Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. 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
I have become a fan of Joseph Fasano, who regularly shares his poetry on BlueSky. The following poem reminds me of the George Herbert sonnet that I shared for Good Friday. At a time when rightwing Christians are applying their political muscle to put down fellow Americans and demonize immigrants, Fasano calls out a hypocrisy that Jesus too preached against.
In “Redemption” Herbert talks about searching for Christ in “cities, theaters, gardens, parks, and courts”—in other words, upper class neighborhoods—but ultimately finding him amongst murderers and thieves. That poem came to my mind as I watched White House spokesperson Katie Leavitt, wearing a gold cross around her neck, jeer at the young men who are being sent to a Salvadoran concentration camp. “We are encouraging illegal immigrants to actively self-deport to maybe save themselves from being in one of these fun videos,” the smirking Leavitt said at one point, referring to footage of guards shaving and shackling men who have been convicted of no crime and provided with no hearing.
Later, thumbing her nose at the fifth amendment, she said of Kilmar Ábrego García, “If he ever ends up back in the United States, he would immediately be deported again.”
Fasano’s poem functions as a passionate and principled response:
To Those Who Call Themselves Christian but Seek to Divide and Conquer the World By Joe Fasano
My god you think that’s what love is? Go to your little, bitter meetings, your callous rallies, your palaces of gold.
You think you can choose who is beautiful? Your country is open to the chosen– while somewhere, in the shadows of your houses, the one you believe you are hearing is hanging in a crown of thorns, in agony, burning the world with mercy, his arms in an embrace he cannot close.
While American Calvinists regard themselves as “the Chosen,” the true Chosen include those that Emma Lazarus points to in her Statue of Liberty poem. Put another way, God does chooses to love us all, even when people use nails in an attempt to prevent Jesus’s arms from closing around us.
To the rest of the world, America is a golden palace currently controlled by people who don’t know what love is.
Note on the author: Joseph Fasano’s most recent collection of poetry, well worth checking out, is The Last Song of the World (BOA editions, 2024).
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. 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 lyric by Belfast poet W.R. Rodgers, the final poem in his 14-poem Resurrection: An Easter Sequence (1952), shows Jesus welcoming Mary Magdalene on Easter Sunday. I love Rodgers’s vivid imagery of night slowly giving way to day as the truth dawns on Mary (excuse the pun). “The light had hardly scarleted the dark,” the poet writes, “or the first bird sung when Mary came in sight.” The grief that has whitened her face “like last night’s frost” will soon thaw out “as the sun/burns through the simmering muslins of the mist.”
Atthat point, her initial doubts will “morning[ ] into noon like summering bees mounting and boiling over bell flowers.” Which is another way of saying that her heart will overflow with joy.
With the resurrection, we all step out of the tombs that have been confining us.
The tomb, the tomb, that Was her core and care, her one sore. The light had hardly scarleted the dark Or the first bird sung when Mary came in sight With eager feet. Grief, like last night’s frost, Whitened her face and tightened all her tears. It was there, then, there at the blinding turn Of the bare future that she met her past. She only heard his Angel tell her how The holding stone broke open and gave birth To her dear Lord, and how his shadow ran To meet him like a dog. And as the sun Burns through the simmering muslins of the mist, Slowly his darkened voice, that seemed like doubt, Morninged into noon; the summering bees Mounted and boiled over in the bell-flowers. “Come out of your jail, Mary,” he said, “the doors are open And joy has its ear cocked for your coming. Earth now is no place to mope in. So throw away Your doubt, cast every clout of care, Hang all your hallelujahs out This airy day.”
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. 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
I recently read a Bulwark article on Ayn Rand that has me partially rethinking the author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. Given how much space I’ve given to bashing the noted libertarian thinker, both on this blog and in my book, for fairness sake I should present another perspective.
The Russian emigré looms large in the imaginations of tech bro billionaires Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, and Marc Andreesen. While they regard themselves as Randian supermen (Übermenschen) like John Galt and Howard Roark, however, Paul Crider contends that they are closer to Rand’s villains.
He acknowledges that it makes sense that the billionaires would lionize Rand. As a “radical for capitalism,” she “glamorized the heroic industrialist who struggled to produce, invent, and achieve against the countervailing resentment of the mediocre masses and big government oppression.” Therefore Silicon Valley venture capitalists “like to think they are building—literally building—the future, something very much in line with Rand’s romantic vision of human triumph.”
In point of fact, however, they are “a grab-bag of Randian vices.”
Criber lays out the villainous resemblances:
–While a central virtue in Rand’s ethics is self-esteem, Musk is an attention-seeking bully who feels a constant need for self-validation.
–Musk and Thiel are both “looters”—the worst thing you can be in Rand’s eyes—who sponge off the government. Musk’s companies rake in billions of government subsidies, with Tesla having remained solvent only thanks government assistance. Both Musk and Theil, furthermore, have major defense contracts (Space X, Palantir). And to make sure they get this government money, both men have poured millions into electing candidates who will do their bidding.
