Secret Garden, Hidden Soul

Dixie Egerickx as Mary in The Secret Garden

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Spiritual Sunday

For some reason, I recently experienced the urge to reread the Francis Hodgson Burnett novels that played a key role in my childhood. My ranking has changed so that Little Lord Fauntleroy has fallen from first to third, but The Secret Garden and A Little Princess still hold me in their magic the way they did then.

The secret garden that Mary discovers works as a metaphor for the soul, and the central theme of the book is characters reconnecting with that part of themselves that they have lost touch with. The drama is captured through images of spring growth, which the children call Magic:

They always called it Magic and indeed it seemed like it in the months that followed—the wonderful months—the radiant months—the amazing ones. Oh! the things which happened in that garden! If you have never had a garden, you cannot understand, and if you have had a garden you will know that it would take a whole book to describe all that came to pass there. At first it seemed that green things would never cease pushing their way through the earth, in the grass, in the beds, even in the crevices of the walls. Then the green things began to show buds and the buds began to unfurl and show color, every shade of blue, every shade of purple, every tint and hue of crimson.

And:

The seeds Dickon and Mary had planted grew as if fairies had tended them. Satiny poppies of all tints danced in the breeze by the score, gaily defying flowers which had lived in the garden for years and which it might be confessed seemed rather to wonder how such new people had got there. And the roses—the roses! Rising out of the grass, tangled round the sun-dial, wreathing the tree trunks and hanging from their branches, climbing up the walls and spreading over them with long garlands falling in cascades—they came alive day by day, hour by hour. Fair fresh leaves, and buds—and buds—tiny at first but swelling and working Magic until they burst and uncurled into cups of scent delicately spilling themselves over their brims and filling the garden air.

As Dylan Thomas puts it, “The force that through the green fuse drives the flower/ Drives my green age.”

This magic works not only on the children but on the heartsore owner of the estate, who flees from the garden after his wife is killed by a falling tree limb. Following ten years of empty wandering in a spiritual desert, however, he experiences a Wordsworthian connection with nature that transforms him. It occurs when he is walking in the Austrian Alps and settles upon a carpet of moss by a stream. What Wordsworth describes in Tintern Abbey happens to Archibald Craven as he gazes at the stream and the birds that “come and dip their heads to drink in it and then flick their wings and fly away.” In Wordsworth’s case, the poet is visited by a “blessed mood”

In which the burthen of the mystery,
In which the heavy and the weary weight
Of all this unintelligible world,
Is lightened:—that serene and blessed mood,
In which the affections gently lead us on,—
Until, the breath of this corporeal frame
And even the motion of our human blood
Almost suspended, we are laid asleep
In body, and become a living soul:
While with an eye made quiet by the power
Of harmony, and the deep power of joy,
We see into the life of things.

Burnett writes:

As he sat gazing into the clear running of the water, Archibald Craven gradually felt his mind and body both grow quiet, as quiet as the valley itself. He wondered if he were going to sleep, but he was not. He sat and gazed at the sunlit water and his eyes began to see things growing at its edge. There was one lovely mass of blue forget-me-nots growing so close to the stream that its leaves were wet and at these he found himself looking as he remembered he had looked at such things years ago. He was actually thinking tenderly how lovely it was and what wonders of blue its hundreds of little blossoms were. He did not know that just that simple thought was slowly filling his mind—filling and filling it until other things were softly pushed aside. It was as if a sweet clear spring had begun to rise in a stagnant pool and had risen and risen until at last it swept the dark water away. But of course he did not think of this himself. He only knew that the valley seemed to grow quieter and quieter as he sat and stared at the bright delicate blueness. He did not know how long he sat there or what was happening to him, but at last he moved as if he were awakening and he got up slowly and stood on the moss carpet, drawing a long, deep, soft breath and wondering at himself. Something seemed to have been unbound and released in him, very quietly.

“What is it?” he said, almost in a whisper, and he passed his hand over his forehead. “I almost feel as if—I were alive!”

The focus on the forget-me-nots also brings to mind the concluding lines of Wordsworth’s Intimations of Immortality:

Thanks to the human heart by which we live,
   Thanks to its tenderness, its joys, and fears,
   To me the meanest flower that blows can give
   Thoughts that do often lie too deep for tears.

In Secret Garden, when asked by the children whether the process is indeed Magic, Susan Sowerby, functioning in the book as the wise mother, observes that the label doesn’t matter. Having come upon the children right after they have sung the Doxology—“Praise God from whom all blessings flow”—Susan observes,

I never knowed it by that name [“Magic”] but what does th’ name matter? I warrant they call it a different name i’ France an’ a different one i’ Germany. Th’ same thing as set th’ seeds swellin’ an’ th’ sun shinin’ made thee a well lad an’ it’s th’ Good Thing. It isn’t like us poor fools as think it matters if us is called out of our names. Th’ Big Good Thing doesn’t stop to worrit, bless thee. It goes on makin’ worlds by th’ million—worlds like us. Never thee stop believin’ in th’ Big Good Thing an’ knowin’ th’ world’s full of it—an’ call it what tha’ likes.

