such things, but then on the other hand, what if there are no mental alternatives/treasures to fall back upon, if the nicer books never have been taught to you and all you know is that european books = gloom, then it gets difficult. maybe some stuff indeed should be kept in the basement, but some also not.
yes words. i like that in these little discussions in the comments your questions for clarfications and remarks and so on call me on my inaccuracies and laziness in formulations - one just easily is jotting down: oh those evil conservatives, while in "reality" things are of course never so simple - you make me take care better of my language. and yes just shake your head.
have a good day.
Antonia, I like what you're saying-even though it's sad-about what happens if there are no treasures to fall back on. Reminds me a bit of Lear's book on the Crow Indians (I've got a post on it somewhere in this mess). but isn't that very much part of the modern adventure..the attempt at lightness, with nothing to fall back on?
I really don't like replying to comments as people on the other end can take the things the wrong way and it's so hard to pick up tone (and tone,like style, is almost everything).Far better to discuss things over tea or coffee!
Oh, I found some Calasso for you..or, rather , it's from Calasso. As the Americans say: Enjoy!
The great object of life is Sensation-to feel that we exist-even though in pain-it is this 'craving void' which drives us to Gaming-to Battle-to Travel-to intemperate but keenly felt pursuits of every description whose principal attraction is the agitation inseparable from their accomplishment.
---Byron's Letters and Journals, vol. 3, p109
'Forever inflamed and dissatisfied, his spirit will go abroad in the world, the busy industrious world. ; it will go abroad, I tell to you, like a whore yelling: Plasticity! Plasticity! Plasticity has poisoned him, yet he can't live without his poison now. He has banished reason from his heart...The happiest thing that can happen to him is that nature strike him with a terrifying call to order. And such, in fact, is the law of life: he who refuses the joy of honest activity can feel nothing but the terrible joys of vice...
The immoderate pleasure he takes in form will drive him to monstrous and unprecedented excesses. Swallowed up this ferocious passion for the beautiful and the bizarre, the pretty and the picturesque, ..the notions of the true and the just will disappear. The frenetic passion for art is a cancer that eats up everything else..excessive specialization in a single faculty can only end up in emptiness'.
---Baudelaire, from Roberto Calasso's 'Literature and the Gods'
Salaams,
b.
yes agree with you on the internet & the various dangers it poses to "communication" & tea, but one has to make the best of it i guess.
for some strange reason the Baudelaire essay escped me. i must go and look it up. and do you like Calasso?
and isn't it not only a part of the modern times, the attempt at lightness with nothing to fall back upon?
really like Sibelius & the birds above. wonderful photograph. i saw his house once. it's nice.
Anton, 'morning.
Yes, make the best of it. Although I do struggle.
Yes, I do like Calasso. As you say, some of his writing is startling (at least the bits I've read: Kasch and 'literature and the Gods'..never did get past the first 50 pages of Cadmus).
Perhaps you're right Antonia: it has always been an attempt to defy gravity, free ourselves from the dust..our oldest games: snakes and ladders. But maybe it's become more acute in recent times, no? I think there's a line in solaris where Kelvin is told: there's no going back to the cosmos. And I can't but help think that hatred to religion and Tradition is connected with that desire to escape the past, or anyhting that is 'given'.(Have you read Calvino's wonderful essay on lightness?)
But can there be an unbearable lightness?
hi - glad you like the Calasso a bit - funny thing is i had troubles reading the Cadmus book too, but with the others, no problem. Kasch is great.
yes i agree, re the hatred towards religion and so on in connection with escaping the past - only when it is hated in this way, mostly it come back in via the backdoor. and it is linked to some sometimes dangerous & fanatic desire for immortality, in order to compensate one's own powerlessness or connection to what is 'given'. I think nowadays it is more visible, because it is so extreme in its unreflectedness. but it is a difficult phenomenon on the whole and i am guilty already now of lots of generalizations....you see, againt he dangers of communication via the internet...
For some reason i really don't like calvino, find him too superficial and it is all "Fabula docet" and so on, the characters in his books really simple. well it's been some years since i read him, so maybe i could give it another try. For lightness i go to Cristina Campo.
can there be an unbearable lighness, what do you think? i think yes it can be. only maybe that it is not unbearable.
Antonia, I can see why you or someone might think that calvino is superficial. Don't know, maybe he is in a way. But perhaps naive is a better word..and that type of lightness is hardly with us any more.
For me he is a like a storyteller (Marcovaldo, for example). And in those old stories the "character" was never "developed", never three-dimensional in the way that we're now familar with (the same applies with the two Kadare books I've read: an old style of telling it).
Mr Palomar, for example, has no depth, no "richness" to his character, but neither is he a mere embodiment of "ideas".
I guess you either like him or you don't. How superficial is that!
For me, all he is saying that one can tilt one's head slightly and look at the world in a different way. But even that is to say too much. The book either gives pleasure or it doesn't. End of story.
Can it be unbearable? Well, I guess it can for some people. It's not for me and maybe it really can't because the world and life always intervene (I think that's a line from Jurassic Park!).
Anyway, I leave the last word to you.
Take care,
b.
yes, i think you are right, in the end boils down to whether one likes it or not. yes some naivity or somehting like that, some innocence in Calvino, that's true. I don't know, was always found it lacking some depth which i always found in Jean Paul who has lightness & depth.
agree re the unbearability or just not re the lightness. Jurassic Park, Solaris...i have not seen those. the (at times unfortunate) interference/intervention of the world, yes, here is some Rilke that is sort of slightly analogous. "For somewhere there is an ancient enmity between our daily life and the great work"
i see you're leaving us now, just now that i got used to you. great song above. wishing you well.
Post a Comment