Race Passing and Pretti’s Killers

Alex Pretti moments before he is shot

Thursday

Since we learned that the two Border Patrol agents who killed Alex Pretti were Latino—which is to say, members of one of the communities that Border Patrol and ICE have been targeting—it’s worth revisiting once again how race operates in America. Three novels about race passing provide some insight.

First, some thoughts on the matter. Ever since reading Isabel Wilkerson’s Caste and watching the biopic based on the book (Origins), I have a much clearer sense of the dynamics of race. Essentially, ever since slave times America has been signaling to the world that we have a caste system in which people of color, especially African Americans but occasionally other groups, are at the bottom of the system. Thus every immigrant group has seen it as advantageous to be identified as white. This has been easier for certain groups than others. (Noel Ignatiev’s study of How the Irish Became White tells how one formerly discriminated-against group pulled it off.)

One way to see Donald Trump’s success with Latino voters in the last election is that many were convinced that they had become white and would therefore be safe from his deportation crackdowns. Cuban Americans have long felt this way, but it appeared that other Hispanic populations were coming to believe it also. In some ways, Obama and Biden’s promotion of diversity and the success of DEI programs created a false sense of security. It has been one reason why Democrats’ optimism that the browning of America would favor them electorally has not panned out as they hoped.

Or not panned out until white Christian nationalists began aggressively asserting themselves. It has come as a shock to Hispanic, Islamic, East Asian, South Asian, and Jewish Trump voters that white supremacists will never accept them. As the supremacists see it, you can’t be American if your skin color or religious practices deviate at all.

Nevertheless, certain members of the targeted communities have believed that, if they aggressively embrace the racist stances of the extreme white, they will be accepted. One sees this in such figures as Jewish Stephen Miller, Indian American Dinesh D’Souza, and African American Candace Owens, as well as the murderers of Alex Pretti.  The most fanatical advocates for racism are often members of targeted minorities. 

Which is why race passing novels help us understand what is going on. Race passing is when people with characteristics that would cause society to put them in one racial category pass for members of a different category. William Faulkner’s Light in August, Philip Roth’s The Human Stain, and Nella Larsen’s Passing all feature African American characters who successfully pass as white (although Joe Christmas’s racial mixture is never entirely clear). Each character pays a price for success but, more to my point, we see just how flimsy the distinctions are. Perhaps it is because they are paper thin, however, that whites spend an inordinate amount of energy in maintaining them.

Christmas is an orphan who is raised white but comes to believe he is of mixed ancestry. He feels so torn about this internal bifurcation that he shifts between racial identities, getting into fights with both Blacks and whites. At one stage in his life he attempts to flee from his whiteness:

Sometimes he would remember how he had once tricked or teased white men into calling him a negro in order to fight them, to beat them or be beaten; now he fought the negro who called him white. He was in the north now, in Chicago and then Detroit. He lived with negroes, shunning white people. He ate with them, slept with them, belligerent, unpredictable, uncommunicative. He now lived as man and wife with a woman who resembled an ebony carving. At night he would lie in bed beside her, sleepless, beginning to breathe deep and hard. He would do it deliberately, feeling, even watching, his white chest arch deeper and deeper within his ribcage, trying to breathe into himself the dark odor, the dark and inscrutable thinking and being of negroes, with each suspiration trying to expel from himself the white blood and the white thinking and being. And all the while his nostrils at the odor which he was trying to make his own would whiten and tauten, his whole being writhe and strain with physical outrage and spiritual denial.

When we first encounter him, however, his community thinks he is white, although it turns on him when it determines that he is Black, killing him in a grisly execution that includes castration. His killers react with extreme violence because the ambiguity of his identity threatens to expose the entire system.

In Human Stain, Coleman Silk is a light-skinned Black man who, when he passes himself off as white, is disowned by his family. He goes on to have a successful university career but then is accused of racism by two of his Black students. Although the controversy would probably die down on its own, Silk handles it badly because of his own vulnerability. The secret that he hides has left him in an identity limbo, which in turn leads him to resigning from the university.

In this novel about bottled up rage one finds this remarkable passage:

But the danger with hatred is, once you start in on it, you get a hundred times more than you bargained for. Once you start, you can’t stop. I don’t know anything harder to control than hating. Easier to kick drinking than to master hate. And that is saying something.