“Big Good Thing” works as well as any description. So does her next appellation, which is “Joy Maker”:

Th’ Magic listened when tha’ sung th’ Doxology. It would ha’ listened to anything tha’d sung. It was th’ joy that mattered. Eh! lad, lad—what’s names to th’ Joy Maker,”

When a New York Times reporter tried to pin the author down to a particular religious influence, Burnett gave a response very much in the Sowerby spirit:

I am not a Christian Scientist, I am not an advocate of New Thought [like Theosophy], I am not a disciple of the Yogi teaching, I am not a Buddhist, I am not a Mohammedan, I am not a follower of Confucius. Yet I am all of these things.

Late in the book, Burnett attempts to set forth her philosophy. In the process, she articulates what I think Jesus meant by creating the kingdom of God on earth. The passage occurs in response to Colin declaring, in his exuberance at his new-found health, “I shall live forever—and ever—and ever”:

One of the strange things about living in the world is that it is only now and then one is quite sure one is going to live forever and ever and ever. One knows it sometimes when one gets up at the tender solemn dawn-time and goes out and stands alone and throws one’s head far back and looks up and up and watches the pale sky slowly changing and flushing and marvelous unknown things happening until the East almost makes one cry out and one’s heart stands still at the strange unchanging majesty of the rising of the sun–which has been happening every morning for thousands and thousands and thousands of years. One knows it then for a moment or so. And one knows it sometimes when one stands by oneself in a wood at sunset and the mysterious deep gold stillness slanting through and under the branches seems to be saying slowly again and again something one cannot quite hear, however much one tries. Then sometimes the immense quiet of the dark blue at night with millions of stars waiting and watching makes one sure; and sometimes a sound of far-off music makes it true; and sometimes a look in someone’s eyes.

Or as Wordsworth puts in in Tintern Abbey,

And I have felt
A presence that disturbs me with the joy
Of elevated thoughts; a sense sublime
Of something far more deeply interfused,
Whose dwelling is the light of setting suns,
And the round ocean and the living air,
And the blue sky, and in the mind of man:
A motion and a spirit, that impels
All thinking things, all objects of all thought,
And rolls through all things.

I sensed Burnett’s vision as a child. I find it even more powerful now.

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

Crucial Support in the Face of Death

Winfrey (Mattie), Whitfield (Ciel) in Women of Brewster Place

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Friday

Yesterday I discussed how much I admired Kitty in Anna Karenina for nursing her dying brother-in-law, despite the objections of a husband that wants to protect her from all unpleasantness. Today I write about another woman who will not be denied her place by someone who is dying. Such literature inspires us by showing how life insists upon itself, despite all obstacles.

The character I have in mind is Mattie Michael in Gloria Naylor’s The Women of Brewster Place. The novel is a series of stories about Black women who live in an urban cul-de-sac, and Mattie has had her share of troubles, from being beaten by her father and leaving home for an out-of-wedlock pregnancy to losing this son years later when he jumps bail following a manslaughter charge. Having known such sorrow, she doesn’t hold back when her next-door-neighbor is close to death.

Ciel has lost her baby girl after the child electrocutes herself by sticking a fork in a socket. Ravaged by grief, she decides to die herself, refusing all food and drink:

People had mistaken it for shock when she refused to cry. They thought it some special sort of grief when she stopped eating and even drinking water unless forced to her hair went uncombed and her body unbathed. But Ciel was not grieving for Serena. She was simply tired of hurting. And she was forced to slowly give up the life that God had refused to take from her.

While others, somewhat like Kitty’s Levin, shy away from what they’re seeing, Mattie does not. Instead, she charges in, refusing to let death have dominion:

Mattie stood in the doorway, and an involuntary shudder when through her when she saw Ciel’s eyes. Dear God, she thought, she’s dying, and right in front of our faces.

“Merciful Father, no!” she bellowed. There was no prayer, no bended kneed or sackcloth supplication in those words, but a blasphemous fireball that shot forth and went smashing against the gates of heaven, raging and kicking, demanding to be heard.

“No! No! No!” Like a black Brahman cow, desperate to protect her young, she surged into the room, pushing the neighbor woman and the others out of her way.

Like Kitty with Levin’s brother, Mattie instinctively knows what the occasion calls for as she takes Ciel in her arms:

She sat on the edge of the bed and enfolded the tissue-thin body in her huge ebony arms. And she rocked. Ciel’s body was so hot it burned Mattie when she first touched her, but she held on and rocked. Back and forth, back and forth—she had Ciel so tightly she could feel her young breast flatten against the buttons of her dress. The black mammoth gripped so firmly that the slightest increase of pressure would have cracked the girl’s spine. But she rocked.