Crider notes that many of Rand’s villains—not her heroes—thrive off of this environment:
There is the steel magnate Orren Boyle who uses his government connections to nationalize Rearden Metal, the fictional material developed by one the novel’s central protagonists, Hank Rearden. James Taggart, the incompetent chief of Taggart Transcontinental, resents his capable sister who really runs the railroad; he spends his time peddling influence in policy circles. Or there is the perfectly named Wesley Mouch, a corporate-lobbyist-turned-bureaucrat who is Rand’s stand-in for the idea that industrial lobbying is inherently corrupt.
Taggart, in fact, sounds uncannily like Musk and his Doge team, who are tearing down institutions on the grounds of “waste, fraud, and abuse” while actually costing the government money in the process. For his part, Taggart contends that “destroying the achievements of others is the greatest work there is.”
“I’ve never felt better in my life!” he snapped, resuming his pacing. “You bet I’ve worked hard. My work is bigger than any job you can hope to imagine. It’s above anything that grubbing mechanics, like Rearden and my sister, are doing. Whatever they do, I can undo it. Let them build a track—I can come and break it, just like that!” He snapped his fingers. “Just like breaking a spine!”
Crider points out that, unlike Musk and his ilk, the heroes of Atlas Shrugged “take no such pleasure in destruction or in the subjugation of others, even when it is necessary.” To dominate others, Crider notes,
is to sacrifice their rational interests and happiness for the sake of your own. To inflict cruelty for your own enjoyment is to obliterate the natural harmony of interests between individuals and engender hierarchies of domination and submission. Rand’s heroes wanted to engage with others as free and equal beings, trading value for value.
This is very different from Musk, Thiel and Andreesen. Musk is a white supremacist who boosts Nazis and others on his media platform while Thiel and Andreesen “have embraced the racist and monarchical ideas of the neoreactionary blogger Curtis Yarvin.”
Crider acknowledges that the Silicon Valley oligarchs do share some political ideas with Rand, such as abolisihing various agencies like the Department of Education and USAID (which has saved millions of lives). But Rand, he says, “believed in America’s constitutional republican form of representative government, not monarchy or personalist rule à la Trump.”
To be sure, Crider faults Rand for giving her followers the impression that “John Galt-type heroes are plentiful at the commanding heights of the economy.” In doing so, she leaves her disciples
unprepared for a world in which so many of the world’s wealthiest capitalists used the “aristocracy of pull” to amass their wealth, and sought that wealth not as a byproduct of their creative energies but as a means to dominate others.
Crider adds that Rand also “failed to equip her followers to grapple with racism not from the underbelly of society but from its highest echelons.” While she herself decries racism as the “lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism,” many of her wealthy fans buy into the Great Replacement conspiracy theory, distinguishing between good blood and bad blood immigrants.
I love the “ironic twist” with which Crider ends the article. While our tech oligarchs correctly see themselves a characters “straight out of an Ayn Rand novel,” Crider repeats that it is the villains they resemble rather than the heroes. Our society’s best hope, he believes, lies not in our preening billionaires but “in the quiet competence and steely integrity of career civil servants who refuse to budge.” These have more in common with John Galt and Howard Roark than do the Elon Musks of the world.
A further thought: While I appreciate Crider’s defense of Rand, I still feel the author bears some responsibility for the excesses of her followers. In my book I note how a number of Republican lawmakers—most notably former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan–have used her to attack social welfare programs. Just as Hitler appropriated Nietzsche’s “Übermensch,” for his purposes, so have rightwing libertarians pointed to John Galt in support of their class privilege, labeling as looters beneficiaries of social entitlement programs. Rand’s one-dimensional characters make this easy to do.
My favorite quotation about Rand enthusiasts was penned by blogger John Rogers:
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year-old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
This 14-year-old is invariably a boy longing to be tough enough to handle all the world is throwing at him. If he escapes the Rand orbit, it is by learning that empathy and compassion will get one further than self-interest.
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. 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
A month ago, when Trump was stirring up the news cycle by threatening to take Greenland away from Denmark—Vice President Vance even visited a U.S. military base in Greenland–authoritarianism expert Timothy Snyder invoked Danish fairy tale author Hans Christian Anderson. What we saw in Greenland, he wrote, was “American imperialism with no clothes. Naked and vain.”
After reading Snyder’s essay, I went back and reread “The Emperor’s New Clothes” for the first time since childhood. What I encountered was a perfect description of how an authoritarian conman like Trump operates. The president is not only the emperor in the story. He is also the swindlers who weave the non-existent gown.
The GOP, meanwhile, are the sycophants who surround the emperor while Trump’s followers are the townspeople who cheer him on.