Claire in Larsen’s Passing has an internal struggle similar to those of Christmas and Silk. Passing for white, she marries a rich racist and is rejected by her childhood friends. She learns, however, that a life of luxury cannot compensate for the emptiness she feels, and she seeks out these friends and the Black community, even though she risks exposure. And in fact, her husband eventually finds out:

“So you’re a nigger, a damned dirty nigger!” His voice was a snarl and a moan, an expression of rage and of pain.

I can’t think of any stories featuring people of color brutalizing members of their own race, but the internal conflicts that tear apart the characters in Faulkner, Roth and Larsen’s novels give us an idea as to why such people might be prone to violence. Getting a ticket to whiteness is so enticing, and yet requires such internal sacrifice, that rage is a logical outcome. Indeed, the rage might burn particularly hot against whites like Pretti, who are defending the very people that his murderers should be defending. In their eyes, he is a race traitor, spurning the privilege that they have sold their souls to achieve.

In their guilt and anger, they unload their guns into his body.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments closed

Bad Bunny’s Trees, Olympic Athletes

Wednesday

Today’s post has been inspired by a couple of Blue Sky posts involving sports. Actor Conor Ryan, upon seeing the shrubbery walk in for Bad Bunny’s Super Bowl halftime show, tweeted, “The Ents showing up to take down Isengaard.” Given that I have upon occasion found parallels between Saruman and Trump (for instance, here and here), I applauded the reference.

While most of the 143 million+ who watched the performance thrilled to Bad Bunny’s exuberant celebration of Latino culture and his message that love is more powerful than hate—only the current administration would see this as a political statement—Trump predictably threw a temper tantrum. Sounding like a cranky old geezer, he tweeted,

The Super Bowl Halftime Show is absolutely terrible, one of the worst, EVER! It makes no sense, is an affront to the Greatness of America, and doesn’t represent our standards of Success, Creativity, or Excellence. Nobody understands a word this guy is saying, and the dancing is disgusting, especially for young children that are watching from throughout the U.S.A., and all over the World.”

One of my favorite counter-responses was satirist Andy Borowitz, who after imagining Trump as having won “the gold medal in the downhill presidency” (“Trump set a new speed record for driving the world’s strongest economy into a ditch”), concluded, “Despite his victory, he remained bitter about the Super Bowl halftime show, telling reporters that ‘Bad Bunny took a job away from an American bunny.’”

We could use the Ents in America right now. When King Theoden and his warriors, along with Aragorn, Gimli and Legolas, appear about to succumb to the waves of Saruman’s orcs, the walking and talking trees show up, panicking the invaders. Just as the Super Bowl playing field suddenly became a forest of trees, so do the plains beyond Helm’s Deep, the site of the battle:

The land had changed. Where before the green dale had lain, its grassy slopes lapping the ever-mounting hills, there now a forest loomed. Great trees, bare and silent, stood, rank on rank, with tangled bough and hoary head; their twisted roots were buried in the long green grass. Darkness was under them. Between the Dike and the eaves of that nameless wood only two open furlongs lay. There now cowered the proud hosts of Saruman, in terror of the king and in terror of the trees. 

It makes sense that Trump, one of our most openly anti-environmental presidents ever, would cower before Bad Bunny’s trees. Merry and Pippin give us a report on how they move:

‘There is a great power in them, and they seem able to wrap themselves in shadow: it is difficult to see them moving. But they do. They can move very quickly, if they are angry. You stand still looking at the weather, maybe, or listening to the rustling of the wind, and then suddenly you find that you are in the middle of a wood with great groping trees all around you. 

Next thing you know, Trump’s cultural hegemony is reeling from the onslaught.

The other sports item I owe to my son, who tweeted on Bluesky,

Every Olympic broadcast should be assigned one (1) statistician and one (1) poet to give us different ways to understand the mind-boggling displays of athleticism.

To make clear what he had in mind, he employed a short Oscar Wilde lyric:

Statistician: oof! Tough crash there; skiers go up to 50 mph on the giant slalom 

Poet: Never regret thy fall, 
O Icarus of the fearless flight 
For the greatest tragedy of them all 
Is never to feel the burning light.

