Wendell Berry’s Sabbath Vision

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Sunday

This past year our church has sponsored a series of lecture devoted to the theme, “This Fragile Earth, Our Island Home.” The talks have been tremendously successful, ranging from biologists talking about human cells to botanists sharing research about Appalachian plant species to forest managers describing trees responding to fire. The series concluded on a high note as English professor Dr. Andrea Sanders explored poet Wendell Berry’s vision of the Sabbath.

Andrea accompanied her talk with stunning photographs and, at one point, the song of a wood thrush. She agreed to allow me to share the talk here although, without the photos and bird song, it is not quite as spectacular. On the plus side, reading the talk allows you to sit for a while in the poems she shares.

By Andrea Sanders, delivered in the Adult Forum series “This Fragile Earth, Our Island Home” at the Parish of St. Mark and St. Paul on the Mountain, Sewanee TN, March 30, 2025

I want to start by thanking Robin Bates and his committee for putting together this Sunday Forum series. Like many of you, I have been delighted and inspired by what I have heard. Often, our themes and even our examples overlap. Hopefully, our synergy will fuel continued talk and action on these topics. 

My husband Tom is a nut about bicycles. He rides them, collects them from dumpsters, fixes them up, and gives them away. When you ask Tom how many bicycles a person should have, his answer is “N + 1,” with “N” standing for the number of bicycles you currently have and the “plus 1” being the next bicycle you get–and on to infinity. 

Why am I telling you about Tom and his bicycles? It’s because, while I was working on this talk and we were talking about the meaning of the Sabbath, Tom told me what happens to him when he rides a bike. He zips along, pedaling, not thinking, just getting into the rhythm–world passing by, wind on his face, sights and sounds around him. He says it becomes a moment, not of motion, but of great stillness as he sheds all the anxieties he woke up with that morning. Out of this motionless forward momentum emerge insights and revelations, ideas that probably would not have come to him had he simply stayed put inside his office, his eyes glued to a screen.

The restorative powers of stillness and reflection are what the Sabbath is all about, with a special resonance during the season of Lent. The word “sabbath” is derived from a Hebrew word meaning “rest.”  The word “Lent” comes from the Old English word lencten, which refers to the lengthening of days in the spring season.

To signal the beginning of this season, we observe Ash Wednesday, the day we are reminded of our earthly mortality. As Lent begins, some of us give up some form of earthly pleasure to honor the 40 days Jesus fasted in the desert. This quiet time of meditation, prayer, and abstinence from worldly desires prepares us for the celebration of Christ’s resurrection. Just as the wildflowers gather their strength underground to burst into bloom in the spring, we gather our strength during Lent to replenish and rejuvenate our spirits–to get our hearts and minds in the right place, ready to bloom in the spirit.

In his book The Sabbath, Rabbi Abraham Heschel defines the Sabbath as a retreat from the cares and materialism of daily existence. But he frames the experience as less of a retreat from and more of a retreat to a rejuvenating peace and glimpse of the eternal.

Rabbi Heschel talks about how, as humans, we are limited by our belief that time has a past, present, and future. Yet he observes that, from the perspective of eternity, humans are actually limited by space, not time. Honoring the Sabbath gives us an opportunity to step into Sabbath time, eternal time. He says, “Time is everlasting; it is the world of space which is perishing,” and by this he means the “world of space” where our mortal bodies reside. He continues:

It is the dimension of time wherein man meets God, wherein man becomes aware that every instant is an act of creation, a Beginning, opening up new roads for ultimate realizations. Time is the presence of God in the world of space, and it is within time that we are able to sense the unity of all beings.

In Herschel’s definition, “space” might be Tom’s pedals on the bike, whereas time is his still center and the opening of his mind. I’m sure we’ve all had moments where we are suddenly awash in eternity. It can happen anywhere, anytime: you might be sitting by a mountain stream or staring out at the Grand Canyon or looking into your brand-new grandbaby’s eyes–or just stepping out of your car at the Piggly Wiggly.

It’s a moment that feels like you’re hitting the pause button on regular, prosaic time. You recognize, fleetingly, your small place in the fabric of the universe but also your belongingness in it. You are one with it; you are one with God and creation. In Sabbath time, during which we glimpse the eternal, we also sense our unity with creation. 

Wendell Berry attempts to capture this “dimension of time” in Sabbaths, 2005, XIII:

Eternity is not an infinity.
It is not a long time.
It does not begin at the end of time.
It does not run parallel to time.
In its entirety it always was.
In its entirety it will always be.
It is entirely present always.

This talk will try to capture that spirit of quiet, reflective, yet active questing for a state of mind that is both present here on earth and also present in the eternity of creation–Sabbath time or Sabbath rest. As John Gatta tells us in his book Green Gospel, “Observance of the Sabbath, modelled on God’s seventh-day ‘rest,’ presented a formidable, sacred limit to humanity’s otherwise unlimited ambition to work and amass wealth, to achieve, to strive for more and more rather than resting in what had been given.” Sabbath rest is a time when we turn away from the noise and materialism of the workaday world–the world that often holds us prisoner to deadlines, appointments, reports, buying and selling. As Wordsworth said, 

The world is too much with us; late and soon,
Getting and spending, we lay waste our powers;—
Little we see in Nature that is ours;
We have given our hearts away, a sordid boon!

As we talk today, I hope you will take a mental vacation–a “Sabbath rest”– from thinking analytically and put yourself in your mind’s eye walking along your favorite path in the woods or gazing across your neighbor’s pasture or watching the sunset from the Sewanee cross. Sabbath rest is not just for Sunday or for Lent, but a practice that we can revisit again and again for restoration, strength, and insight. 

We will focus on Wendell Berry, a writer many of you know and love, and who infuses the sense of the eternal and our unity with Creation into his Sabbath poetry. Robin and I share another favorite author, the literature scholar Wayne Booth, who wrote a book called The Company We Keep: An Ethics of Fiction. In this book, Booth explains how reading is engaging in a reciprocal dialogue with another person–and sometimes we need to consider carefully the people we hang out with. Wendell Berry is the type of company we keep to make us better people. 

Berry, who has visited Sewanee multiple times, lives in Henry County, Kentucky, where he was born and has farmed for over 40 years. He has written over 50 books of poetry, fiction, and essays, all of which champion the agrarian life, living locally in harmony with nature, and basing one’s life on the bonds of neighborliness and affection for other people and all the earth’s inhabitants.

But what I just said makes him sound a little too mild; he is an activist: staunch in his advocacy against technology and against the misplaced value system in our current economy. His actions and writings on these topics are uncompromising and fierce, and they would definitely be appropriate for our forum topic “Our Fragile Earth.” However, for today’s talk, I have decided to focus on his more philosophical and meditative side.

Since 1979, Berry has periodically written and published what he calls his “Sabbath poems.” In his introduction to This Day, a collection of Sabbath poems he wrote from 1979 to 2013 and from which I choose many of the following lyrics, he writes,

On Sunday mornings I often attend a church in which I sometimes sat with my grandfather, in which I sometimes sit with my grandchildren, and in which my wife plays the piano. But I am a bad-weather churchgoer. When the weather is good, sometimes when it is only tolerable, I am drawn to the woods on the local hillsides or along the streams. . . . In such places, on the best of these Sabbath days, I experience a lovely freedom from expectations–other people’s and also my own. I go free from the tasks and intentions of my workdays, and so my mind becomes hospitable to unintended thoughts: to what I am very willing to call inspiration.

This quotation captures the idea that the Sabbath–like Tom’s bike ride–sets something free in us to make space for inspiration to enter in. And if it sounds like he is playing hooky from church as a “bad-weather churchgoer,” he is not the only one. You will recall Emily Dickinson’s poem “Some keep the Sabbath” from Robin’s talk just a couple of weeks ago:

Some keep the Sabbath going to Church –
I keep it, staying at Home –
With a Bobolink for a Chorister –
And an Orchard, for a Dome –

Some keep the Sabbath in Surplice –
I, just wear my Wings –
And instead of tolling the Bell, for Church,
Our little Sexton – sings.