Perhaps there’s a slight echo of Walt Whitman’s “Out of the Cradle Endlessly Rocking” here because the rocking takes on archetypal dimensions. Mattie becomes that force which, through the long history of human suffering, provides a comfort so deep as to keep the race keeping on:

Ciel moaned. Mattie rocked. Propelled by the sound, Mattie rocked her out of that bed, out of that room, into a blue vastness just underneath the sun and above time. She rocked her over Aegean seas so clean they shone like crystal, so clear the fresh blood of sacrificed babies torn from their mother’s arms and given to Neptune could be seen like pink froth on the water. She rocked her on and on, past Dachau, where soul-gutted Jewish mothers swept their children’s entrails off laboratory floors. They flew past the spilled brains of Senegalese infants whose mothers had dashed them on the wooden sides of slave ships. And she rocked on.

And in that comfort, which passeth all human understanding, she finds her way to the heart of the pain:

She rocked her into her childhood and let her see murdered dreams. And she rocked her back, back into the womb, to the nadir of her hurt, and they found it—a slight silver splinter, embedded just below the surface of the skin. And Mattie rocked and pulled—and the splinter gave way, but its roots were deep, gigantic, ragged, and they tore up flesh with bits of fat and muscle tissue clinging to them. They left a huge hole, which was already starting to pus over, but Mattie was satisfied. It would heal.

And Ciel does heal. First she retches (“After a while she heaved only air, but the body did not seem to want to stop”), which Naylors describes as “exorcising the evilness of pain.” Then Mattie gives her water, gently bathes her, and wraps her in a clean sheet. The session ends in healing tears:

And Ciel lay down and cried. But Mattie knew the tears would end. And she would sleep. And morning would come.

Dylan Thomas counseled us not to go gentle into that good night but to “rage and burn” at the approach of death. When Julia and I lost our Justin, I was like King Hrethel in Beowulf, who crawls into bed when he loses his eldest son, never to emerge, but Julia insisted on life. I still remember, the morning after, going out at dawn into the grass by the inlet close to our house and lying together in the wet grass. Although our grief shook us to our core, she insisted that we keep going.

And we have.

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

Tolstoy’s Kitty and a Dying Patient

Victorian nurses caring for a dying man suffering from Tuberculosis

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Thursday

My favorite episode in Anna Karenina is the one where Levin tries to protect his new wife from his dying brother—he doesn’t want her to have to confront the unpleasantness of the world—only to discover that she can handle the situation better than he can. At that moment, he realizes he has married a woman with far more depth than he realized.

The episode also raises a question I’ve long thought about: why do women seem more able to handle sickness, dying, and death better than men?

Such a question comes with the caveat that all gender generalizations are suspect and none should be seen as absolute. In my own experience, however, this has proved to be the case. When my oldest son died and our family was lost in a haze, a number of women descended upon our house and took over. They saw there was a need and saw that they could help.

I also saw how my wife Julia worked with my dying mother far better than I did. I was like Tolsoy’s Levin, getting tangled in my head about what I should say or do, whereas Julia—like Kitty—kept her eye firmly fixed on what was most important.

When Levin’s brother is dying, Levin initially tries to prevent Kitty from going to see him, believing that his young bride won’t be able to handle either the brother’s unpleasantness or his lower class female companion. Kitty, however, refuses to stay away. Here’s an excerpt of from one of their first marital arguments:

“I tell you, that if you go, I shall come with you; I shall certainly come,” she said hastily and wrathfully. “Why out of the question? Why do you say it’s out of the question?”

“Because it’ll be going God knows where, by all sorts of roads and to all sorts of hotels. You would be a hindrance to me,” said Levin, trying to be cool.

“Not at all. I don’t want anything. Where you can go, I can….”

“Well, for one thing then, because this woman’s there whom you can’t meet.”

“I don’t know and don’t care to know who’s there and what. I know that my husband’s brother is dying and my husband is going to him, and I go with my husband too….”

As it turns out, Levin is fairly useless when he encounters his brother:

Levin could not look calmly at his brother; he could not himself be natural and calm in his presence. When he went in to the sick man, his eyes and his attention were unconsciously dimmed, and he did not see and did not distinguish the details of his brother’s position. He smelt the awful odor, saw the dirt, disorder, and miserable condition, and heard the groans, and felt that nothing could be done to help. It never entered his head to analyze the details of the sick man’s situation, to consider how that body was lying under the quilt, how those emaciated legs and thighs and spine were lying huddled up, and whether they could not be made more comfortable, whether anything could not be done to make things, if not better, at least less bad. It made his blood run cold when he began to think of all these details. He was absolutely convinced that nothing could be done to prolong his brother’s life or to relieve his suffering. But a sense of his regarding all aid as out of the question was felt by the sick man, and exasperated him. And this made it still more painful for Levin. To be in the sick-room was agony to him, not to be there still worse. And he was continually, on various pretexts, going out of the room, and coming in again, because he was unable to remain alone.

This stands in stark contrast to how Kitty responds:

But Kitty thought, and felt, and acted quite differently. On seeing the sick man, she pitied him. And pity in her womanly heart did not arouse at all that feeling of horror and loathing that it aroused in her husband, but a desire to act, to find out all the details of his state, and to remedy them. And since she had not the slightest doubt that it was her duty to help him, she had no doubt either that it was possible, and immediately set to work. The very details, the mere thought of which reduced her husband to terror, immediately engaged her attention. She sent for the doctor, sent to the chemist’s, set the maid who had come with her and Marya Nikolaevna to sweep and dust and scrub; she herself washed up something, washed out something else, laid something under the quilt. Something was by her directions brought into the sick-room, something else was carried out. She herself went several times to her room, regardless of the men she met in the corridor, got out and brought in sheets, pillow cases, towels, and shirts.