Trump’s imperialist ambitions make no sense, Snyder points out, because the U.S. is getting everything it wants from current arrangements with Greenland. If, for the sake of a differently colored map, the U.S. were to seize the autonomous Danish province, it would actually end up with less. As Snyder explains,
There is nothing that Americans cannot get from Denmark or Canada through alliance. The very existence of the base at Pituffik shows that. Within the atmosphere of friendship that has prevailed the last eighty years, all of the mineral resources of Canada and Greenland can be traded for on good terms, or for that matter explored by American companies. The only way to put all of this easy access in doubt was to follow the course that Musk-Trump have chosen: trade wars with Canada and Europe, and the threat of actual wars and annexations. Musk-Trump are creating the bloodily moronic situation in which the United States will have to fight wars to get the things that, just a few weeks ago, were there for the asking. And of course wars rarely turn out the way one expects.
Back to the story. In one way, it captures Trump successfully in how it depicts the emperor as vainglorious and in love with show. All hat and no cattle, as they say in Texas:
Many years ago there lived an Emperor who was so monstrous fond of fine new clothes that he spent all his money on being really smart. He didn’t care about his army, he didn’t care for going to the play, or driving out in the park, unless it was to show his new clothes. He had a coat for every hour in the day; and just as people say about a king, that “he’s holding a council”, so in this country they always said, “The Emperor is in his dressing room.”
Yes, we have a wannabe emperor who is more interested in Red Square-type military parades than in keeping the country safe.
In the weavers, however, we see how Trump has been able to pull off his con. Like him, they have a genius for creating an alternate reality:
[O]ne day there arrived two swindlers. They gave out that they were weavers, and said they knew how to make the loveliest stuff that could possibly be imagined. Not only were the colors and patterns extraordinarily pretty, but the clothes that were made of the stuff had this marvelous property: that they were invisible to anyone who was either unfit for his situation or else was intolerably stupid.
Going along with the con becomes the major criteria for advancement in this kingdom:
“Very excellent clothes those must be,” thought the Emperor; “if I wore them I could tell which are the men in my realm who aren’t fit for the posts they hold. I could tell clever people from stupid ones…
In other words, only those who are willing to say that 2+2=5 need apply. And so it happens:
So the worthy old minister went into the hall where the two swindlers were sitting working at the bare loom. “Heaven help us,” thought the old minister, staring with all his eyes; “I can’t see a thing”; but he didn’t say so.
Both the swindlers begged him to be pleased to step nearer, and asked if here was not a pretty pattern, and beautiful colours; and they pointed to the bare looms, and the poor old minister kept staring at it, but he couldn’t see anything, because there was nothing to be seen. “Gracious goodness!” thought he; “can I be stupid? I never thought so, and nobody must get to know it. Can I be unfit for my office? No, no! It won’t do for me to say I can’t see the stuff.” “Well, have you nothing to say about it?” said the one who was weaving.
“Oh, it’s charming! Most delightful!” said the old minister, looking through his spectacles. “The pattern! The color! Yes, indeed, I must tell the Emperor I am infinitely pleased with it.”
Meanwhile, the weavers continue to behave in Trumpian fashion:
The swindlers now demanded more money and more silk and gold to be used in the weaving. They pocketed it all; not a thread was put up, but they went on, as before, weaving at the bare loom.
By the end of the story, practically the whole city has bought into the fraud:
So the Emperor walked in the procession under the beautiful canopy, and everybody in the streets and at the windows said: “Lord! How splendid the Emperor’s new clothes are. What a lovely train he has to his coat! What a beautiful fit it is!” Nobody wanted to be detected seeing nothing: that would mean that he was no good at his job, or that he was very stupid. None of the Emperor’s costumes had ever been such a success.
This is why it’s so important not to normalize Trump, which is why many activists have been criticizing the mainstream media, including the New York Times and the Washington Post, for doing so. Trump wins once organizations and people tacitly agree to ignore the fact that he set his thugs on the Capitol and that he is an adjudicated rapist. In fact, too many in the media and the GOP take their cue from those watching the procession and not in the fact that the emperor is naked.
The story perhaps departs from the Trump case in one respect. Given how the president appears to escape accountability at every turn, the story may more of a wish fulfillment than an accurate depiction of what happens when the truth is revealed:
“But he hasn’t got anything on!” said a little child. “Lor! Just hark at the innocent,” said its father. And one whispered to the other what the child had said: “That little child there says he hasn’t got anything on.”
“Why, he hasn’t got anything on!” the whole crowd was shouting at last…”
The Emperor’s response is familiar, however. While, unlike Trump, he has a moment of self-doubt, very much like Trump he brazens it out. Meanwhile his ministers, like GOP members of Congress, follow along obediently:
[T]he Emperor’s flesh crept, for it seemed to him [the people] were right. “But all the same,” he thought to himself, “I must go through with the procession.” So he held himself more proudly than before, and the lords in waiting walked on bearing the train—the train that wasn’t there at all.