God preaches, a noted Clergyman –
And the sermon is never long,
So instead of getting to Heaven, at last –
I’m going, all along.

Why do so many of us (including so many of my students) fall in love with this poem? Maybe because it captures

  • how the tiniest of nature’s inhabitants is sacred and evokes the sense of the sacred in us,
  • how the persona identifies with the bobolink–wearing her “wings” as though she herself is one of Matthew’s “least of these” or “lily of the field,” 
  • how the poem connects being immersed in nature and sensing infinity,
  • how the poet resolves that Heaven is right here, right now, all around us.

Wendell Berry too makes much of the deep connection between the infinite and the natural world.  Nature is the ongoing act of God’s creation, and–since we are a part of nature–we, too, are an ongoing act of God’s creation. Referencing the creation story in Genesis and the fourth commandment in Exodus, Berry tells us that

The Sabbath is the day, and the successive days honoring the day, when God rested after finishing the work of creation. . . . The idea of the Sabbath gains in meaning as it is brought out-of-doors and into a place where nature’s principles of self-sustaining wholeness and health are still evident. In such a place–as never, for me, under a roof–the natural and the supernatural, the heavenly and the earthly, the soul and the body, the wondrous and the ordinary, all appear to occur together in the one fabric of creation.

Like Emily Dickinson, Berry sees the presence of God in the trees, which are, for him, a “timbered choir.” In this poem, he is talking about a small woodland he “let alone” at his farm, land he allowed to recover naturally from having been strip-mined:

Sabbaths, 1986, I

Slowly, slowly, they return
To the small woodland let alone:
Great trees, outspreading and upright,
Apostles of the living light.

Patient as stars, they build in air
Tier after tier a timbered choir,
Stout beams upholding weightless grace 
Of song, a blessing on this place.

They stand in waiting all around,
Uprisings of their native ground, 
Downcomings of the distant light;
They are the advent they await.

Receiving sun and giving shade,
Their life’s a benefaction made,
And is a benediction said
Over the living and the dead.

In fall their brightened leaves, released,
Fly down the wind, and we are pleased
To walk on radiance, amazed.
O light come down to earth, be praised!

In The Gift of Good Land, Berry tells us,

In token of His landlordship, God required a Sabbath for the land, which was to be left fallow every seventh year; and a Sabbath of Sabbaths every fiftieth year, a “year of jubilee,” during which not only would the fields lie fallow, but the land would be returned to its original owners, as if to free it of the taint of trade and the conceit of human ownership. But beyond their agricultural and social intent, these Sabbaths ritualize an observance of the limits of “my power and the might of mine hand”–the limits of human control. Looking at their fallowed fields, the people are to be reminded that the land is there only by gift; it exists in its own right, and does not begin or end with any human purpose.

Berry sees the Sabbath of Sabbaths–the jubilee–as a celebration that emphasizes the gift of good land and the limitations of human control. In other words, it is an occasion for us to be humble, which reminds me of the season of Lent and also of another Sabbath poem:

Sabbaths, 2012, VIII

Since, despite the stern demands 
of scientist and realist, we will always
be supposing, let us suppose 
that Nature gave the world flowers
and birdsong as a language, by which
it might speak to discerning humans.
And what must we say back? Not
just thanks or praise, but acts
of kindness bespeaking kinship
with the creatures and with Nature, acts
faithful as the woods that dwells in place
time out of mind, self-denying
as the parenthood of the birds, and like
the flowers humble and beautiful. 

You’ll notice that this jubilee is also an occasion to give not only thanks and praise but also “acts / of kindness bespeaking kinship / with the creatures and with Nature.” Berry feels deeply the kinship with his land, his neighbors, and all of creation. Like Aldo Leopold in Sand County Almanac, he has learned to “think like a mountain.” Like Robin Wall Kimmerer in Braiding Sweetgrass, he has made respect for and reciprocity with all of creation the basis of his value system. Berry continues: 

[W]e depend upon other creatures and survive by their deaths. To live, we must daily break the body and shed the blood of Creation. When we do this knowingly, lovingly, skillfully, reverently, it is a sacrament. When we do it ignorantly, greedily, clumsily, destructively, it is a desecration. In such desecration we condemn ourselves to spiritual and moral loneliness, and others to want.

In an interview with Bill Moyers, Berry talks about the absurdity of farmers having to leave their country life behind because they can’t make a living. He says, “It’s a result of having the wrong idea about what we mean by ‘making a living’ in the first place. To make a living is not to make a killing, it’s to have enough.”

This idea of having “enough” and finding joy and fulfillment in sharing with and respecting the rest of creation is intimately tied to the idea of the Sabbath. Maria Popova, whose blog The Marginalian many of us enjoy, writes about how Berry’s insistence on taking a Sabbath rest constitutes an act of resistance against our culture’s “cult of more.” To take a Sabbath in nature is even more radical, for nature is “that eternal pasture of enoughness.” She continues:

To be in nature, without doing, is to be reminded that we are nature, too; that we cannot force the creative force that made us; that we need not keep breaking our own hearts on expectation’s cold hard edge of not-enough.

In the Moyers interview, Berry makes the connections between Nature, Sabbath, and values even more explicit:

I consider myself a person who takes the Gospel very seriously. . . . A lot of my writing, when it hasn’t been in defense of precious things, has been a giving of thanks for precious things. . . . It’s mighty hard  right now to think of anything that is precious that isn’t in danger.

People of religious faith know that the world is maintained every day by the same force that created it. It’s an article of my faith and belief that all creatures live by breathing God’s breath and participating in His spirit. And this means that the whole thing’s holy–the whole shootin’ match. There are no sacred and unsacred places; there are only sacred and desecrated places. So finally I see those gouges in the surface mine country as desecrations, not just as land abuse, not just as human oppression, but as desecration, as blasphemy.

His Sabbath poems defend and give thanks for precious things, and they celebrate the sacredness of nature and community. They share the joy of the Sabbath jubilee, the inevitability of the season of death, and the promise of rebirth. Furthermore, for Berry there is no separation between what an anthropologist might call the sacred and the profane. All are of a piece. All are woven into the same fabric. If we do not take care of the land and each other, we are blasphemers. 

In the poem “How to Be a Poet,” Berry gives some good advice:

Make a place to sit down.   
Sit down. Be quiet.
               . . .
There are no unsacred places;   
there are only sacred places   
and desecrated places.
Make a place to sit down.   
Sit down. Be quiet. 
               . . .
Accept what comes from silence.   
Make the best you can of it.   
Of the little words that come   
out of the silence, like prayers   
prayed back to the one who prays,   
make a poem that does not disturb   
the silence from which it came.

Berry often emphasizes the need for quiet, for silence. One reason is to make room to listen. Another is that words are simply inadequate. He says, “To be quiet, even wordless, in a good place is a better gift than poetry.” In celebrating the Sabbath outside in quiet solitude, he is honoring a sacred gift, one that we can enjoy on any day of the week:

That one is sometimes able, among the disturbances of the present world, to wander into some good and beautiful whereabouts of the woods, grow quiet, and come to rest is a gift, a wonder, and a kind of grace. Though associated with a particular day, this is a possibility that may present itself at any time.

Berry associates being silent and fully present in Nature with being open and receptive to grace, to life, and to eternity. Sometimes Berry’s language echoes that of T. S. Eliot, who also recognizes the inadequacy of language, the perception of the eternal, and the shadow of being human and being trapped in and tempted by the material world, where we lose vision, where we lose insight, as Jesus in human flesh was tempted in the desert:

                                       Words strain,
Crack and sometimes break, under the burden,
Under the tension, slip, slide, perish,
Decay with imprecision, will not stay in place,
Will not stay still.  