Levin thinks his irascible brother will be upset at Kitty’s interference, only to discover that she understands the brother better than Levin does:

Levin did not approve of all this; he did not believe it would be of any good to the patient. Above all, he feared the patient would be angry at it. But the sick man, though he seemed and was indifferent about it, was not angry, but only abashed, and on the whole as it were interested in what she was doing with him.

Tolstoy continues to hammer home the difference between the two different approaches to death as the episode continues. Here he contrasts Kitty and the brother’s female companion with Levin:

Both [women] knew, without a shade of doubt, what sort of thing life was and what was death, and though neither of them could have answered, and would even not have understood the questions that presented themselves to Levin, both had no doubt of the significance of this event, and were precisely alike in their way of looking at it, which they shared with millions of people. The proof that they knew for a certainty the nature of death lay in the fact that they knew without a second of hesitation how to deal with the dying, and were not frightened of them. Levin and other men like him, though they could have said a great deal about death, obviously did not know this since they were afraid of death, and were absolutely at a loss what to do when people were dying. If Levin had been alone now with his brother Nikolay, he would have looked at him with terror, and with still greater terror waited, and would not have known what else to do.

And further on:

More than that, he did not know what to say, how to look, how to move. To talk of outside things seemed to him shocking, impossible, to talk of death and depressing subjects—also impossible. To be silent, also impossible. “If I look at him he will think I am studying him, I am afraid; if I don’t look at him, he’ll think I’m thinking of other things. If I walk on tiptoe, he will be vexed; to tread firmly, I’m ashamed.” Kitty evidently did not think of herself, and had no time to think about herself: she was thinking about him because she knew something, and all went well.

Ultimately, it is Kitty, not Levin, who does the brother the most good in his final moments.

As I say, I shy away from gender generalizations, and there are undoubtedly men who can handle sick beds and women who can’t. But my own experience has been Levin’s, and I deeply admire and gratefully acknowledge those women who step up in moments of crisis.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed

Late to the Party

Yellow poplar

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Wednesday

As Shakespeare would say, rough winds are currently shaking our darling buds, with gusts of up to 45 miles an hour bringing in unseasonably cold temperatures. At the same time, the green wave is well underway, having finally—for the most part—worked its way to the top of the Sewanee mountain. This gives me an excuse to share this lovely Patrick Kavanagh poem, about one tree that is taking its time about getting with the program:

To a Late Poplar

Not yet half-drest
O tardy bride!
And the priest
And the bridegroom and the guests
Have been waiting a full hour.

The meadow choir
Is playing the wedding march
Two fields away,
And squirrels are already leaping in ecstasy
Among leaf-full branches.

Ah yes, we’ve had more than our fill of ecstatic squirrels. For most of the trees, the wedding march is well underway.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Comments closed

Tolstoy’s Vision of Establishing Dialogue

Vikander and Gleeson as Kitty and Levin in Anna Karenina


Note:
 If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Tuesday

Twice over the past two days have I heard people advising sympathetic listening as response to our polarized times, is to listen. While actual agreement may seem like a distant dream, such listening at least gives us a fighting chance.

Kitty gives Levin advice along these lines in Anna Karenina, which I’m currently rereading, and it makes a difference.

In our church’s recent Sunday Forum, two members of the Beloved Community Commission, Nancy Cason and Kate Kesse, discussed how churches can play a role in advancing racial and economic equity for marginalized populations. The organization derives its name from Martin Luther King’s vision that the “aftermath of nonviolence is the creation of the beloved community,” and we were advised that entering into someone else’s vision of the world is often more powerful than attempting to fix things or play Lady Bountiful. Only after such a relationship is established is further progress possible.

I heard something similar in a Carleton College zoom session yesterday on “Truth, Education, and Democracy.” Carleton Professors Sindy L. Fleming and Chico Zimmerman, along with two of their students, talked about a course they teach on “Civil Discourse in a Troubled Age.” Their aim is to move past discussion and debate to genuine dialogue, and to my question, “How do you engage people in dialogue who don’t want dialogue,” Zimmerman talked about the power of sympathetic listening. Reaffirming this approach, one of the students, who has engaged in voter registration, mentioned the power of such listening when he knocked on doors. Even when encountering strong anti-abortion positions, he said, he felt he made headway by asking questions and hearing what people had to say.

The judgmental Levin hears something similar from Kitty in the blissful moment after he learns that she loves him. Talking of one of the guests at a gathering they are attending, there’s this interchange, starting with Kitty:

“And I see you think he’s a horrid man?”

“Not horrid, but nothing in him.”

“Oh, you’re wrong! And you must give up thinking so directly!” said Kitty. “I used to have a very poor opinion of him too, but he, he’s an awfully nice and wonderfully good-hearted man. He has a heart of gold.”