Enjoy the Olympics.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Comments closed

An Ego the Size of the Universe

Rockwell as Zaphod Beeblebrox in Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

Tuesday

Reprinted from March 13, 2017 with changes

If you’ve ever read Douglas Adams’s Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, perhaps you will know what episode came to mind when I heard about Donald Trump boasting of his large ego at last week’s national prayer breakfast. As you read through his comments, let me know if you can detect any sign of spiritual searching or if you can explain why various church leaders would have laughed and applauded as Trump delivered them:

They rigged the second election. I had to win it. I had to win it. I needed it for my own ego. I would’ve had a bad ego for the rest of my life. Now I really have a big ego. Beating these lunatics was incredible … the first time they said I didn’t win the popular vote. I did.

So who has the bigger ego, Donald Trump or Zaphod Beeblebrox?

Beeblebrox is the irritating cousin of protagonist Ford Prefect in Hitchhiker’s Guide. In the scene I have in mind, Beeblebrox has been captured by the fiendish Gargravarr, a Frogstar prison warden whose mind and body are undergoing “a trial separation likely to end in divorce.” Beeblebrox appears to have unlimited self-confidence, but “unlimited” only goes so far as a descriptor when one is subjected to Gargravaar’s “Total Perspective Vortex.”

Adams describes how the Vortex works. It all has to do with a sense of proportion:

The Total Perspective Vortex derives its picture of the whole Universe on the principle of extrapolated matter analyses. To explain — since every piece of matter in the Universe is in some way affected by every other piece of matter in the Universe, it is in theory possible to extrapolate the whole of creation — every sun, every planet, their orbits, their composition and their economic and social history from, say, one small piece of fairy cake. The man who invented the Total Perspective Vortex did so basically in order to annoy his wife.

Trin Tragula — for that was his name — was a dreamer, a thinker, a speculative philosopher or, as his wife would have it, an idiot. And she would nag him incessantly about the utterly inordinate amount of time he spent staring out into space, or mulling over the mechanics of safety pins, or doing spectrographic analyses of pieces of fairy cake.

“Have some sense of proportion!” she would say, sometimes as often as thirty-eight times in a single day. And so he built the Total Perspective Vortex — just to show her.

And into one end he plugged the whole of reality as extrapolated from a piece of fairy cake, and into the other end he plugged his wife: so that when he turned it on she saw in one instant the whole infinity of creation and herself in relation to it.

We have here the classic death-of-God existential horror show. If humans are merely a random biochemical event that occurred on an infinitesimally tiny pebble hurtling through the vast reaches of interstellar space, then our lives are meaningless. Some existentialists cushion themselves against this demoralizing truth by counseling us to live as though our lives have meaning, even if they don’t. This, however, can be seen as no more than a cowardly coping mechanism. The Total Perspective Vortex is designed to cut through such rationalizations and show us how small and insignificant we truly are.

This is in fact how the Vortex works with Mrs. Trin Tragula:

To Trin Tragula’s horror, the shock completely annihilated her brain; but to his satisfaction he realized that he had proved conclusively that if life is going to exist in a Universe of this size, then the one thing it cannot afford to have is a “sense of proportion.”

Mrs. Tragula would have survived, however, had she an ego the size of Beeblebrox’s. Think about it this way: if we see ourselves as more or less on a par with our immediate surroundings, then we feel neither too big nor too small. It is a perspective we are familiar with. If, on the other hand, we were suddenly shown the entire universe, the only way we could hold on to a sense of proportion and stay sane would be (drumroll!) if we had an ego as big as the universe!

This proves to be the case with Zaphod Beeblebrox. Gargravarr is stunned to see what emerges from the Total Perspective Vortex:

He waited for him to flop forward out of the box, as they all did.

Instead, he stepped out.

“Hi!” he said.

“Beeblebrox…” gasped Gargravarr’s mind in amazement.

“Could I have a drink please?” said Zaphod.

“You…you…have been in the Vortex?” stammered Gargravarr.

“You saw me, kid.”

“And it was working?”

“Sure was.”

“And you saw the whole infinity of creation?”

“Sure. Really neat place, you know that?”

Gargravarr’s mind was reeling in astonishment. Had his body been with him it would have sat down heavily with its mouth hanging open.

“And you saw yourself,” said Gargravarr, “in relation to it all?”

“Oh, yeah yeah.”

“But…what did you experience?”

Zaphod shrugged smugly.

“It just told me what I knew all the time. I’m a really terrific and great guy. Didn’t I tell you, baby. I’m Zaphod Beeblebrox!”

While Trump’s ego may not be as large as the universe, it is big enough for him to deny that millions voted against him in 2016 and again in 2020. He thinks he is “a really terrific and great guy,” and his wounded ego led him to sic his followers onto the nation’s Capitol building and all that has followed. 