Time past and time future
What might have been and what has been
Point to one end, which is always present.

. . . say that the end precedes the beginning,
And the end and the beginning were always there
Before the beginning and after the end.
And all is always now. 

The Word in the desert
Is most attacked by voices of temptation,
The crying shadow in the funeral dance. . . . 
(from Four Quartets, “Burnt Norton”)

In the following Sabbath poem, Berry explores what happens when we cannot find Sabbath rest and are, in effect, lost in the desert:

Sabbaths, 1980, V

Six days of work are spent
To make a Sunday quiet
That Sabbath may return.
It comes in unconcern;
We cannot earn or buy it.
Suppose rest is not sent
Or comes and goes unknown,
The light, unseen, unshown.
Suppose the day begins
In wrath at circumstance,
Or anger at one’s friends
In vain self-innocence
False to the very light, 
Breaking the sun in half, 
Or anger at oneself
Whose controverting will 
Would have the sun stand still.
The world is lost in loss
Of patience; the old curse
Returns, and is made worse 
As newly justified.
In hopeless fret and fuss,
In rage at worldly plight
Creation is defied, all order is unpropped,
All light and singing stopped.

The Sabbath might go “unseen, unshown” because we are angry at events, at friends, at ourselves–but in all cases, “the world is lost in loss / Of patience” and “the old curse”–by which I think he means Adam’s curse–returns and “All light and singing” are “stopped.” 

In another poem, Berry’s language echoes Eliot’s as he strains to convey the now of creation and of the narrow passage we must navigate to get there. The ending, the passage through the narrow gap, requires a stripping away of the body’s life to the “shadow of the mercy of light.” To get to the Sabbath, we must leave anger and pettiness behind and pass through “the narrow gate”:

Sabbaths 1985, V

How long does it take to make the woods?
As long as it takes to make the world.
The woods is present as the world is, the presence
Of all its past, and of all its time to come.
It is always finished, it is always being made, the act
Of its making forever greater than the act of its destruction.
It is a part of eternity, for its end and beginning 
Belong to the end and beginning of all things, 
The beginning lost in the end, the end in the beginning.

What is the way to the woods, how do you go there?
By climbing up through the six days’ field,
kept in all the body’s years, the body’s 
sorrow, weariness, and joy. By passing through
the narrow gate on the far side of that field
where the pasture grass of the body’s life gives way
to the high, original standing of the trees.
By coming into the shadow, the shadow 
of the grace of the strait way’s ending, 
the shadow of the mercy of light.

Why must the gate be narrow?
Because you cannot pass beyond it burdened.
To come in among these trees you must leave behind
The six days’ world, all of it, all of its plans and hopes.
You must come without weapon or tool, alone, 
Expecting nothing, remembering nothing,
Into the ease of sign, the brotherhood of eye and leaf.

Sometimes Berry avoids explanation and tries to get us through that narrow passage by helping us simply be present in Nature, demanding nothing of it and quietly joining in the experience. Here is one of my favorite poems of this type:

Sabbath VIII, 1994

And now this leaf lies brightly on the ground. 

Why aren’t there more words in this poem? Berry is working in the tradition of haiku and imagism, in which words were used to evoke an explicit experience of the real. For example, the ancient poet Kobayashi Issa wrote:

On a branch
floating downriver
a cricket, singing.

The Modernist poet Ezra Pound, meanwhile, saw the sudden “apparition of face in the crowd” as “petals on a wet, black bough.”

For his part, T. S. Eliot sought the “objective correlative,” the precise words that would convey lived experience, and in “Ars Poetica,” Archibald Macleish famously said, “A poem should not mean / But be.” Virginia Woolf described her “moments of being,” and Gaston Bachelard talked about the “poetic instant.” Words are inadequate to convey reality, but poets, perhaps, take us as close as we can get. 

Here are two more beautiful examples. What I love about these poems is how they invite us to the experience, call us to the table, to be nourished by what we find there, much of which comes from our own memories and imagination–the realm of God and Creation. Close your eyes and listen to the wood thrush while I read these poems to you:

Sabbath 1996, VI

A bird the size 
of a leaf fills 
the whole lucid
evening with
his note, and flies. 

And:

Sabbath 1997, I

Best of any song 
is bird song 
in the quiet, but first 
you must have the quiet.

In these poems we become Emerson’s famous “transparent eyeball”:

In the woods, we return to reason and faith. There I feel that nothing can befall me in life—no disgrace, no calamity . . . which nature cannot repair. Standing on the bare ground—my head bathed by the blithe air, and uplifted into infinite space—all mean egotism vanishes. I become a transparent Eyeball; I am nothing; I see all; the currents of the Universal Being circulate through me; I am part or particle of God. 

Having played the song of the wood thrush, I remind you, as Tom reminded me, that Emerson’s friend Henry David Thoreau said in his Journal of July 5, 1852: “The thrush alone declares the immortal wealth and vigor that is in the forest. . . . Whenever a man hears it, he is young, and Nature is in her spring. Wherever he hears it, it is a new world and a free country, and the gates of heaven are not shut against him.” In the Sabbath moment, in Sabbath rest, the gates of heaven are opened to us.

We can pair Sabbath V of 1980, where Berry says, “The old curse / Returns, and is made worse,” with the idea of finding Sabbath rest by stepping a toe into eternity. When I read “The old curse,” I think, of course, of Adam’s curse–of the knowledge of good and evil, of being exiled from the garden to a wasteland, of alienation from God and intimate union with creation, of being lost to language and daily toil. To be human is to be mortal; life itself comes paired up with a death sentence. Creation is not all roses; the roses have thorns. The Sabbath reminds us that the story of creation is the story of life and death, joy and sorrow, pleasure and pain, triumph and tragedy. Experiencing the Sabbath gives us the perspective we need to see that all are of a piece, a tightly-woven fabric in eternity.

No one conveys the complexity of the sacred tapestry of creation better than Annie Dillard, whose Pilgrim at Tinker Creek is one long Sabbath excursion into the natural world. As she says, “Evolution loves death more than it loves you or me. . . . We value the individual supremely, and nature values him not a whit.” In fact, she says, “that something is everywhere and always amiss is part of the very stuff of creation.”

Dillar concludes, “The terms are clear: if you want to live you have to die. . . . A scientist calls it the Second Law of Thermodynamics. A poet says–and, of course, that poet is Dylan Thomas, “‘The force that through the green fuse drives the flower/Drives my green age.’” In other words, the same generative life that creates us and propels us also dooms us. How do we reconcile this truth with the fullness of creation as revealed in the Sabbath? 

Dillard recounts a dream where she saw “all the individual people . . . in their individual times and places . . . dying and being replaced by ever more people, one by one, like stitches in which whole worlds of feeling and energy were wrapped, in a never-ending cloth.” This is the fabric of creation–so huge and infinite that we cannot comprehend it. It is this ignorance that may prevent us from having faith. “Faithlessness,” she says,

is a cowering cowardice born of our very smallness, a massive failure of imagination. . . . If we were to judge nature by its common sense or likelihood, we wouldn’t believe the world existed. . . . The whole creation is one lunatic fringe. If creation had been left up to me, I’m sure I wouldn’t have had the imagination or courage to do more than shape a single, reasonably sized atom, smooth as a snowball, and let it go at that. No claims of any and all revelation could be so far-fetched as a single giraffe.

In the presence of the immensity of creation–and stifled by our perceptions of our own fallibility–ordinary humans tend to lack vision. Maybe this is one reason that poets and artists might end up saving the world. Dillard describes a goldfinch sitting atop a thistle, on a perch of fluffy, downy seeds surrounded by thorns. She uses the image to make a point about creation:

The thistle is part of Adam’s curse. “Cursed is the ground for thy sake; in sorrow shalt thou eat of it all the days of thy life; Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee.” A terrible curse: But does the goldfinch eat thorny sorrow with the thistle, or do I? If this furling air is fallen, then the fall was happy indeed. If this creekside garden is sorrow, then I seek martyrdom. This crown of thorns sits light on my skull, like wings. The Venetian Baroque painter Tiepolo painted Christ as a red-lipped infant clutching a goldfinch; the goldfinch seems to be looking around in search of thorns. Creation itself was the fall, a burst into the thorny beauty of the real.