“How could you find out what sort of heart he has?”

“We are great friends. I know him very well. Last winter, soon after … you came to see us,” she said, with a guilty and at the same time confiding smile, “all Dolly’s children had scarlet fever, and he happened to come and see her. And only fancy,” she said in a whisper, “he felt so sorry for her that he stayed and began to help her look after the children. Yes, and for three weeks he stopped with them, and looked after the children like a nurse.”

To which there’s this Levin response:

“I’m sorry, I’m sorry, and I’ll never think ill of people again!” he said gaily, genuinely expressing what he felt at the moment.

And, in fact, he puts his new resolution into action immediately:

He did at once, and without the smallest effort, keep the promise he had made her—always to think well of all men, and to like everyone always. The conversation fell on the village commune, in which Pestsov saw a sort of special principle, called by him the “choral” principle. Levin did not agree with Pestsov, nor with his brother, who had a special attitude of his own, both admitting and not admitting the significance of the Russian commune. But he talked to them, simply trying to reconcile and soften their differences. He was not in the least interested in what he said himself, and even less so in what they said; all he wanted was that they and everyone should be happy and contented.

A short time later Kitty asks, “What do they want to argue for? No one ever convinces anyone, you know,” to which Levin replies, “Yes; that’s true; it generally happens that one argues warmly simply because one can’t make out what one’s opponent wants to prove.”

And then there’s this insight:

Levin had often noticed in discussions between the most intelligent people that after enormous efforts, and an enormous expenditure of logical subtleties and words, the disputants finally arrived at being aware that what they had so long been struggling to prove to one another had long ago, from the beginning of the argument, been known to both, but that they liked different things, and would not define what they liked for fear of its being attacked.

When Levin, somewhat imperfectly, attempts to communicate this idea to Kitty, she

knitted her brow, trying to understand. But directly he began to illustrate his meaning, she understood at once.

“I know: one must find out what he is arguing for, what is precious to him, then one can….”

The ellipsis, I assume, indicates something along the lines of “come to a common understanding.”

While the Levin-Kitty marriage is a happy one, they of course have quarrels, including one involving a guest who flirts with her. What ensues is a mistaken assumption such as we see often in our own politics: sometimes when we see people demonizing others, it is because they are imagining things that those others are thinking and lash out in anger. Think about this dynamic as you read the following scene, where Kitty blushes in shame and embarrassment because Veslovsky is making love to her while Levin interprets the blush to mean that she is actually in love with him:

His jealousy had in these few moments, especially at the flush that had overspread her cheeks while she was talking to Veslovsky, gone far indeed. Now as he heard her words, he construed them in his own fashion. Strange as it was to him afterwards to recall it, it seemed to him at the moment clear that in asking whether he was going shooting, all she cared to know was whether he would give that pleasure to Vassenka Veslovsky, with whom, as he fancied, she was in love.

Levin turns cold, Kitty is hurt, and there are some agonizing moments. Fortunately, they are able to communicate and come to an understanding.

Communication is key for us as well. Unfortunately social media, Carleton professor Zimmerman noted, does not encourage common understanding. Indeed, flash emotional responses can foster just the opposite. Both he in his course and the Better Community project are attempting to establish something better. The very survival of our democracy hinges on such projects.

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

Welcoming in May with a Dance

May dancing in Tess of the d’Urbervilles

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Monday – May Day

As today is May Day, I share some literary instances of mayday dancing. Such dancing, when connected with a maypole (so my internet research informs me), “is believed to have started in Roman Britain around 2,000 years ago, when soldiers celebrated the arrival of spring by dancing around decorated trees thanking their goddess Flora.”

Nathaniel Hawthorne features maypole dancing in “The Maypole of Merry Mount,” although in his case the tradition has lost its seasonal significance as the decadent revelers dance around the maypole throughout the year. It has degenerated into no more than an excuse to party.

This is not the case with Thomas Hardy, who uses the holiday to connect his rural characters with ancient Cerelean festivals—which is to say, rituals connected with fertility deities. In Tess of the d’Urbervilles, the dancers are all women:

The banded ones were all dressed in white gowns a gay survival from Old-Style days, when cheerfulness and Maytime were synonyms days before the habit of taking long views had reduced emotions to a monotonous average. Their first exhibition of themselves was in a processional march of two and two round the parish.

In addition to the white frocks, Hardy tells us the dancers carry willow wands, images of fertility:

[E]very woman and girl carried in her right hand a peeled willow-wand, and in her left a bunch of white flowers. The peeling of the former, and the selection of the latter, had been an operation of personal care.

In Return of the Native, men join the festivities:

A whole village-full of sensuous emotion, scattered abroad all the year long, surged here in a focus for an hour. The forty hearts of those waving couples were beating as they had not done since, twelve months before, they had come together in similar jollity. For the time paganism was revived in their hearts, the pride of life was all in all, and they adored none other than themselves.