In short, he would give Zaphod Beeblebrox some stiff competition.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Trump, a Gulliverian Midget amongst Giants

Gulliver and the Brogdingnagian king

Monday

I continue to be astounded, not at the egregious things that Donald Trump continues to spew, but at how Republicans act as though it doesn’t matter. In a comment last week he complained that Americans are allowing the ICE killings of Renee Good and Alex Petti to overshadow his magnificent accomplishments. In doing so, he reminded me of Gulliver in Jonathan Swift’s satire.

First of all, here’s the quote:

You arrest thousands of rapists. You arrest thousands of the worst people. You arrest the drug dealers. I mean, we had drug kingpins. We had murderers. Thousands, no incident. We bring ‘em back to their country. Two people it’s bad. I hate it. I hate even talking about it. Two people out of tens of thousands,” Trump said during Wednesday’s interview. 

“And you get bad publicity. Nobody talks about all of the murderers that we’re taking out of our country,” he continued.

In other words, he is accusing the American public of having “a nice, unnecessary scruple.” Which is the accusation Gulliver levels at the giant king of the Brobdingnagians in Book II of Gulliver’s Travels.

A small man, both literally and morally, Gulliver seeks to impress the king by offering him the secret of gunpowder. It’s like Trump thinking he can impress people by bombing multiple countries or kidnapping the Venezuelan president:

In hopes to ingratiate myself further into his majesty’s favor, I told him of “an invention, discovered between three and four hundred years ago, to make a certain powder, into a heap of which, the smallest spark of fire falling, would kindle the whole in a moment, although it were as big as a mountain, and make it all fly up in the air together, with a noise and agitation greater than thunder. That a proper quantity of this powder rammed into a hollow tube of brass or iron, according to its bigness, would drive a ball of iron or lead, with such violence and speed, as nothing was able to sustain its force. That the largest balls thus discharged, would not only destroy whole ranks of an army at once, but batter the strongest walls to the ground, sink down ships, with a thousand men in each, to the bottom of the sea, and when linked together by a chain, would cut through masts and rigging, divide hundreds of bodies in the middle, and lay all waste before them. That we often put this powder into large hollow balls of iron, and discharged them by an engine into some city we were besieging, which would rip up the pavements, tear the houses to pieces, burst and throw splinters on every side, dashing out the brains of all who came near. 

I’ll get to the king’s rejection of Gulliver’s offer in a moment. First, however, let’s compare Gulliver’s bafflement with Trump’s. Trump can’t figure out how people can be so dumb (“narrow principles and views,” to use Gulliver’s words) as to reject his gift to them. On the one side, there are “thousands” of rapists, murderers, and “worst people” arrested. On the other, two dead Americans. 

Now to Gulliver:

A strange effect of narrow principles and views! that a prince…should, from a nice, unnecessary scruple, whereof in Europe we can have no conception, let slip an opportunity put into his hands that would have made him absolute master of the lives, the liberties, and the fortunes of his people! 

Of course, there’s nothing that Trump desires more than to be an absolute master. The Brobdingnagian king, by contrast, proves himself to be truly big by expressing more of an interest in the welfare of his people:

And he gave it for his opinion, “that whoever could make two ears of corn, or two blades of grass, to grow upon a spot of ground where only one grew before, would deserve better of mankind, and do more essential service to his country, than the whole race of politicians put together.”

As for his opinion of those who lionize violence:

He was amazed, how so impotent and groveling an insect as I” (these were his expressions) “could entertain such inhuman ideas, and in so familiar a manner, as to appear wholly unmoved at all the scenes of blood and desolation which I had painted as the common effects of those destructive machines…”

An impotent and groveling little man.  To be big, you have to put your country first.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

The Sin above All Sins: Harm Thy Brethren

Tulsidas

Sunday

At a time when many white nationalist Christians are rationalizing governmental brutality, “True Religion” by the great 16th century Hindi poet and reformer can help those who wish to regain their moral center. Tulsidas goes to the heart of the matter with his simple message, “Serve thy brethren.” The poem was translated from the Sanskrit by Mahatma Gandhi when he was in prison for opposing British colonial rule.

I came across the poem in Poems of War Resistance, an anthology that my father published at the height of the Vietnam War.