“I could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and shoot somebody, and I wouldn’t lose any voters,” Trump famously declared in 2016. I’m also thinking they wouldn’t say anything if he walked down Pennsylvania Avenue butt naked.
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. 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
Although I delayed my Earth Day post for a day to write an essay on the late Pope Francis, he would not have approved. More than any previous pope, Francis focused on the environment, attempting to rally the world around the threat of climate change. The passage in the Anglican Book of Common Prayer, where we pray for “this fragile earth, our island home,” is very much in the spirit of Pope Francis, as well as of the saint after whom he chose to name himself.
NPR notes that Francis repeatedly raised the problem of how fossil fuels were heating the earth, and his writing on the subject became increasingly urgent. According to Christiana Zenner, associate professor of theology, science and ethics at Fordham University, Francis’s encyclical on the subject was “the first of its kind to look at the relationship between humans and God, as well as humans and the natural world, and to link these types of relationship as matters of faith.”
To mark this day, I turn to Catholic convert Denise Levertov, whose tender poem “Beginners” acknowledges a paradox: at the same time that we understand, more deeply than ever before, the wonders of nature (at least from a scientific angle), we are destroying that very nature. What good are our amazing documentaries on the natural world when we find ourselves in thrall to despoilers who are overtly hostile to forests, national parks, and clean air and water?
In her poem, which I shared 14 years ago following the horrific Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the poet begins with a dedication to Karen Silkwood, the activist who blew the whistle on lax nuclear plant practices (she herself had been radiated) and who died in a suspicious car accident after meeting with a reporter. (I don’t know who Eliot Gralla was, perhaps a Levertov friend.) The poet then quotes a passage from Algernon Charles Swinburne’s hypnotic but very disturbing “The Garden of Proserpine.”
As I noted in my previous post, I think Levertov begins her poem with Swinburne because he represents a dangerous tendency that she wants to counteract. Sometimes we get so discouraged that we just want to give up.
Proserpine is the Roman name for Persephone, the daughter of fertility goddess Demeter/Ceres who was abducted by Hades/Pluto and dragged off to the underworld. Regarded by some mystics as a conduit to the spirit world, in Swinburne’s poem Proserpine represents a kind of death wish. At one point in the poem she says,
I am tired of tears and laughter, And men that laugh and weep; Of what may come hereafter For men that sow to reap: I am weary of days and hours, Blown buds of barren flowers, Desires and dreams and powers And everything but sleep.
The only flower in her garden, the poem reports, is the poppy, used for opium.
Levertov’s purpose in writing “Beginnings” aligns with the purpose of Earth Day, which is to rouse herself, and us, from lethargy. As is customary with the poet, she does not do this in a way that is facile or shallowly optimistic. “I know you feel defeated,” I hear Levertov saying, “but focus on this exciting new love rather than feeling that you are ‘hastening into the sea of non-being.’ You are a beginner, not someone at the end of the river. The possibilities that are opening up should galvanize you. Hope and desire aren’t dead; they are in bud. It’s time to tap into our anger at the brokenness and desecration and take action.”
The anger must be constructive, not destructive. Unlike, say, Trumpian anger, it should be fueled not by resentment and fear but by a vision of connectedness with “beast and flower.” It will be life affirming if it is guided by justice and mercy, which we have “only begun to imagine.”
Such a vision will allow us to “join our solitudes in the communion of struggle.” Whatever form that struggle takes–each of us must exercise our own particular gifts–it will have power if it is guided by a sense of things “unfolding.”
Here’s the poem.
Beginners Dedicated to the memory of Karen Silkwood and Eliot Gralla
“From too much love of living, Hope and desire set free, Even the weariest river Winds somewhere to the sea–“
But we have only begun To love the earth.
We have only begun To imagine the fullness of life.
How could we tire of hope? — so much is in bud.
How can desire fail? — we have only begun
to imagine justice and mercy, only begun to envision
how it might be to live as siblings with beast and flower, not as oppressors.
Surely our river cannot already be hastening into the sea of nonbeing?
Surely it cannot drag, in the silt, all that is innocent?
Not yet, not yet– there is too much broken that must be mended,
too much hurt we have done to each other that cannot yet be forgiven.
We have only begun to know the power that is in us if we would join our solitudes in the communion of struggle.
So much is unfolding that must complete its gesture,
so much is in bud.
One reason why we should spend time around children is because, for them, the world is fresh and new. Similarly, the reason why we should “join our solitudes in the communion of struggle” is because in communal action there is hope. Instead of withdrawing into solitary caves of dragon despair—instead of dwelling on old grudges and the “hurt we have done to each other/ that cannot yet be forgiven”—we can give ourselves over to celebrating and mending.
Earth Day always occurs somewhere close to Easter, which has fertility goddess origins. When Christian missionaries came to medieval Britain, celebrations of Jesus’s resurrection merged with celebrations of the Anglo-Saxon goddess Eostre and the spring solstice. Stepping beyond the old dispensation and embracing the new, as Christians claim they do with Easter, is also a good way to see the environment in which we move.
