I'd like to share Ralph Waldo Emerson's thoughts on Jane Austen:
I am at a loss to understand why people hold Miss Austen's novels at so high a rate, which seem to me vulgar in tone, sterile in artistic invention, imprisoned in their wretched conventions of English society, without genius, wit, or knowledge of the world. Never was life so pinched and narrow...All that interests...any character is has he (or she) the money to marry with?...Suicide is more respectable.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Tuesday, June 21, 2011
World Tales
World Tales is simply one of the best books ever produced. Sometimes I like to share extracts with people unfortunate enough not to own this stellar volume.
So here's one. It's the introduction to a rendition of "The Fisherman and his Wife"
Maxim Gorky, no victim of the sensation that world tales were merely irrationalities produced by disordered primitive brains, freely admitted that such stories "opened up for me a new world where some free and all-fearless power reigned and inspired me to dream of a better life."
This tale certainly emphasizes that there is another 'world' or system which can cause changes in this dimension which are utterly inexplicable. It also claims, implicitly, that there are rules connected with such phenomena which have to be observed.
In the oldest forms of this recital, the Tibetan tale of King Mandhatar, the ruler conquers the whole earth and then desires to overwhelm heaven. Soon afterwards, he dies. A Polynesian connection has been noted, and there are many versions in Europe. Although the vanity and ambition of the King changes, in European hands, into that of a covetous woman, it might be noted that a check of folk-tale content has shown that more delinquent men than women appear in them, as a matter of statistics: and the sex of the culprit does not matter when it comes to the moral.
The following version gives a good idea of the climate and projection of the story in Germany of the time of the Grimm collection, with terminology somewhat modernized.
I think that's a very lovely summation, and it prompts me to reflect on how long it's been now that I've believed women in these times, and through most of the twentieth century following women's 'liberation,' are hampered by a lower set of expectations. This will never do. Double standards are every which way you look, and the least remarked is the the one about expectations for women's moral and mental growth. Every time I encounter the miserable abortion 'debate' I'm tempted to hop on my soapbox and spout a lot of stuff that would likely be taken, in these enlightened times, for that evil old 'gender feminism' (whatever that means.)
My opinion is that those who seek to limit access to abortion, or to ban it all together, have no real consciouness of their desire to act as protectors and wise stewards. Telling women simply NOT to have abortions means, in my book, a refusal to allow women to cope with the most challenging moral issues of life. I often want to elbow my way into the 'debate' and ask, "Should women also be prohibited from deciding whether to pull the plug on an aging relative or sick child?" Oh, it's not the same thing, no tiny wee precious..er..'innocent' life is involved, but...still. It's killing, you know, at its most basic, of course. Why is it that every which way I turn, I can't see the fine logic some people would like to bring to this ridiculous excuse for a conversation, but only chivalry in one of its most grotesque costumes yet?
You see, it looks so jolly sweet and nice. It's out for everyone's best interest and serves nobody's real life needs.
Oh, and if you want a piece of my mind on the limiting lower standard for women's mental capacities, just check the greeting card industry, one of the leaders in illiteracy today. If you'd like to kill a Hallmark employee over the awesomely awful grammar and usage in your typical get well card, you may agree with me. Furthermore, women who spend most of their time shopping, at the salon, or watching middlebrow teevee are always considered frivolous, empty, and wrong...but in the right way. Such token 'female' behaviors are a reassurance to all those men and gungho feminists who simply can't let go of the Western ideals of male virtue.
They call people like me naive, but we are sometimes the toughest audience to dupe.
So here's one. It's the introduction to a rendition of "The Fisherman and his Wife"
Maxim Gorky, no victim of the sensation that world tales were merely irrationalities produced by disordered primitive brains, freely admitted that such stories "opened up for me a new world where some free and all-fearless power reigned and inspired me to dream of a better life."
This tale certainly emphasizes that there is another 'world' or system which can cause changes in this dimension which are utterly inexplicable. It also claims, implicitly, that there are rules connected with such phenomena which have to be observed.
In the oldest forms of this recital, the Tibetan tale of King Mandhatar, the ruler conquers the whole earth and then desires to overwhelm heaven. Soon afterwards, he dies. A Polynesian connection has been noted, and there are many versions in Europe. Although the vanity and ambition of the King changes, in European hands, into that of a covetous woman, it might be noted that a check of folk-tale content has shown that more delinquent men than women appear in them, as a matter of statistics: and the sex of the culprit does not matter when it comes to the moral.
The following version gives a good idea of the climate and projection of the story in Germany of the time of the Grimm collection, with terminology somewhat modernized.
I think that's a very lovely summation, and it prompts me to reflect on how long it's been now that I've believed women in these times, and through most of the twentieth century following women's 'liberation,' are hampered by a lower set of expectations. This will never do. Double standards are every which way you look, and the least remarked is the the one about expectations for women's moral and mental growth. Every time I encounter the miserable abortion 'debate' I'm tempted to hop on my soapbox and spout a lot of stuff that would likely be taken, in these enlightened times, for that evil old 'gender feminism' (whatever that means.)
My opinion is that those who seek to limit access to abortion, or to ban it all together, have no real consciouness of their desire to act as protectors and wise stewards. Telling women simply NOT to have abortions means, in my book, a refusal to allow women to cope with the most challenging moral issues of life. I often want to elbow my way into the 'debate' and ask, "Should women also be prohibited from deciding whether to pull the plug on an aging relative or sick child?" Oh, it's not the same thing, no tiny wee precious..er..'innocent' life is involved, but...still. It's killing, you know, at its most basic, of course. Why is it that every which way I turn, I can't see the fine logic some people would like to bring to this ridiculous excuse for a conversation, but only chivalry in one of its most grotesque costumes yet?
You see, it looks so jolly sweet and nice. It's out for everyone's best interest and serves nobody's real life needs.
Oh, and if you want a piece of my mind on the limiting lower standard for women's mental capacities, just check the greeting card industry, one of the leaders in illiteracy today. If you'd like to kill a Hallmark employee over the awesomely awful grammar and usage in your typical get well card, you may agree with me. Furthermore, women who spend most of their time shopping, at the salon, or watching middlebrow teevee are always considered frivolous, empty, and wrong...but in the right way. Such token 'female' behaviors are a reassurance to all those men and gungho feminists who simply can't let go of the Western ideals of male virtue.
They call people like me naive, but we are sometimes the toughest audience to dupe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)