True Religion
By Tulsidas
Trans. by Mahatma Gandhi

This and this alone
Is true religion-
To serve thy brethren:

This is sin above all other sin,
To harm thy brethren:

In such a faith is happiness,
In lack of it is misery and pain:

Blessed is he who swerveth not aside
From this straight path:
Blessed is he whose life is lived
Thus ceaselessly in serving God:

By bearing others’ burdens,
And so alone,
Is life, true life, to be attained:

Nothing is hard to him who, casting self aside,
Thinks only this—
How may I serve fellow-men?

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Comments closed

From Secular Humanist to Christian Believer

Friday

Today in my on-going memoir I examine how a staunch secular humanist could, upon reaching his forties, become an Episcopalian. Prior to conversion, it was not unusual for me to ask, “Who needs religion when one has literature?” After all, both are symbol systems that we use to understand the world, and I considered literature’s system to be richer and more complex.

I was raised in the heart of the Baptist Bible belt thinking that everyone in the world was Episcopalian. That’s what it was like to grow up in Sewanee, Tennessee, home to a college and a seminary owned by 28 southern Episcopal dioceses. But my Congregationalist father lost his faith after witnessing Dachau during the war while my mother, whose family was Episcopalian, had a bad back that couldn’t handle the hard pews. Consequently we didn’t attend church.

Nevertheless I ended up singing in the church choir after my sixth-grade teacher, a grim woman who used to complain about the Supreme Court outlawing the Lord’s Prayer in public schools, marched the class across the street to audition and I was in. After that my father started attending church, although I learned later that it was to support the desegregation efforts of the rector, not my singing. 

From those two years in church, I carried away the impression that God is angry all the time. To this day I can recite the grim 1928 confessional, since replaced: “We have left undone those things which we ought to have done; And we have done those things which we ought not to have done; And there is no health in us.”

Years later, in Donald Schier’s “20th Century French Novels” class at Carleton, I read Roger Martin du Gard’s Jean Barois, which follows a character’s trajectory from “The Faith” through “The Doubt” and “The Struggle” to “The Faith Again” (to cite the four section headings). I remember thinking that Jean Barois felt more like real life than a novel and also that there was something wrong with how the protagonist comes to his beliefs. Barois starts off as a member of a pious family, splits with religion and his devout wife over science, becomes a political radical during the Dreyfus affair, and eventually finds his way back to religion when he is dying of tuberculosis. 

Barois throughout is contrasted with his mentor Marc-Elie Luce, a noted philosopher and member of the Senate, who warns him against going too far, whether in politics or religion. I remember thinking that Barois lacks Luce’s moderation as he swings between one extreme and the other.

While I wasn’t raised religious like Barois, I do remember the moment in adolescence that I learned about Darwinian evolution and dismissed religion. I think I got this from reading Jerome Lawrence and Robert Edwin Lee’s play Inherit the Wind, about the Scopes trial, along with Irving Stone’s biography Clarence Darrow for the Defense, who defended the Dayton, Tennessee science teacher. I rooted for science, booed fundamentalist religion, and figured I didn’t have to take religion seriously.

On the other hand Julia, whom I met in college, was the descendant of Moravian missionaries and grew up in the Iowa church founded by her great-great-great grandfather. For her, church and community were one and the same and part of her fundamental identity. When we moved to Atlanta for graduate school, she switched to the Episcopal church since Moravians were hard to find, and when we moved to Maryland, she took our children to the Episcopal church that sat next to the college where I was teaching. Unlike intolerant Barois with his wife, I took her faith seriously, even if I didn’t share it.

I was also impressed with the existential questions that church attendance sparked in my three young sons. I didn’t see such conversations happening anywhere else in their world. I was also impressed with the rector, who had been dean and president of the Church Divinity School of the Pacific before ending his career at St. Mary’s Parish and so had an academic mindset I could relate to. We met to converse every one or two weeks and, while he never pressured me to join the church (which I appreciated), I began earnestly exploring religious issues.

Of course, as one who taught early British literature, I was well acquainted with what Christianity and Anglicanism meant to the authors. A couple of years ago C.S. Lewis scholar Rob MacSwain, who teaches at the Sewanee seminary, gave a talk in which he contended that Anglicans/ Episcopalians don’t do systematic theology the way that, say, Catholics, Lutherans, Moravians, and Baptists do. Rather, they conduct their theology through literature. 