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. 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
I can think of no better way to honor the late Pope Francis than to repost the essay I wrote last August reporting on his extraordinary defense of literature. As I noted at the time, I first wondered whether Francis was apologizing for the Catholic Church’s long and dark history of banning books. And while I think there’s some truth to this, the letter goes far beyond any apology.
Francis sees literature as absolutely essential to our spiritual, intellectual, and physical well-being. He even says that literature can sometimes step in when prayer fails us. The letter is one of the most extraordinary defenses I have encountered, up there with those of Sir Philip Sidney and Percy Shelley.
Francis begins by saying that he wrote his letter originally to point out how literature can contribute to “the path of personal maturity” for Catholic priests but adds that “this subject also applies to the formation of all those engaged in pastoral work, indeed of all Christians.” You can read the letter in its entirety here, but I have pulled out some of the highlights. I quote Francis directly because he articulates his points so well:
–In moments of weariness, anger, disappointment or failure, when prayer itself does not help us find inner serenity, a good book can help us weather the storm until we find peace of mind. Time spent reading may well open up new interior spaces that help us to avoid becoming trapped by a few obsessive thoughts that can stand in the way of our personal growth.
–A book demands greater personal engagement on the part of its reader [than audio-visual media]. Readers in some sense rewrite a text, enlarging its scope through their imagination, creating a whole world by bringing into play their skills, their memory, their dreams and their personal history, with all its drama and symbolism. In this way, what emerges is a text quite different from the one the author intended to write. A literary work is thus a living and ever-fruitful text, always capable of speaking in different ways and producing an original synthesis on the part of each of its readers. In our reading, we are enriched by what we receive from the author and this allows us in turn to grow inwardly, so that each new work we read will renew and expand our worldview.
–I would agree with the observation of one theologian that “literature… originates in the most irreducible core of the person, that mysterious level [of their being]… Literature is life, conscious of itself, that reaches its full self-expression through the use of all the conceptual resources of language.”
–Literature…has to do, in one way or another, with our deepest desires in this life, for on a profound level literature engages our concrete existence, with its innate tensions, desires and meaningful experiences.
–In the end, our hearts always seek something greater, and individuals will find their own way in literature. I, for my part, love the tragedians, because we can all embrace their works as our own, as expressions of our own personal drama. In weeping for the fate of their characters, we are essentially weeping for ourselves, for our own emptiness, shortcomings and loneliness. Naturally, I am not asking you to read the same things that I did. Everyone will find books that speak to their own lives and become authentic companions for their journey. There is nothing more counterproductive than reading something out of a sense of duty, making considerable effort simply because others have said it is essential. On the contrary, while always being open to guidance, we should select our reading with an open mind, a willingness to be surprised, a certain flexibility and readiness to learn, trying to discover what we need at every point of our lives.
–How can we reach the core of cultures ancient and new if we are unfamiliar with, disregard or dismiss their symbols, messages, artistic expressions and the stories with which they have captured and evoked their loftiest ideals and aspirations, as well as their deepest sufferings, fears and passions? How can we speak to the hearts of men and women if we ignore, set aside or fail to appreciate the “stories” by which they sought to express and lay bare the drama of their lived experience in novels and poems?
–From a practical point of view, many scientists argue that the habit of reading has numerous positive effects on people’s lives, helping them to acquire a wider vocabulary and thus develop broader intellectual abilities. It also stimulates their imagination and creativity, enabling them to learn to tell their stories in richer and more expressive ways. It also improves their ability to concentrate, reduces levels of cognitive decline, and calms stress and anxiety.
–Even more, reading prepares us to understand and thus deal with various situations that arise in life. In reading, we immerse ourselves in the thoughts, concerns, tragedies, dangers and fears of characters who in the end overcome life’s challenges. Perhaps too, in following a story to the end, we gain insights that will later prove helpful in our own lives.
–When I think of literature, I am reminded of what the great Argentinian writer Jorge Luis Borges used to tell his students, namely that the most important thing is simply to read, to enter into direct contact with literature, to immerse oneself in the living text in front of us, rather than to fixate on ideas and critical comments. Borges explained this idea to his students by saying that at first they may understand very little of what they are reading, but in any case they are hearing “another person’s voice”. This is a definition of literature that I like very much: listening to another person’s voice. We must never forget how dangerous it is to stop listening to the voice of other people when they challenge us! We immediately fall into self-isolation; we enter into a kind of “spiritual deafness”, which has a negative effect on our relationship with ourselves and our relationship with God, no matter how much theology or psychology we may have studied….This approach to literature, which makes us sensitive to the mystery of other persons, teaches us how to touch their hearts.