Creation is both rose and thorns. To embrace our place in creation, we must embrace life and death, embrace the fall, embrace the mystery of both the beauty and the misery of existence, embrace our imperfections and the grace that allows us to rise above them. 

I am reminded of the Japanese concepts of wabi-sabi, finding beauty in the natural imperfections of people and things, and kintsugi, “golden joinery,” a technique in which precious pottery is repaired with gold–the lines of the brokenness making the pot even more beautiful. And these ideas remind me of Leonard Cohen’s famous phrases: 

Ring the bells that still can ring
Forget your perfect offering
There is a crack, a crack in everything
That’s how the light gets in…

We cannot allow our obsessions with our imperfections, our things, our lack of things–our everyday trivialities–blind us to the unfathomable richness we have been blessed with in the unity of creation. Echoing Thomas Merton’s exhortation for us to quit “diddl[ing] around in the contemplative life, making itsy-bitsy statues,” Dillard invites us–as does Berry–to stop tippy-toeing around in the quotidian and embrace the immensity of the gift we have been given. Dillard meets Berry in the gaps, in his “narrow gate,” his silent woods:

It is so self-conscious, so apparently moral, simply to step aside from the gaps where the creeks and winds pour down, saying, I never merited this grace, quite rightly, and then to sulk along the rest of your days on the edge of rage. I won’t have it. The world is wilder than that in all directions, more dangerous and bitter, more extravagant and bright. We are making hay when we should be making whoopee; we are raising tomatoes when we should be raising Cain, or Lazarus. Ezekiel excoriates false prophets as those who have “not gone up into the gaps.” The gaps are the thing.The gaps are the spirit’s one home, the altitudes and latitudes so dazzlingly spare and clean that the spirit can discover itself for the first time like a once-blind man unbound. The gaps are the cliffs in the rock where you cower to see the back parts of God; they are the fissures between mountains and cells the wind lances through, the icy narrowing fiords splitting the cliffs of mystery. Go up into the gaps. If you can find them; they shift and vanish too. Stalk the gaps. Squeak into a gap in the soil, turn, and unlock–more than a maple–a universe. This is how you spend this afternoon, and tomorrow morning, and tomorrow afternoon. Spend the afternoon. You can’t take it with you.

In the gaps is where we find rebirth and redemption and are at home in creation, as Berry reveals in these poems:

Sabbaths 1992, III

Again we come
to the resurrection
of bloodroot from the dark,

a hand that reaches up 
out of the ground,
holding a lamp.

And:

Sabbaths 1992, II

Lift up the dead leaves
and see, waiting 
in the dark, in cold March, 

the purplish stems, leaves, 
and buds of twinleaf,
infinitely tender, infinitely

expectant. They straighten
slowly into the light after
the nights of frost. At last

the venture is made: the brief
blossoms open, the petals fall, 
the hinged capsules of seed

grow big. The possibility
of this return returns
again to the seed, the dark, 

the long wait, and the light again.

And this poem, which emphasizes that being “invisible” in nature–the “transparent eyeball,” the meditative silence and receptivity of the Sabbath mind. We must pass through the “narrow gap” to be truly at home in creation: 

Sabbaths 1980, IV

The frog with lichened back and golden thigh
Sits still almost invisible
On leafed and lichened stem,
Invisibility
Its sign of being at home
There in its given place, and well.

The warbler with its quivering striped throat
Would live almost beyond my sight, 
Almost beyond belief,
But for its double note–
Among high leaves a leaf, 
At ease, at home in air and light.

And I, through woods and fields, through fallen days, 
Am passing to where I belong:
At home, at ease, and well, 
In Sabbaths of this place
Almost invisible, 
Toward which I go from song to song.

In a final Sabbath poem, I see a blessing and a benediction and a fine way to end this talk. Berry helps us realize that as we release our Earthly desires in the Sabbath moment and become one with creation, we recognize that we are “the maker’s joy in what is made,” which is “the joy in which we come to rest.” 

Sabbaths 2007, XII

Learn by little the desire for all things
Which perhaps is not desire at all 
But undying love which perhaps 
Is not love at all but gratitude
For the being of all things which
Perhaps is not gratitude at all 
But the maker’s joy in what is made,
The joy in which we come to rest.

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

How Swift Would Respond to Trump

Gulliver talking with the king of the Brobdingnagians

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Friday

Yesterday, while discussing Adrienne Rich’s poem “What Kinds of Times Are These,” I imagined her grappling with the question of how to speak to people about political danger. After a while, one begins tunning out the doomsayers, even when (or especially when) they’re right. Her answer is to speak to people indirectly through poetry. I imagine her saying, with Emily Dickinson, “Tell the truth but tell it slant.”

The reason why literature instruction is so vital is that many of the great authors have anticipated the issues we’re dealing with now. Take Gulliver’s Travels, for instance. When I heard that ICE had sent an innocent man to El Salvador’s notorious Terrorism Confinement Center based on an “administrative error”—and then complained that people were making a fuss over it—I thought of Gulliver complaining about the King of Brobdingnag’s “nice, unnecessary scruple” over gunpowder. Given that ICE officers are wielding such impressive power as they deport brown-skinned immigrants, I imagine Trump saying, why get hung up over the minor technicality that some of them have done nothing wrong?

I also thought of the line from Stanley Kubrick’s Doctor Strangelove when General Buck Turgidson’s “infallible” human reliability test fails to screen out a mad general who sets off World War III. When criticized by the president, Turgidson replies, “Well, I, uh, don’t think it’s quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up, sir.”

But back to Gulliver, who when he is in the land of the giants provides insight into Trump. Because he is a small man (literally), he seeks to impress by talking big. Gulliver thinks he will win the giant king’s admiration with the secret of gunpowder. In this, he reminds me of the way that Trump, in his first administration, talked about using nuclear weapons and bunker busting bombs—or for that matter, the way that is currently flaunting American might and casually talking about going to war with Canada, Greenland, and Panama. Here’s Gulliver attempting to impress the Brobdingnagian king:

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. That I knew the ingredients very well, which were cheap and common; I understood the manner of compounding them, and could direct his workmen how to make those tubes, of a size proportionable to all other things in his majesty’s kingdom, and the largest need not be above a hundred feet long; twenty or thirty of which tubes, charged with the proper quantity of powder and balls, would batter down the walls of the strongest town in his dominions in a few hours, or destroy the whole metropolis, if ever it should pretend to dispute his absolute commands.” This I humbly offered to his majesty, as a small tribute of acknowledgment, in turn for so many marks that I had received, of his royal favour and protection.

The king is as horrified as we should all be at Trump, and his reaction is one for the ages:

The king was struck with horror at the description I had given of those terrible engines, and the proposal I had made. “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; whereof,” he said, “some evil genius, enemy to mankind, must have been the first contriver. As for himself, he protested, that although few things delighted him so much as new discoveries in art or in nature, yet he would rather lose half his kingdom, than be privy to such a secret; which he commanded me, as I valued any life, never to mention any more.”

Impotent groveling insect unmoved at the prospect of blood and desolation? Yes, that’s our president. Unlike this enlightened king, Trump thinks that having absolute power over others should be every leader’s desire.