Hardy describes the phallic maypole in detail:

The pole lay with one end supported on a trestle, and women were engaged in wreathing it from the top downwards with wild flowers. The instincts of merry England lingered on here with exceptional vitality, and the symbolic customs which tradition has attached to each season of the year were yet a reality on Egdon. Indeed, the impulses of all such outlandish hamlets are pagan still—in these spots homage to nature, self-adoration, frantic gaieties, fragments of Teutonic rites to divinities whose names are forgotten, seem in some way or other to have survived mediæval doctrine.

The townsfolk witness the result of the May Day festivities the following morning:

 [T]here stood the Maypole in the middle of the green, its top cutting into the sky. It had sprung up in the night, or rather early morning, like Jack’s beanstalk. She opened the casement to get a better view of the garlands and posies that adorned it. The sweet perfume of the flowers had already spread into the surrounding air, which, being free from every taint, conducted to her lips a full measure of the fragrance received from the spire of blossom in its midst. At the top of the pole were crossed hoops decked with small flowers; beneath these came a milk-white zone of Maybloom; then a zone of bluebells, then of cowslips, then of lilacs, then of ragged-robins, daffodils, and so on, till the lowest stage was reached. Thomasin noticed all these, and was delighted that the May revel was to be so near.

The purpose of the holiday is to connect with your natural roots. As you can’t do so if you fail to give yourself over fully to the earth’s natural forces, step outside and give it a whirl.

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

A Bombed Cathedral, My Lost Child

Justin carrying the cross at the National Cathedral in Washington

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Spiritual Sunday

Last Sunday Julia and I attended church service in the new Coventry Cathedral, which stands next to the one that was bombed by the Germans in 1940 and that now stands open to the sky. I think of that as I write today’s essay about Justin, my eldest son who drowned on this day, April 30, 23 years ago. We lost him on the first Sunday after Easter.

Like Coventry Cathedral, we still bear the marks of the blast we received that day. And like the people of Coventry, we rebuilt our lives, which stand adjacent to the ruins. Extending this analogy, in the new cathedral one can look through a glass wall, known as “the screen of saints and angels,” and see the old cathedral. Angels have been etched into that glass by artist John Hutton (it was a ten-year project) so that, as one looks out at the old church, one is aware of ghostly presences. While we no longer think of Justin daily, at unexpected moments he enters our thoughts, just as Hutton’s transparent angels insinuate themselves into one’s field of vision.

Justin would have loved the George Herbert poem/hymn we sang as the recessional. Justin, who was 21, had embarked on an intense spiritual search at the time of his death and visited four churches in the 24 hours before he died, including the Episcopal/Anglican church he grew up in. Although sometimes tormented by religious struggles, he was also joyful and didn’t hold back from expressing his joy at being filled with the holy spirit. Here’s Herbert doing the same in his call-and-response poem that places special emphasis on the heart:

Antiphon 1

Chorus Let all the world in ev’ry corner sing,
                              My God and King.

Verse  The heav’ns are not too high,
          His praise may thither fly:
          The earth is not too low,
          His praises there may grow.

Chorus Let all the world in ev’ry corner sing,
                              My God and King.

Verse The church with psalms must shout,
          No door can keep them out:
          But above all, the heart
          Must bear the longest part.

Chorus Let all the world in ev’ry corner sing,
                              My God and King.

In the moments before his death, Justin rushed up to the large wooden cross on Church Point (at St. Mary’s City, Maryland), kissed it, and joyously flung himself into the St. Mary’s River, a kind of baptismal immersion to match his overflowing joy. He was singing from every corner of his being.

And lest you think he was being reckless, we had taken our kids to swim in this spot when they were small, and at any other time the river would have posed no danger. In fact, Justin had jumped into that water fully clothed before. What he didn’t know was that the rainiest spring in decades had created dangerous currents, one of which caught him and dragged him out.

A student who saw him go under reported that he cried out, “Jesus God!” before disappearing forever. I’m sure there was fear and desperation in those words but maybe also a sense that he was not alone. There’s no way I can know.

What I do know is that Herbert’s hymn would not have done much for me at the time. I didn’t much feel like lifting up my voice to sing, and God indeed seemed “too high,” an impersonal force that didn’t bother itself with our tiny lives.

Now, however, my heart opens to hear the psalms, including today’s psalm, which is the 23rd. In church together we will read, “Yea though I walk through the valley of death, I shall fear no evil, for thou art with me” and “Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life. And I shall live in the house of the Lord forever.”

Justin, as he leapt into the water, was singing from the heart. Our children have much to teach us.

Old Coventry Cathedral seen through the western window of the new cathedral
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Comments closed

Empire of Light, Filled with Poetry

Colman, Ward in Empire of Light

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Friday

On our plane ride back from the United Kingdom, I watched Sam Mendes’s Oscar-nominated Empire of Light, which looks back to a time when cinema screens seemed to stretch forever and when films like Chariots of Fire were public events. I write about the film here because it is filled with poetry, which infuses the film with a special magic.