–T.S. Eliot, the poet whose poetry and essays, reflecting his Christian faith, have an outstanding place in modern literature, perceptively described today’s religious crisis as that of a widespread emotional incapacity. If we are to believe this diagnosis, the problem for faith today is not primarily that of believing more or believing less with regard to particular doctrines. Rather, it is the inability of so many of our contemporaries to be profoundly moved in the face of God, his creation and other human beings. Here we see the importance of working to healing and enrich our responsiveness. On returning from my Apostolic Journey to Japan, I was asked what I thought the West has to learn from the East. My response was, “I think that the West lacks a bit of poetry”.
–What profit, then, does a priest gain from contact with literature? Why is it necessary to consider and promote the reading of great novels as an important element in priestly paideia?… Let us try to answer these questions by listening to what the German theologian [Karl Rhaner] has to tell us. For Rahner, the words of the poet are full of nostalgia, as it were, they are like “gates into infinity, gates into the incomprehensible. They call upon that which has no name. They stretch out to what cannot be grasped.” Poetry “does not itself give the infinite, it does not bring and contain the infinite.” That is the task of the word of God and, as Rahner goes on to say, “the poetic word calls upon the word of God.” For Christians, the Word is God, and all our human words bear traces of an intrinsic longing for God, a tending towards that Word. It can be said that the truly poetic word participates analogically in the Word of God, as the Letter to the Hebrews clearly states (cf. Heb 4:12-13).
–As far as content is concerned, we should realize that literature is like “a telescope”, to use a well-known image of Marcel Proust. As such, it is pointed at beings and things, and enables us to realize “the immense distance” that separates the totality of human experience from our perception of it. “Literature can also be compared to a photo lab, where pictures of life can be processed in order to bring out their contours and nuances. This is what literature is ‘for’: it helps us to ‘develop’ the picture of life,” to challenge us about its meaning, and, in a word, to experience life as it is.
–In terms of the use of language, reading a literary text places us in the position of “seeing through the eyes of others,” thus gaining a breadth of perspective that broadens our humanity. We develop an imaginative empathy that enables us to identify with how others see, experience and respond to reality. Without such empathy, there can be no solidarity, sharing, compassion, mercy. In reading we discover that our feelings are not simply our own, they are universal, and so even the most destitute person does not feel alone.
–In reading about violence, narrowness or frailty on the part of others, we have an opportunity to reflect on our own experiences of these realities. By opening up to the reader a broader view of the grandeur and misery of human experience, literature teaches us patience in trying to understand others, humility in approaching complex situations, meekness in our judgement of individuals and sensitivity to our human condition. Judgement is certainly needed, but we must never forget its limited scope. Judgement must never issue in a death sentence, eliminating persons or suppressing our humanity for the sake of a soulless absolutizing of the law.
–The wisdom born of literature instils in the reader greater perspective, a sense of limits, the ability to value experience over cognitive and critical thinking, and to embrace a poverty that brings extraordinary riches. By acknowledging the futility and perhaps even the impossibility of reducing the mystery of the world and humanity to a dualistic polarity of true vs false or right vs wrong, the reader accepts the responsibility of passing judgement, not as a means of domination, but rather as an impetus towards greater listening. And at the same time, a readiness to partake in the extraordinary richness of a history which is due to the presence of the Spirit, but is also given as a grace, an unpredictable and incomprehensible event that does not depend on human activity, but redefines our humanity in terms of hope for salvation.
At one point in his letter, Francis worries about what happens when literature is seen as non-essential. He is talking about the education of seminarians, but his observation extends to everyone. Dismissing literature as a frill, he contends, “can lead to the serious intellectual and spiritual impoverishment of future priests, who will be deprived of that privileged access which literature grants to the very heart of human culture and, more specifically, to the heart of every individual.”
He also talks about his own teaching experiences in Argentina. When he encountered students who wanted to read the contemporary poet Garcia Lorca rather than the canonical El Cid, he decided to discuss Lorca in class while having the students read El Cid at home. In the process, he discovered that discussing the contemporary poet led his students to appreciate the older one.
I can’t say much more in response to Francis’s letter than a loud “Amen!”
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. 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
“Some say the world will end in fire/ Some say in ice,” goes Robert Frost’s well-known poem. And while the poem, which in the past I’ve applied to climate change, is really about relationships (fiery anger and cold withdrawal can both be lethal), it works as a pun to capture our current situation. ICE, the acronym for Immigration and Customs Enforcement, has become the Trump administration’s Gestapo, disappearing people off the streets and sending them to prisons and, in some instances, a Salvadoran concentration camp.
In this case, ICE is helping end our constitutional republic since the right of individuals to due process is at the core of who we are. Once the government can lock people up secretly and without a hearing, we have become a dictatorship.
ICE started with immigrants but it has since moved on to people with legitimate visas and green cards, and there have been at least two instances of American citizens being incarcerated before relatives showed up with birth certificates. ICE claimed these were mistakes but according to former Soviet grandmaster Gary Kasparov, who knows authoritarian measures when he sees them, “mistakes” are actually tests: dictators want to see how far they can push their power.