The Gulliver of Book II is an ardent patriot who thinks his country is the greatest. Under cross examination, however, the king carries away a picture that looks less like an idealized Great Britain and more like the Trump administration and his GOP enablers. Here’s his summation, which he figures out by reading between the lines of Gulliver’s praise:

My little friend Grildrig, you have made a most admirable panegyric upon your country; you have clearly proved, that ignorance, idleness, and vice, are the proper ingredients for qualifying a legislator; that laws are best explained, interpreted, and applied, by those whose interest and abilities lie in perverting, confounding, and eluding them. I observe among you some lines of an institution, which, in its original, might have been tolerable, but these half erased, and the rest wholly blurred and blotted by corruptions. It does not appear, from all you have said, how any one perfection is required toward the procurement of any one station among you; much less, that men are ennobled on account of their virtue; that priests are advanced for their piety or learning; soldiers, for their conduct or valour; judges, for their integrity; senators, for the love of their country; or counsellors for their wisdom.

Based on this, the king concludes, “I cannot but conclude the bulk of your natives to be the most pernicious race of little odious vermin that nature ever suffered to crawl upon the surface of the earth.”

While I like to think that the rest of the world is distinguishing between Trumpists and other Americans, I shudder to think how we will be viewed if we’re not able to stop all the damage that he is inflicting. I predict we will see increasing numbers of Americans pretending they’re Canadian when traveling abroad.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments closed

Poetry an Ally in Times Like These

Adrienne Rich

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Thursday

The horrors of being baselessly deported and imprisoned are becoming a daily occurrence in America, with one of the latest instances being an “administrative error.” Apparently Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, a El Salvadoran man here under protected legal status and the father of a U.S. citizen, has been sent to El Salvador’s notorious Terrorism Confinement Center, even though he is innocent of all wrongdoing.

According to the Associated Press, Abrego Garcia “was arrested in Baltimore on March 12 after working a shift as a sheet metal apprentice in Baltimore and picking up his 5-year-old son, who has autism and other disabilities, from his grandmother’s house.” Although ICE has acknowledged that they made a mistake, they are now, predictably, claiming that Abrego Garcia is a gang member. His lawyers point out that the U.S. Government “has never produced an iota of evidence.” Trumpism’s history of lying to cover up its crimes undoubtedly means that the charge is fabricated..

I wonder if, in her 1991 poem “What Kinds of Times Are These,” Adrienne Rich anticipated such seizures. After all, she talks about our country having “its own way of making people disappear.” So maybe, even 25 years ago, she sensed we had the potential. “Our country,” she writes, “is moving closer to its own truth and dread.”

The poem is responding to a fine Bertolt Brecht lyric where he writes that, when times are dark, “a conversation about trees is almost a crime.” The dark times he is referencing is Hitler coming to power. His point is that talking about anything else seems an indulgence:

Truly, I live in the dark ages.
What times are these, in which
A conversation about trees is almost a crime
For in doing so we maintain our silence about so much wrongdoing!

Brecht doesn’t like this state of affairs but appears to find it inevitable. While it’s necessary to focus on the evil in the world, he laments that doing so to the exclusion of all else distorts us:

For we knew only too well: 
Even the hatred of squalor 
Makes the brow grow stern. 
Even anger against injustice 
Makes the voice grow harsh. 
Alas, we 
Who wished to lay the foundations of kindness 
Could not ourselves be kind.  

Rich’s counter-response is that perhaps, at such moments, talking about trees is exactly what we need.

What Kind of Times Are These
By Adrienne Rich

There’s a place between two stands of trees where the grass grows uphill
and the old revolutionary road breaks off into shadows
near a meeting-house abandoned by the persecuted
who disappeared into those shadows.

I’ve walked there picking mushrooms at the edge of dread, but don’t be fooled
this isn’t a Russian poem, this is not somewhere else but here,
our country moving closer to its own truth and dread,
its own ways of making people disappear.

I won’t tell you where the place is, the dark mesh of the woods
meeting the unmarked strip of light—
ghost-ridden crossroads, leafmold paradise:
I know already who wants to buy it, sell it, make it disappear.

And I won’t tell you where it is, so why do I tell you
anything? Because you still listen, because in times like these
to have you listen at all, it’s necessary
to talk about trees.

As I read the poem, Rich seems to be saying that talking about trees is a necessary counter to authoritarianism and oppression. In the growth and hope of trees, there is an implied reproof to the forces of death. Talking about trees, in other words, isn’t an avoidance of fascism but a way of connecting with the life force necessary to fight it. In this way, Rich hopes to avoid the trap that Brecht identifies.

Years ago, I attended a symposium on Iran, held at my old college (St. Mary’s College of Maryland). In one session we discussed Reading Lolita in Tehran, and one political activist was critical, wondering why we were talking about literature—and why Azar Nafisi was receiving so much publicity—when there were much more pressing issues.

My response was that if the prospect of a society in which art could flourish was not one of the goals of political change, then what was the point? It was a version of a quote attributed to Emma Goldman, “If I can’t dance, I don’t want to be part of your revolution.” Rich is suggesting that, by listening carefully to poetry, we discover an essential ally in times like these.

I’m certainly finding it an ally in writing this blog. Whereas most of my posts these days are about our own dark times, I find my spirits lifted by the application of literature. It functions as a stable base and a guiding compass.

Emma Goldman quotation: While Goldman never wrote the quote attributed to her, it’s a nice distillation of her thinking. In 1973 anarchist printer Jack Frager printed tee shirts with the supposed Goldman quote, which is actually a summation of the Goldman passage:

At the dances I was one of the most untiring and gayest. One evening a cousin of Sasha, a young boy, took me aside. With a grave face, as if he were about to announce the death of a dear comrade, he whispered to me that it did not behoove an agitator to dance. Certainly not with such reckless abandon, anyway. It was undignified for one who was on the way to become a force in the anarchist movement. My frivolity would only hurt the Cause. I grew furious at the impudent interference of the boy. I told him to mind his own business. I was tired of having the Cause constantly thrown into my face. I did not believe that a Cause which stood for a beautiful ideal, for anarchism, for release and freedom from convention and prejudice, should demand the denial of life and joy. I insisted that our Cause could not expect me to become a nun and that the movement would not be turned into a cloister. If it meant that, I did not want it.

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

Shakespeare on Trans Rights

Stubbs, Carter, Stephens in Twelfth Night (1996)


Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Wednesday

In these dark times, we look desperately for points of light where we can find them, and one positive development has been all the judges ruling against Trump’s egregious executive orders. Recently, one court overturned his ban on transgendered people serving in the military and an appeals court upheld that ruling.

When it comes to transgender rights, we can count on William Shakespeare, who understood in a deep way the fragility of gender distinctions. Plays like Twelfth Night and As You Like It are critical for exploring why some feel compelled to change genders that don’t correspond with their birth anatomy.

That being said, Shakespeare also has a warning that progressives should heed given the outsized role that trans women competing in women’s sports has played in electoral politics. It’s an issue that alienates some liberals who otherwise have no problem with bathrooms or pronouns, partly because sports and domination are so connected. In the figure of Twelfth Night’s Orsino, the Bard shows what male entitlement looks like when it crosses gender lines.

But let’s look first at how Shakespeare challenges gender distinctions. To borrow from my book, in Twelfth Night

we encounter a man who discovers he has an inner woman, a woman who discovers she has an inner man, two men who are attracted to other men, and a woman who is attracted to another woman. Count Orsino gets to marry someone he once thought was a man; Lady Olivia makes overtures to another woman (although technically she thinks he’s a man); Viola, under the flimsiest of pretexts, passes herself off as a man; and Orsino for a time mimics behavior that he regards as feminine.

“Understanding humans as well as anyone ever has,” I go on to write, “Shakespeare knew that we are more complex than the gender labels foisted upon us by tradition, and he found an artistic vehicle to explore our complexity.”

We can regard the twins in the play, Viola and Sebastian, as stand-ins for all of us—we all have a male and a female side, and the lightning strike that splits their ship and separates them is symbolic of how, from the beginning, society assigns one gender and all the characteristics traditionally associated with it to each of us. For some, it feels as though the universe has played a terrible joke: a bolt of lightning out of the blue has separated them from an essential part of themselves.