MacSwain’s talk was about how Lewis explores questions of faith through his fantasy and science fiction, and I immediately applied the idea to other authors. Among British Anglicans who use their art to explore spiritual issues are Christopher Marlowe, Edmund Spencer, Sir Philip Sidney, John Donne, George Herbert, Henry Vaughan, Lancelot Andrewes, Jonathan Swift, Joseph Addison, William Cowper, William Wordsworth, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Charlotte Bronte, Anne Bronte, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Elizabeth Barrett Browning, Christina Rossetti, George Eliot, Gerard Manley Hopkins, John Keble, W.H. Auden, R. S. Thomas, T. S. Eliot, Dorothy Sayers, Charles Williams, Lewis, Malcolm Guite, Rowan Williams, and Philip Pullman. 

The tradition goes so deep in the English tradition that even authors who are not Anglican can be seen as using literature in this way, such as John Milton, John Bunyan, and J.R.R. Tolkien. And to these can be added American Episcopalian authors, such as John Steinbeck, James Agee, Tennessee Williams, Madeleine L’Engle, Margaret Wise Brown, and Mary Oliver. So I suppose I was being given a religious education without knowing it. 

Now, not all of these authors explored religion in church-approved ways—Wordsworth’s magnificent poem Intimations of Immortality was attacked for its vision of a soul existing prior to birth (“trailing clouds of glory do we come/ From God who is our home”)—but that helps make MacSwain’s point: literature can explore spiritual questions in powerful ways not available to systematic theology. Hopkins, who when he converted to Catholicism, at first thought he must give up poetry to do so but (thankfully!) later concluded that the two need not conflict and wrote some of the most memorable religious poems in the language. For his part, Pullman describes himself as “a Church of England atheist, and a 1662 Book of Common Prayer atheist, because that’s the tradition I was brought up in and I cannot escape those early influences.”

So back to my own conversion. There were two key moments. One was when I realized that Jesus was not a man with all the answers but rather someone who was undergoing his own growth process. The temptation scene in the desert, for instance, I now saw as an internal struggle where Jesus—having realized from his baptism at the hands of John the Baptism that he has God within—is meditating on what this means and doesn’t mean. Once I saw Jesus as someone grappling with life’s big questions, I could relate to him more.

The other moment happened when, in one of my conversations with Pregnall, I was expressing existential frustrations about the sterility of the world. He replied, “I sense that you long for mystery.” The observation hit like a thunderbolt. I didn’t find this mystery in my early love affair with Darwinian evolution—back then I was most interested in finding solid answers and mastering the unknown—whereas I now realized that Christianity provided a framework for articulating my sense of wonder. I now thrill to the language in the Book of Common Prayer, which touches parts of me that Enlightenment science fails to reach.

Not that I see a conflict between science and religion. Scientists, to reach conclusions, must bracket off certain aspects of existence to answer their questions—for instance, the soul and art—which is where mystics and poets make their home. We need all of the above.

With my new interest in Christianity, I enrolled in the Episcopal Church’s “Education for Ministry,” which Pregnall was teaching. EFM is a four-year course that dives into Old Testament, New Testament, church history, and theology. “Ministry” refers to everyone who wants to live a Christian life, not just official ministers. The program was developed by the Charlie Winters, the father of my best friend in middle school, and features several pedagogical tools that I would incorporate into my college teaching. 

The most significant of these was exploring how insights gained from a Biblical passage can be used to guide one’s daily life. As the current EFM textbook explains it, “A reflection that does not end with implications for our own lives as ministers in the world is incomplete.” Thanks to EFM, I started encouraging my college students to use their literary insights as life guidance, coming up with a three-step process of “immerse, reflect, act” or IRA: immerse yourself in the work, step back and reflect on it, and (to quote Rilke’s “Archaic Torso of Apollo”) “change your life.” It was as though I was treating literature as holy scripture.

I took over teaching the EFM class after Pregnall unexpectedly retired with heart problems, which gave me the opportunity to try out the new approach. In my college classes, meanwhile, I was finally figuring out a way to make literature meaningful for my students, my lifelong goal.

As far as church attendance was concerned, I felt at first as though I had betrayed something, although I wasn’t sure whether it was the secular humanism, academe, or my secular family.  Kneeling in prayer involved crossing some invisible barrier. Since I was determined to be proactive rather than rebelliously reactive, I opened my heart to the faith, which now seems to be just part of who I am.