The Iceman Cometh is the title of a Eugene O’Neill play that can be applied to our situation. While there are multiple interpretations of the title, including that it alludes to Jesus’s apocalyptic warning about the bridegroom coming and catching the handmaids asleep, at one level it is a reference to the character “Hickey” Hickman. A successful businessman who returns home each year to throw a party, this year Hickey has another plan: to throw cold water on people’s pipe dreams.
These pipe dreams are rationalizations for non-action. The other characters, all alcoholics, invent continuous excuses for why they aren’t doing anything meaningful with their lives. Instead, they choose to hang around Harry Hope’s saloon. Early on, one of the more reflective patrons delivers a pronouncement that at first put me in mind of Trump supporters:
To hell with the truth! As the history of the world proves, the truth has no bearing on anything. It’s irrelevant and immaterial, as the lawyers say. The lie of a pipe dream is what gives life to the whole misbegotten mad lot of us, drunk or sober.
How are Trumpists to deal with the impending threat of climate change, a Trump recession, and a rapidly changing and complex world? Easy. Just let your leader lull you into the pipe dream that, by asserting white supremacy and going it alone, America can be great again.
The play shows the fury these people experience when someone comes in to wake them up (Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris). By the end of the play, they have convinced themselves that Hickey is insane and that they can return to their pipe dreams and their alcoholic stupor.
But I want to focus on another pipe dream that is more insidious. This is the one the ICEmen are attacking. The pipe dream is that America has a set of safeguards that will protect its democracy. That our inalienable rights are written into the Constitution and therefore operative. That the courts will affirm the principles of due process, of birthright citizenship, of the rights to speak freely and to assemble, etc. And that the American people are fundamentally decent. ICE has entered our lives like Hickey into the saloon and ripped these illusions from our eyes.
As we see ICE crossing one red line after another, how long before we see its actions resulting in people getting killed? Domestic prisons yesterday, a Salvadoran concentration camp today, what tomorrow? This, after all, was the trajectory in 1930s Germany, and we know where that ended up. To invoke another ice poem, this one about death, Wallace Stevens writes, “The only emperor is the emperor of ice cream.”
Elsewhere in his poem, Stevens writes, “Let be be finale of seem,” pointing to how the grim reaper will cut through all illusions. Corpses wrapped in winding sheets, resembling “big cigars,” have a way of confronting us with reality. “If her horny feet protrude,” the poet points out, “they come to show how cold she is, and dumb.”
We’re not at the killing stage yet and, with enough resistance, may escape it. We just can’t make the assumption that ICE will stop there given everything else it has done. Right now, our only hope is collective action.
With ICE’s escalating raids in mind, I turn to Martin Niemöller’s famous poem. It’s worth noting that the poem is personal and comes from a deep place. Niemöller was a battalion commander of the paramilitary Freikorps that brutally put down the Ruhr uprising in 1920; he voted for Nazis in 1924, 1928, and 1933; and he was making anti-Semitic statements as late as 1935. He was thus like those former Trump supporters who finally see the light.
In his case, seeing the light landed him in concentration camps until the end of the war, and he narrowly escaped death:
First they came for the Communists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Communist Then they came for the Socialists And I did not speak out Because I was not a Socialist Then they came for the trade unionists And I did not speak out Because I was not a trade unionist Then they came for the Jews And I did not speak out Because I was not a Jew Then they came for me And there was no one left To speak out for me.
They came for him, and Trump’s ICEmen won’t stop at undocumented immigrants and people with visas and green cards. Ask not for whom the doorbell tolls. It tolls for thee.
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.
Easter Sunday
Since beginning this blog, I have often shared a Mary Oliver poem on Easter Sunday. I do so again today since, in “Messenger,” she grapples with the Jesus miracle that we celebrate today and that is the most difficult to accept.
While I don’t myself entirely believe that Jesus came back as a living, breathing human being—one who (so Luke reports) made multiple appearances, such as walking through locked doors, suddenly vanishing, participating in a meal, and presenting his body to be touched—I do believe that he articulated a deep and transcendent truth about the nature of being. It is this truth that Oliver is getting at when she makes reference to living forever.
Oliver so loves the world that, when she fully enters into creation, it no longer matters that she is aging. Her “body clothes,” like her boots and her coat, may be wearing thin, but her connection with the moth and the wren and “the sleepy dug-up clam” means that she transcends self to become part of something larger.
Oliver is able to reach beyond the drama of life and death because, like sunflowers and hummingbirds, she is a seeker of sweetness. She offers up thanks that she has a mind, a heart, and a body through which she can experience the world, and she offers up thanks that she can voice her gratitude. “Songs of songs of thankfulness and praise, Jesus, Lord, to thee we raise,” goes the old Victorian hymn, and Oliver’s poem works as such a hymn.
For a creative writer, voicing words of thankfulness and praise is particularly important. In his novel All the Pretty Horses, Cormac McCarthy writes of “that resonance which is the world itself and which cannot be spoken but only praised.”