Sometimes this ambiguity even shows up in the biological realm. There are people born with ambiguous sexual organs (“easier to dig a hole than erect a pole” has often been society’s surgical response), and there are people whose chromosomes don’t fall into either the xx or xy categories. As University of Hawaii biologist Milton Diamond succinctly puts it, “Nature loves diversity; society hates it.”

Thank goodness we have a society that is somewhat willing—at least so far—to allow people to openly cross the gender divide. Society is the beneficiary because people can serve in ways that otherwise would have been closed to them. From what I understand, trans members of the armed forces have made tremendous contributions. One reason America as a nation has flourished is because it has granted people the freedom to follow their genius, even when doing so breaks with past practice.

To voice my one concern, however, I offer up a personal story. To begin with some background, I was a small and shy boy when I was growing up, one who didn’t engage in roughhouse or play football (a religion in rural Tennessee). Although I am cis-gender, I vividly remember thinking that a mistake had been made somewhere, that I was actually a girl. I was riveted by stories of boys who looked like girls (Little Lord Fauntleroy) or actually were girls (Tip/Ozma in The Land of Oz), and when I encountered a recording of Twelfth Night in seventh grade, I listened to it over and over. I identified especially with Viola, with her male exterior hiding a female interior.

Here’s my story: once, at fifth grade recess, I left the boys and inserted myself in a girls’ dodgeball game. While I wasn’t athletic, my boy’s physiology meant that, for once in my life, I was the best player on the field. I still remember the satisfaction I felt. And I also remember the fury of Tootsie Green, the most athletic girl in the class, at how I had invaded her turf. She did everything she could to get me out of the game, ignoring all the other girls in the ring.

Of course, I had a testosterone advantage. If males are stronger and faster than women, it is because we have more muscle mass, larger frames, and larger lung and heart capacity. Weak though I was compared to other boys, I could dominate over girls, something males have a history of doing (to say the least). My reservation about trans women playing female sports is that there is not a level physiological playing field, giving them a built-in advantage.

Martine Navratilova, a pioneering lesbian athlete, got into trouble in 2019 when she made this point. Male athletes who transition to become female athletes but decline to undergo gender reassignment surgery, she said, are “cheating” and should not be allowed to compete against women. As a result of her comments, she was called transphobic, dismissed as a TERF (trans-exclusionary feminist), and dropped by Athlete Ally, an LGBTQ+ advocacy group.

Decades later, I remembered the brief sense of superiority I felt on that dodgeball pitch after seeing the movie Tootsie, where an unemployed actor (played by Dustin Hoffmann) passes himself off as a woman in order to get a job. An English colleague of mine expressed her fury about the film, which she said contends that it takes a man to be a superior woman.

Orsino certainly believes this. At the beginning of the play, he has discovered love and sweetness, which he regards as women’s domain. “If music be the food of love, play on,” he commands, lolling around rather than (as his attendant desires) going out deer hunting. Learning that Lady Olivia won’t consider his suit until she has spent seven years mourning her brother, he is overcome with admiration. Women, with their deep sensitivity, are far superior to men, he concludes. If she can love a brother that much, he muses, just think how much she will love a husband.

Note how his gender stereotyping locks both him and Olivia into a life-denying behavior. He admires her decision to mourn for seven years and she herself feels obligated to do so. It takes a figure like Viola, who refuses to conform to gender expectations, to free the two from these mental prisons.

But before that happens, we see what happens when someone with Orsino’s male privilege starts mimicking what he regards as female behavior. When Viola, in the guise of Cesario, tries to argue him out of his Olivia fixation—Olivia, she implies, is shrugging Orsino off the way Orsino would shrug off a woman who loved him—Orsino won’t accept the equation. Now that he has ventured into women’s territory, he wishes to control it. Love for women, he asserts, is merely an appetite whereas, for men like him, it involves the liver. (Note: The liver in the 17th century was considered the site of the soul, the vital organ and the central place of all forms of mental and emotional activity. Since then we have shifted the symbolism from liver to heart.) He doesn’t acknowledge that he earlier he attributed to Olivia a great liver:

There is no woman’s sides
Can bide the beating of so strong a passion
As love doth give my heart; no woman’s heart
So big, to hold so much; they lack retention.
Alas, their love may be called appetite,
No motion of the liver but the palate,
That suffer surfeit, cloyment, and revolt;
But mine is all as hungry as the sea,
And can digest as much. Make no compare
Between that love a woman can bear me
And that I owe Olivia.

So take that, women. Now that I’ve entered your domain, I can inform you that you are merely emotional when you think you are in love whereas men in love are having an oceanic experience.

What’s my point? In addition to having qualms about trans women playing women’s sports, I guess I’m also advising humility in the transitioning. Patriarchal arrogance, the very thing that some transitioning men are seeking to escape, strikes deep. At the very least, Orsino’s behavior can help us understand why some TERFs are hostile to trans women. Perhaps talking about the character may pave the way for more productive interactions.

Goodness knows we need such conversations at the present moment. Radical feminists find themselves targeted by Trumpists no less than trans folk. And then there are all those other letters in LGBTQ+–not only the “T”–that find themselves in jeopardy. The time has come for being politically smart and reaching out to others.

Further thought: As I talk about how acceptance of difference has been one of the foundations of American greatness, I should mention Louise Erdrich’s novel The Last Report about the Miracles at Little No Horse. In it, a woman passes herself off as a man so that she can serve an Ojibwe community as their Catholic priest. In the process, we see how the world would be enriched if Catholicism allowed women to serve as priests. Of course, “Father Damian” must hide her anatomical identity, but Erdrich’s big-hearted novel challenges gender distinctions in a compelling way–and in a way consistent with American dreams of ever expanding freedom.

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

An April Fools’ Day Poem

Randolph Caldecott, illus. from “Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog”

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Tuesday – April Fools’ Day

Oliver Goldsmith’s “An Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog,” with its wonderfully unexpected reversal, works as an April Fools’ joke. In the spirit of the day, I also share a group chat about what war plans would look like if Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth worked for Sauron.

I recalled Goldsmith’s poem, which is a satire on sanctimonious, holier-than-thou Christians, when I was reading stories of how Trump spiritual advisor Paula White-Cain is promising spiritual blessings for a mere $1000 donation. With contorted reasoning the televangelist is telling potential clients, “You’re not doing this to get something, but you’re doing it in honor to God, realizing what you can receive for your special Passover offering of $1,000 or more as the Holy Spirit leads you.”

And if you can’t afford $1000? Well, for $125 people can obtain an “Olive Wood communion set from the Holy Land,” including “unleavened bread and grape juice from the Holy Land.”

Meanwhile, Trumpist Christians, even while claiming to be born again and washed in the blood of the lamb, show few signs of following Jesus. I think especially of how many are reveling in Trumpism’s sadistic handling of immigrants. One could say, with Rappaccini’s daughter in the Hawthorne story, “Oh, was there not, from the first, more poison in thy nature than in mine?”

But that’s a heavy message to attach to this comic tour de force. So set aside politics for a moment and enjoy.

An Elegy on the Death of a Mad Dog
By Oliver Goldsmith

Good people all, of every sort,
    Give ear unto my song;
And if you find it wond’rous short,
    It cannot hold you long.

In Isling town there was a man,
    Of whom the world might say,
That still a godly race he ran,
    Whene’er he went to pray.

A kind and gentle heart he had,
    To comfort friends and foes;
The naked every day he clad,
    When he put on his clothes.

And in that town a dog was found,
    As many dogs there be,
Both mongrel, puppy, whelp, and hound,
    And curs of low degree.

This dog and man at first were friends;
    But when a pique began,
The dog, to gain some private ends,
    Went mad and bit the man.

Around from all the neighboring streets,
    The wondering neighbors ran,
And swore the dog had lost his wits,
    To bite so good a man.

The wound it seemed both sore and sad,
    To every Christian eye;
And while they swore the dog was mad,
    They swore the man would die.