Nor has my commitment to reason lessened. There’s a saying amongst Episcopalians—when you enter the church, you don’t check your mind at the door—which traces back to Elizabethan preacher Richard Hooker’s contention that faith rests upon the three-legged stool of scripture, tradition, and reason. Each serves to uphold and critique the other two in a dynamic way. I still believe fervently in the necessity of critical thinking, even while acknowledging that there are things like Christ’s resurrection that defy worldly logic. I don’t know at all about how this manifestation took place, but I know that it had a transformative influence on his followers.

I’m fond of quoting Hamlet’s “there is more on heaven and earth than is dreamt of in your philosophy, Horatio.” He is saying this to his philosophy student friend to explain the ghost of his father, who has shown up demanding revenge, but it can also be applied to many of life’s mysteries. I think that people who require scientific certainty in all things sometimes reduce the world, just as fundamentalists often reduce God to something that they can control. Reductive science and reductive religion are coin sides of the same impulse.

It is always good to remind ourselves that God is not only bigger than we think but bigger than we can think. The winds that began blowing through the universe with the big bang–creating along the way conscious beings capable of producing works of stunning beauty—will always stymie our encapsulation attempts. I believe these winds operate on me as a miniscule speck living upon a miniscule speck within an incomprehensibly immense universe, even as they (to shift registers) “move the sun and the other stars.” Dante calls this force Love, which isn’t a bad place upon which to rest one’s identity.

As I think of the many Christian writers that I adore, I realize they were driven by the same longing for mystery that an Episcopalian rector recognized within me. Poetry, which brings together earthly and the transcendent, is as close as language comes to articulating that mystery. 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Comments closed

Dante’s Inferno and My Cancer Biopsy

A 14th century illustration of Dante’s Ninth Circle

Thursday

Because I had a biopsy yesterday to test for prostate cancer, I’m feeling rather groggy at the moment. As a result, you’re receiving a shorter than normal post, this one about the character Dante and his guide Virgil in The Divine Comedy.

An explanation here requires some delicacy so here’s my effort to spare you. First of all, to gain samples, my urologist had to (as we used to say as kids) “put it where the sun don’t shine.” Thankfully, unlike the first time the procedure was performed, I was anesthetized. (Don’t ask me about that first time!)

The good news is that, although I won’t get test results for another week, the doctor didn’t find anything obvious. In order to reassure me, however, he had to venture first into a dark wood.

Which brings me to Divine Comedy. Satan presides over the ninth circle of Inferno, which is to say the level furthest from God. Dante has long since discovered that, to deal with his crisis of faith, he must first acknowledge/journey through the darkest features of humanity. In Inferno’s last canto, there is a literal 180-degree turn as he and Virgil climb through Satan to get to Purgatory.

“Through” is the operative preposition. The center of hell is the devil’s rear end, and the winds that buffet the travelers are clearly flatulence (as are the winds that blow in the infernal regions of Milton’s Paradise Lost). In a brief intermission between gusts, Dante and Virgil begin their journey down Satan’s thighbone, which scholars like Norman O. Brown see as a euphemism for the anus:

Then, as he [Virgil] bade, about his neck I curled
My arms and clasped him. And he spied the time
And place; and when the wings were wide unfurled

Set him upon the shaggy flanks to climb
And thus from shag to shag descended
‘Twixt matted hair and crusts of frozen rime.

And when we had come to where the huge thighbone
Rides in its socket at the haunch’s swell,
My guide, with labor and great exertion,

Turned head to where the feet had been, and fell
To hoisting himself up upon the hair,
So that I thought us mounting back to Hell.

Given that the earth is a globe, however, they are not mounting back up to hell but rather away from it. Dante concludes Inferno with encouraging words:

He first, I following; till my straining sense
Glimpsed the bright burden of the heavenly cars
Through a round hole; by this we climbed, and thence

Came forth, to look once more upon the stars.

So there you have it: my courageous doctor climbed through my round hole so that I can (hopefully for many more years) gaze upon the stars.

Okay, that’s enough.

More on Scatological Dante
In a past post I shared a delightful doggerel version Divine Comedy, written by my father, making clear the symbolism connected with Satan. You can read the whole thing here but here’s a sampling:

[Dante] put his dream in poetry
And gave it to the press
And it sold a million copies
And a million more I guess
And everybody read it
And began to look around
For the
Tower of Jesus the
Flower of Mary and
Satan the hole in the ground.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Comments closed

Ralph Chaplin’s Poetic Call to Action

IWW organizer Ralph Chaplin

Wednesday

After seeing my post where I cited William Drennan’s “Wake of William Orr” to honor Renee Good and Alex Petti, a reader shared a poem by International Workers of the World organizer Ralph Chaplin. Most famous for the socialist anthem “Solidarity Forever,” Chaplin was arrested under the Espionage Act of 1917 for opposing America’s entry into World War I. He may have written “Mourn Not the Dead” in Chicago’s Cook County Jail in 1917.