An article in Awards Daily by one Sasha Stone picks up some of the poetic references I missed. For instance, the film is set in the beach resort sound of Margate Sands, where T.S. Eliot wrote The Waste Land, and a crossword puzzle that one of the characters is filling out asks, “What is the cruelest month.” (I know I don’t have to answer that one for you.) After that, we encounter poems by Alfred Lord Tennyson, W. H. Auden, and Philip Larkin.

The story reminds me somewhat of Rainer Werner Fassbinder’s 1974 film Ali: Fears Eats the Soul in the way a middle-aged woman, beaten down by life, is rejuvenated by her relationship with a young immigrant of color. In this case, he is from the West Indies and he works alongside her in a movie theatre. The year is 1981, which is when Thatcherism and skinhead riots were creating havoc in the U.K., and at one point rioters smash through the cinema’s windows and beat up young Stephen. Hilary, meanwhile, doesn’t have the self-belief to stand up to her boss, who uses her sexually. They are indeed living in a desolate wasteland.

Their relationship brings poetry into their lives, sometimes literally as Hilary shares various poems with Stephen. The first poem I recall is Tennyson’s “Ring Out, Wild Bells,” the first stanza of which Hilary recites for Stephen as they greet the new year. At the time, they are standing on the roof of the theatre awaiting the fireworks:

 Ring out, wild bells, to the wild sky,
   The flying cloud, the frosty light:
   The year is dying in the night;
Ring out, wild bells, and let him die.

Moved by the poem and the moment, Stephen kisses Hilary, at which point, frightened by her growing attraction for him, she runs away. Eliot’s Waste Land explains why. April is the cruelest month when we have shut down our feelings (“Winter kept us warm, covering/ Earth in forgetful snow”), which Hilary has, and now here are, like  

Lilacs out of the dead land, mixing
Memory and desire, stirring
Dull roots with spring rain…

As the relationship blooms, we learn that Hilary has been raped in the past and also been hospitalized for mental problems. As the two face pressure from both sides, Stephen wonders whether they should break off the relationship, which sends Hilary into a tailspin. Yet she gathers her strength and, during the announcements of a grand showing of Chariots of Fire that all the local luminaries are attending, crashes the podium. In her remarks she pleads for interracial harmony and then reads to the bewildered crowd the final stanza of Auden’s  “Death’s Echo”:

Dance, dance, for the figure is easy,
   The tune is catching and will not stop;
Dance till the stars come down from the rafters;
   Dance, dance, dance till you drop.

“Death’s Echo” is a dark poem, as indicated by such lines as

The greater the love, the more false to its object,
   Not to be born is the best for man;
After the kiss comes the impulse to throttle,
   Break the embraces, dance while you can.

If we can dance—or if we can love—the Waste Land won’t have the last word. Hilary proclaims this vision to herself, to Stephen, and to the world.

Her relationship with Stephen cannot last, however. If he is is to step into his powers, he must leave his job at the theatre and go to college. He must also find someone his own age. Hilary realizes this and, in the end, though heartbroken, she uses a Larkin poem to let him know it’s okay to leave her. Opening the book of Larkin poems that she has presented him upon his boarding the bus, he find the following one marked:

The Trees

The trees are coming into leaf
Like something almost being said;
The recent buds relax and spread,
Their greenness is a kind of grief.

Is it that they are born again
And we grow old? No, they die too,
Their yearly trick of looking new
Is written down in rings of grain.

Yet still the unresting castles thresh
In fullgrown thickness every May.
Last year is dead, they seem to say,
Begin afresh, afresh, afresh.

“Dance, dance, dance,” Auden has written and now Larkin follows it up with his own thrice repeated command. “Trees” also reads as a response to Eliot’s vision of a world

where the sun beats,
And the dead tree gives no shelter, the cricket no relief,
And the dry stone no sound of water.

The Larkin poem applies more to Hilary than to Stephen and could be her way of reassuring him that all will be well with her. While separations and deaths inevitably occur in our lives, greenness returns. “Last year is dead,” Larkin writes, just as Tennyson writes, “The year is dying in the night.” And while Tennyson follows this up with, “Ring out, wild bells, and let him die,” Larkin writes, “Begin afresh, afresh, afresh.” At movie’s end, we see Hilary indeed beginning afresh as she returns to her friends in the theatre and to the world of the movies.

One last note: I believe the movie ends with Hilary seeing, for the first time, one of the films her theatre is showing. In watching Peter Sellers, as Chauncey Gardener, walk across a pond in the finale of Being There, we are seeing the power of cinema, that empire of light, to create transcendent moments. Hilary herself has achieved a new level of being—she has begun afresh—and the movie confirms what she has achieved.

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

Tucker Carlson as Sammy Glick

Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, notify me at [email protected] and indicate which you would like. I promise not to share your e-mail address with anyone. To unsubscribe, send me a follow-up email.

Thursday

We returned to the States to discover that Fox’s Tucker Carlson, who had remade himself into a racist nativist, has been fired by Rupert Murdoch. Of the many commentaries I’ve read about the bow-tied pundit, one surprised me by invoking a forgotten novel that I haven’t read since high school.