But soon a wonder came to light,
    That showed the rogues they lied,
The man recovered of the bite,
    The dog it was that died.

And now for the group chat, which of course is a parody of the discussion carried out by the “Houthi PC Small Group.” The on-line conversation, which included such top government officials as the Vice President, the Secretary of State, and the Secretary of Defense, also inadvertently added the editor of The Atlantic. Jeffrey Goldberg, who originally thought the chat was a hoax, learned about planned air strikes on Yemen shortly before they were launched. And who knows what other foreign entities were listening in?

The parody was authored by r/NonCredibleDefense (MilesLongthe3rd) and appeared on Reddit:

Gondor assault small group

Witch King: My lord, shall I launch the attack on Gondor?
Sauron: As soon as possible!
Gothmog: THE AGE OF MEN IS OVER
Gandalf: Looks like I’d better light the beacons 🔥 🔥 🔥
Sauron: Is that fucking Gandalf in our Mordor chat? Who the fuck added a wizard? ANSWER ME!

To riff off of Mark Twain’s legendary remark, “Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Trump’s Cabinet. But I repeat myself.”

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

Trumpism as the Hamlet Story

Coke Smyth, Hamlet Stabs Polonius

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Monday

As awful as recent developments may be with regard to the Trump administration grabbing people off the streets and sending them to prison camps in El Salvador and Louisiana, I find a tiny degree of comfort that great writers of the past have recognized such reprehensible behavior and called it out in memorable poetry. Esquire’s Charles Pierce has applied Hamlet to Karoline Leavitt, White House spokesperson, after she jeered at Trump’s victims.

Here’s the sweet-smiling Leavitt commenting on the horrific video, promoted by the Trump administration, of Salvadoran soldiers and police officers brutalizing people who have been sent there, many because of misinterpreted tattoos. Asked whether the purpose of the sadistic recording is to persuade migrants to self deport, Leavitt replied, “We are encouraging illegal immigrants to actively self-deport to maybe save themselves from being in one of these fun videos” (Pierce’s italics).

To which Pierce responds, “The woman is the living embodiment of Hamlet’s conclusion that ‘one may smile, and smile, and be a villain.’”

Hamlet is referring here to Claudius. The prince has just learned from his dead father’s ghost that Claudius poured poison into his ear while he was sleeping. Hamlet, who it appears has been filling manuscripts with various observations, resolves from this moment on to devote his note taking to a single subject: the “smiling, damnèd villain” that is his uncle:

I’ll wipe away all trivial, fond records,
 All saws of books, all forms, all pressures past,
 That youth and observation copied there,
 And thy commandment all alone shall live
Within the book and volume of my brain,
 Unmixed with baser matter. Yes, by heaven!
 …
 O villain, villain, smiling, damnèd villain!
 My tables—meet it is I set it down
That one may smile and smile and be a villain.
 At least I am sure it may be so in Denmark.

We should all have Hamlet’s focus at the moment. Thinking of the play, I can’t help but think of Hamlet, Sr. as our great presidents of the past—say, a combination of Washington and Lincoln—coming to warn us that our democracy has been taken over by a usurper. American democracy, for all its drawbacks, has been a jewel in Enlightenment’s crown, and now it is being sold to the highest bidder by a money-grubbing huckster. Trump has seduced America as Claudius seduces Gertrude, who is failing to appreciate the man she so casually forgets:

The Ghost: Ay, that incestuous, that adulterate beast,
With witchcraft of his wits, with traitorous gifts—
 O wicked wit and gifts, that have the power
 So to seduce!—won to his shameful lust
 The will of my most seeming-virtuous queen.

We, meanwhile, are like Hamlet, stunned by the contrast between the greatness of America’s past and its shabby present. It’s a contrast comparable to that between Hamlet’s father and his uncle, which Hamlet sets forth for his mother:

Look here upon this picture and on this,
The counterfeit presentment of two brothers.
See what a grace was seated on this brow,
 Hyperion’s curls, the front of Jove himself,
 An eye like Mars’ to threaten and command,
 A station like the herald Mercury
 New-lighted on a heaven-kissing hill,
A combination and a form indeed
 Where every god did seem to set his seal
 To give the world assurance of a man.
 This was your husband. Look you now what follows.
 Here is your husband, like a mildewed ear
Blasting his wholesome brother. Have you eyes?
 Could you on this fair mountain leave to feed
 And batten on this moor? Ha! Have you eyes?

Trump as a mildewed ear? A moor compared to a mountain? And not only when set against the towering figures of Washington and Lincoln. Barack Obama and Joe Biden are mountains compared to this narcissistic braggart.

Meanwhile, Trump sycophants like Leavitt are the Poloniuses in this drama and should take heed what happens to him. “A rat, a rat,” shouts Hamlet as he stabs Polonius through the tapestry. Or in the immortal words of NeverTrumper Rick Wilson, “Everything that Trump touches dies.”

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

Her Maker’s Maker, Her Father’s Mother

Fra Angelico, The Annunciation

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Sunday

John Donne, who believes that God loves for us to use our imaginations—especially when we engage in playful paradoxes and witty wordplay—brings the full power of his intelligence to celebrate St. Gabriel’s visit to Mary, supposedly on or around March 25. (After all, March 25 is nine months before December 25.) In Donne’s poem “Annunciation,” the paradoxes include:

–Jesus “cannot sin, and yet all sins must bear”;
–Jesus “cannot die, yet cannot choose but die”;
–Jesus is at once son and brother to Mary;
–Mary is her “Maker’s maker” and her “Father’s mother”;
–in the darkness of her womb she has light:
–cloistered in the smallness of that womb is immensity

Donne also has fun with the double meaning of the word “conceived”: God conceived that this moment would happen (“In the beginning was the Word”), which led Mary to conceive the baby Jesus. And the poet goes crazy with the word “all” in the first two lines.

Annunciation
By John Donne

Salvation to all that will is nigh;
That All, which always is all everywhere,
Which cannot sin, and yet all sins must bear,
Which cannot die, yet cannot choose but die,
Lo! faithful Virgin, yields Himself to lie
In prison, in thy womb; and though He there
Can take no sin, nor thou give, yet He’ll wear,
Taken from thence, flesh, which death’s force may try.
Ere by the spheres time was created thou
Wast in His mind, who is thy Son, and Brother;
Whom thou conceivest, conceived; yea, thou art now
Thy Maker’s maker, and thy Father’s mother,
Thou hast light in dark, and shutt’st in little room
Immensity, cloister’d in thy dear womb.

I’m struck by how Donne’s sonnet (iambic pentameter with an abba-cddc-efef-gg rhyme scheme) can’t easily accommodate words like “salvation” and “immensity”– just as Mary’s mortal womb can’t contain Jesus’s immortality.” Donne at once locks his subject into a tight verse form and has his subject explode the container.

The lesson? God is always bigger than our attempts to reduce Him/Her/It to the measure of our understanding. When people attempt to employ God to advance their own narrow agendas, God won’t play along. After all, God is “that All, which always is all everywhere.”

Oh yes, and God is also accessible “to all.”

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Trump, Hitler: Two Storytelling Narcissists

Channeling Evita and Mussolini, Trump poses in the Kennedy Center

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Friday

Much has been made—and some comfort found—in the fact that the Trump-Musk administration resembles the gang that couldn’t shoot straight. Inadvertently inviting a reporter into a high-level meeting discussing battle plans for an about-to-be-launched attack is only the latest example of many.

It’s less comforting to learn, however, that the same could be said of Adolph Hitler’s administration. As Tom Phillips’s recent book HUMANS: A Brief History of How We F*cked It All Up observes, Hitler was actually “an incompetent, lazy egomaniac and his government was an absolute clown show.”