Chaplin was radicalized as a child when he saw a man shot dead during the Pullman strike of 1894, leading us to wonder how many of our young people will be similarly radicalized by the actions of Trump’s goons. Chaplin would go on to work with Mother Jones during the bloody 1912-13 coal miners’ strike in Kanawha County, West Virginia in 1912-13. He must have felt horribly alone when war fever swept through the United States in 1917, when the public was willing to countenance the suspension of various civil liberties.

Fortunately, his poem about “the apathetic throng” applies to fewer people today than it would have a year ago as increasing numbers of Americans are turning out to protest the ICE raids and other Trump assaults on democracy. For instance, Rachel Maddow reported  Monday on how even people in red states are managing to block the construction of immigrant concentration camps.

Unfortunately, we have many “cowed and meek” members of Congress that continue to allow Trump to have his way in all things. Having witnessed his ability to unleash his supporters on anyone who disagrees with him, they “dare not speak.”

Mourn Not the Dead
By Ralph Chaplin 

Mourn not the dead that in the cool earth lie — 
Dust unto dust — 
The calm sweet earth that mothers all who die 
As all men must; 

Mourn not your captured comrades who must dwell — 
Too strong to strive — 
Each in his steel-bound coffin of a cell, 
Buried alive; 

But rather mourn the apathetic throng — 
The cowed and the meek — 
Who see the world’s great anguish and its wrong 
And dare not speak!

For what it’s worth, history is watching and taking names. And providing a spur to action.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

How Homer Would Judge ICE

Odysseus metes out justice to the suitors

Tuesday

Of the many ICE horror stories emerging out of Minneapolis, there’s one that caught my particular attention because the agents violated a  sacred law that dates back to Homer’s time and earlier. Apparently four agents dined at a family-owned Mexican restaurant and then, after the restaurant closed, followed the staff home and arrested three of them.

To break bread in someone’s establishment and then turn around and abuse that establishment chills the blood. 

It is violation of a host’s hospitality, of course, that sets off the Trojan War: Paris runs off Menelaus’s wife Helen after the Spartan king has welcomed him into his home. It takes a crime of this magnitude to bring the Greek city states together to launch their assault.

Then there is the incident of Odysseus with the Kyklopês Polyphemus, although in this case it is the host who violates the laws of hospitality. Odysseus brings a goatskin full of sweet wine hoping to meet the cave dweller. What he encounters instead is a host who rejects the laws set down by Zeus, eating rather than entertaining his guests. Odysseus reports on their interchange:

“We would entreat you, great Sir, have a care
for the gods’ courtesy; Zeus will avenge
the unoffending guest.”

He answered this
from his brute chest, unmoved:

‘You are a ninny,
or else you come from the other end of nowhere,
telling me, mind the gods! We Kyklopês
care not a whistle for your thundering Zeus
or all the gods in bliss; we have more force by far.

The difference between the Kyklopês and the Greeks is the difference between barbarism and civilization. Odysseus describes them as “giants, louts, without a law to bless them,” which pretty much sums up ICE and Border Patrol agents.

Of course, the epic also features the ultimate abuse of a host’s hospitality, which Odysseus sums up when he returns to wreak vengeance. While I don’t wish for Trump’s federal agents to suffer the fate of Penelope’s suitors, I do wish them to be held accountable. Here’s Odysseus after he throws off his disguise and confronts them, bow and arrows in hand: 

You yellow dogs, you thought I’d never make it
home from the land of Troy. You took my house to plunder,
twisted my maids to serve your beds. You dared
bid for my wife while I was still alive.
Contempt was all you had for the gods who rule wide heaven,
contempt for what men say of you hereafter.
Your last hour has come. You die in blood.

As a democracy, our own “gods who rule wide heaven” are the Constitution and the rule of law, which ICE and Border Patrol are busily trashing. Contempt for these and “for what men say of you hereafter” pretty much sums up Trump and everyone following his example.

May there one day be a cleansing.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

  • Sign up for my weekly newsletter