Mother Jones’s David Corn has alluded to Bud Schulburg’s What Makes Sammy Run in an attempt to figure out Carlson’s strange trajectory from seemingly reasonable rightwing intellectual to white supremacist. In Corn’s eyes, he is a “Sammy Glick of the Right”:

What happened to Carlson? Perhaps nothing. Maybe from the start he was nothing but an opportunistic guy on the make. A Sammy Glick of the right. As a young reporter, he seized the opportunity to brand himself as a conservative journalist different from other right-wing scribes in the combative Age of Clinton. Years later, as that glow wore off (and his television career started slipping), he reinvented himself as an angry populist cheerleader of the Trumpish right. That’s where the audience and the big bucks were—and the influence. It’s possible that along the way he even convinced himself of some of what he was saying. But the likely explanation is that truth never mattered: It was all about status and money.

Comparing Glick and Carlson is somewhat strange in that Glick is a working class kid fanatically driven to rise in the world—a kind of Jewish Gatsby—whereas Tucker Swanson McNear Carlson grew up in privileged surroundings, attending first a private boarding school and then one of the small ivies, Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut. But like Sammy, Carlson appears to be willing to do and say anything to succeed. As Sammy says at one point in his rapid rise to Hollywood mogul, “Going through life with a conscience is like driving your car with the brakes on.”

Unlike Carlson, Sammy is a product of New York’s “dog eat dog” Lower East Side. The narrator meets him when, at 16, he is a copyboy for a newspaper. By the end, through stealing scripts, shamelessly using and discarding acquaintances, stabbing his principled boss in the back, and leaving his girlfriend to strategically marry the daughter of the Wall Street banker representing the film company’s financiers, Sammy rises to the top, becoming a producer.

Then, having reached the pinnacle, he experiences the emptiness of a life where everything has been transactional. When he catches his wife Laurette Harrington making love to an actor he has just hired, she informs him that their marriage is no more than a business affair. His response is to order Shiek, his personal servant, to find him a prostitute.

Before this occurs, however, he tells the narrator that he has achieved everything he ever wanted. I wonder whether Tucker Carlson, when he ruled the world of cable television, ever thought similarly. The scene occurs when Glick is looking out his window at Hollywood in action:

“Now it’s mine,” Sammy said. “Everything’s mine. I’ve got everything. Everybody’s always saying you can’t get everything and I’m the guy who swung it. I’ve got the studio and I’ve got the Harrington connections and I’ve got the perfect woman to run my home and have my children.”

I sat there as if I were watching The Phantom of the Opera or any other horror picture. I sat there silently in the shadows, for it was growing dark and the lights hadn’t been switched on yet and I think he had forgotten he was talking to me. It was just his voice reassuring him in the dark.

“Sammy,” I said quietly, “how does it feel? How does it feel to have everything?”

He began to smile. It became a smirk, a leer.

“It makes me feel kinda..” And then it came blurting out of nowhere—“patriotic.”

If you see the American Dream as achieving personal success, then I suppose you could interpret your ascension to the heights as patriotic. But success paid for with one’s soul is ultimately empty, as the narrator reflects after having seen Glick turn to paid sex after discovering his wife’s affair:

I drove back slowly, heavy with the exhaustion I always felt after being with Sammy too long. I thought of him wandering alone through all his brightly lit rooms. Not only tonight, but all the nights of his life. No matter where he would ever be at banquets, at gala house parties, in crowded night clubs, in big poker games, at intimate dinners, he would still be wandering alone through all his brightly lit rooms. He would still have to send out frantic S.O.S.’s to Sheik, the virile eunuch. Help! Help! I’m lonely. I’m nervous. I’m friendless. I’m desperate. Bring girls, bring Scotch, bring laughs. Bring a pause in the day’s occupation, the quick sponge for the sweaty marathoner, the recreational pause that is brief and vulgar and titillating and quickly forgotten, like a dirty joke.

Tucker Carlson is far from the only Sammy Glick in the rightwing media. Tom Nichols, Atlantic writer and former Republican, identifies the type. In the 1990s, he says, the new generation of young conservatives

realized that the way to dump their day jobs for better gigs in radio and television was to become more and more extreme—and to sell their act to an audience that was nothing like them or the people at D.C. dinner parties. They would have their due, even if they had to poison the brains of ordinary Americans to get it.

Carlson, as Nichols sees it, is

emblematic of the entire conservative movement now, and especially the media millionaires who serve as its chief propagandists. The conservative world has become a kind of needle skyscraper with a tiny number of wealthy, superbly educated right-wing media and political elites in the penthouses, looking down at an expanse of angry Americans whose rage they themselves helped create.

If your only criteria for success is how much wealth and/or power you can amass—I’m thinking of such unprincipled politicians as Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Lindsey Graham here as well as Carlson—then you are doomed to a perpetual restlessness. Or as Schulberg’s narrator puts it, “always thinking satisfaction is just around the bend.” You run incessantly without ever finding peace.

And sooner or later, as Schulberg narrator notes, there will be other Sammy Glicks overtaking you—or in Carlson’s case, other Fox commentators—at which point you may come face to face with the emptiness inside you.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments closed