Phillips points this out to counter our impression that the Nazi machine was ruthlessly efficient. In actuality, it resembled what we’re currently seeing from Trump:

[Hitler’s] government was constantly in chaos, with officials having no idea what he wanted them to do, and nobody was entirely clear who was actually in charge of what. He procrastinated wildly when asked to make difficult decisions, and would often end up relying on gut feeling, leaving even close allies in the dark about his plans. His “unreliability had those who worked with him pulling out their hair,” as his confidant Ernst Hanfstaengl later wrote in his memoir Zwischen Weißem und Braunem Haus. This meant that rather than carrying out the duties of state, they spent most of their time in-fighting and back-stabbing each other in an attempt to either win his approval or avoid his attention altogether, depending on what mood he was in that day.

Phillips notes that there is debate amongst historians about “whether this was a deliberate ploy on Hitler’s part to get his own way, or whether he was just really, really bad at being in charge of stuff.” He himself concludes that, “when you look at Hitler’s personal habits, it’s hard to shake the feeling that it was just a natural result of putting a work-shy narcissist in charge of a country.”

What Germany’s elites failed to realize, however—and what many Americans failed to realize—is that just because you’re incompetent doesn’t mean that you can’t take over a country.

Furthermore, although lazy idiots, Trump and Hitler knew/know how to put on a show. In my book Better Living through Literature I talk about Jonathan Gottschall’s Storytelling Animal: How Stories Make Us Human, which looks at Hitler’s genius in this area. Gottschall examines “how he used story in his rise to power, and how he suppressed countervailing stories”:

Starting off with the Fuhrer at 16, Gottschall says that Hitler’s megalomania was triggered by Richard Wagner’s opera Rienzi and that he relied on Wagner ever after. The opera tells a story about a populist hero who rises to power and then is betrayed by his former allies and dies in a glorious last stand. In other words, Wagner’s work operatically fed both Hitler’s megalomania and his narcissistic self-pity. Gottschall argues that Hitler essentially “ruled through art, and he ruled for art.” Citing Frederic Spotts’s Hitler and the Power of Aesthetics, he notes that Hitler’s goals were more “broadly artistic” than military or political. According to Spotts, “Hitler’s interest in the arts was as intense as his racism; to disregard the one is as profound a distortion as to pass over the other.”

Because of his interest in art, Hitler, along with his chief propagandist Joseph Goebbels, paid special attention to literature, targeting books they claimed were “un-German in spirit.” His ban, however, worked as an indirect compliment, as Bertolt Brecht observes in his poem “The Burning of the Books.” By consigning to the flames such writers as Heinrich Mann, Brecht, Ernst Glaser, Erich Kastner, Jack London, Theodore Dreiser, Ernest Hemingway, Heinrich Heine, and Thomas Mann, the Nazis implicitly acknowledged, as Gottschall puts it, that “ink people are among the most powerful and dangerous people in the world.”

I thought of Gottschall’s book and Hitler’s fixation on culture as I watched Trump assume directorship of the Kennedy Center and pose, Evita-like, from the upper balcony. (He may also have been channeling Mussolini.) If everything is about showy narratives, then it makes sense that he would become excited over staging musicals. (Apparently he wants to bring back Evita, Cats, and Phantom of the Opera.) We saw this in his first administration when he fantasized about Red Square-style military parades, worried about his hair getting wet when visiting Normandy Beach cemeteries, and criticized his chief of staff General John Kelly for inviting a disabled vet to sing the national anthem. His policy positions may be an inch deep, allowing subordinates to dictate his agenda, but he knows how to spin a narrative.

Because Hitler had similar skills, he was able to launch a war that led to between 70 and 85 million dead. Trump will never achieve that level of “success,” but between his Covid response, his attacks on USAID, his order to halt funding childhood vaccinations abroad (a program that has reportedly saved 18.8 children’s lives since its inception in 2000), and his support for Russia in the Ukraine conflict, he’s tallying an impressive number of deaths on his own.

But hey, if he can lord it over our cultural institutions, it will all have been worth it. Unlike Evita, however, he will not be cried for when he falls.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Kafka and America’s Disappeared

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at [email protected]. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.

Thursday

In a conversation I had last week with author Maggie Thrash, I learned that dystopian science fiction, long a bestselling genre, is less popular these days. The major reason makes sense. Why read dark warnings about the future when the future is here, when George Orwell’s 1984 appears to be an operations manual for the current administration and Handmaid’s Tale is a step away from becoming reality?

I mention this latter example in light of terrifying developments regarding female reproduction. I recommend subscribing to Jessica Valenti’s free substack blog Abortion, Every Day  if you want a full rundown. There you can read about women being arrested for miscarriages, Texas midwives being charged with felonies, and pregnant women dying of sepsis when they could have received life-saving abortions. The situation worsens by the day.

In today’s post, however, I want to focus on those people who are being disappeared, a development reminiscent of Kafka’s Trial. The Guardian has an account of a Canadian entrepreneur who, for two weeks, found herself in ICE custody and then two private prisons after she entered the country legally. Fortunately Jasmine Mooney, as she notes in the article, is one of the lucky ones, thanks to various support systems she could draw on.

Others have not been so fortunate. Many of the Venezuelans sent to the notorious El Salvador prison have little legal recourse, even though they are not in fact gang members (apparently ICE has been misinterpreting their tattoos). These misidentifications haven’t prevented the State Department under Marco Rubio from cheering their horrific treatment. The U.S., it appears, is several steps into our version of Pastor Martin Niemöller’s famous poem, “First they came for the communists.”

At the very end of Kafka’s Trial, we watch as K is disappeared. I won’t get into K’s psychological drama here, how he’s so beaten down that he practically accedes to his execution. Rather, I focus on the fact that he’s innocent of all wrongdoing. For no reason at all—certainly no reason that anyone in the book gives—he has been singled out to be killed.

In a scenario that is becoming increasingly common in the States, two men show up at K’s door and, without any explanation, escort him out:

[T]hey took his arms in a way that K. had never experienced before. They kept their shoulders close behind his, did not turn their arms in but twisted them around the entire length of K.’s arms and took hold of his hands with a grasp that was formal, experienced and could not be resisted. K. was held stiff and upright between them, they formed now a single unit so that if any one of them had been knocked down all of them must have fallen. They formed a unit of the sort that normally can be formed only by matter that is lifeless.

The men escort K to an abandoned quarry, where they prepare for the execution:

After exchanging a few courtesies about who was to carry out the next tasks—the gentlemen did not seem to have been allocated specific functions—one of them went to K. and took his coat, his waistcoat, and finally his shirt off him….[Then he took him under the arm and walked up and down with him a little way while the other gentleman looked round the quarry for a suitable place. When he had found it he made a sign and the other gentleman escorted him there. It was near the rockface, there was a stone lying there that had broken loose. The gentlemen sat K. down on the ground, leant him against the stone and settled his head down on the top of it….Then one of the gentlemen opened his frock coat and from a sheath hanging on a belt stretched across his waistcoat he withdrew a long, thin, double-edged butcher’s knife which he held up in the light to test its sharpness. The repulsive courtesies began once again, one of them passed the knife over K. to the other, who then passed it back over K. to the first. K. now knew it would be his duty to take the knife as it passed from hand to hand above him and thrust it into himself. But he did not do it, instead he twisted his neck, which was still free, and looked around. He was not able to show his full worth, was not able to take all the work from the official bodies, he lacked the rest of the strength he needed and this final shortcoming was the fault of whoever had denied it to him.

And finally this:

But the hands of one of the gentleman were laid on K.’s throat, while the other pushed the knife deep into his heart and twisted it there, twice. As his eyesight failed, K. saw the two gentlemen cheek by cheek, close in front of his face, watching the result. “Like a dog!” he said, it was as if the shame of it should outlive him.

The “like a dog” thought points to how he has been stripped of his humanity and reduced to such a state that he sees himself as an animal. When a society starts descending to that level, we are in Nazi territory. Throughout the novel, K has attempted to do everything society has instructed him to, only to end up here. The allegorical “K” stands for all of us.

America has become Amerika.

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