In titling her poem “Messenger,” perhaps Oliver sees herself as a kind of John the Baptist, telling us that divinity is at hand. In yielding herself to the perfect whole, to borrow from Ralph Waldo Emerson’s poem “Each and All,” she moves beyond the self that can die and connects with a creation that continues on. Like Blake, she can
See a world in a grain of sand And a heaven in a wild flower, Hold infinity in the palm of your hand And eternity in an hour.
Or as an enchanted Colin exclaims upon first entering the Secret Garden and seeing the magic of green and growing things, “Mary! Dickon! I shall get well! And I shall live forever and ever and ever!”
Here’s Oliver’s poem:
Messenger by Mary Oliver
My work is loving the world. Here the sunflowers, there the hummingbird equal seekers of sweetness. Here the quickening yeast; there the blue plums. Here the clam deep in the speckled sand.
Are my boots old? Is my coat torn? Am I no longer young, and still not half-perfect? Let me keep my mind on what matters, which is my work,
which is mostly standing still and learning to be astonished. The phoebe, the delphinium. The sheep in the pasture, and the pasture. Which is mostly rejoicing, since all the ingredients are here,
which is gratitude, to be given a mind and a heart And these body-clothes, A mouth with which to give shouts of joy To the moth and the wren, to the sleepy dug-up clam, Telling them all, over and over, how it is that we live forever.
Wordsworth sums up the experience 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.
It is this divine presence that Jesus sought to put us in touch with. He knew that, when we open ourselves to it, everything else falls away. The stone is rolled back and we see into the life of things.
Note: If you wish to receive, via e-mail, (1) my weekly newsletter or (2) daily copies of these posts, write to me at rrbates1951@gmail.com. Comments may also be sent to this address. I promise not to share your e-mail with anyone. To unsubscribe, write here as well.
Saturday
Last night 250 years ago, two lanterns in Boston’s North Tower shone out, signaling to Paul Revere and Samuel Dawes that British troops would be crossing the Charles River (“two if by sea”) rather than taking the longer land route (“one if by land”). The following day, exactly 250 years ago, “embattled famers” stood on “the rude bridge that arched the flood” and “fired the shot heard round the world.
In other words, the world witnessed the early stirrings of what would become the American Revolution. “The Declaration of Independence,” signed a little more than a year later, has inspired the cause of freedom ever since.
Over the past few months I’ve written essays on both Henry Wadsworth Longfellow’s “The Midnight Ride of Paul Revere” and Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “The Concord Hymn,” poems which have become terribly relevant. As Americans all over America join “No Kings Day” marches today, I repost the essay on the Emerson poem. Donald Trump is proving far more malicious and far more destructive than George III ever was.
Reprinted from Feb. 24, 2025
Last week Donald Trump tweeted out a picture of himself wearing a crown and proclaiming, “LONG LIVE THE KING!” following his attempt to end Manhattan’s experiment with congestion pricing. While Trump apologists contended that he was just trolling liberals, the declaration is in line with many similar ones, such as that he will be a dictator “on day one,” that “he who saves his Country does not violate any Law,” and (to the governor of Maine) that “We are the federal law.” He might just as well have said, like absolute monarch Louis XIV, “L’état, c’est moi.” [“The state, it is I.”]
“Look at what they do, not what they say,” MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow constantly reminds us, and Trump’s actions since beginning his second term are consistent with one who would like to be king or dictator or a law unto himself. (Especially frightening are his plans for the FBI and the military.) But the king statement has particularly caught people’s attention because, as New Yorker writer Bill McKibben recently observed, Trump is attempting to overturn “the most basic meme in American history.”
Given that the president has us thinking back to George III, it’s time to break out some of our American Revolution-themed poems. Ralph Waldo Emerson’s “Concord Hymn” is a good place to start.
The poem was written in 1837 to dedicate an obelisk erected to commemorate the 1775 Battle of Lexington and Concord. Having heard about stored arms, British troops were on their way to find and destroy them. Thanks to Paul Revere and Samuel Prescott—that’s another poem I may find myself revisiting in the upcoming months—the colonists were warned of their coming. [Note: My post on “The Midnight Ride on Paul Revere can be found here.] Throughout the day, more and more militiamen showed up to harass the British, with the turning point occurring at Concord’s North Bridge, where outnumbered British regulars fell back under intense fire.
Emerson’s poem serves the same purpose as the monument: to make sure that the spirit of those brave men may never be forgotten. After all, memories are short and people pass away. Or as Emerson puts it,
On this green bank, by this soft stream, We set to-day a votive stone; That memory may their deed redeem, When, like our sires, our sons are gone.
It is easy to forget the price that people paid for the freedoms we take for granted. Quoting James Marriott of the London times, Heather Cox Richardson has noted that such forgetting—combined with our relatively comfortable lives—is one reason why we’re in our current mess:
[Mariott] noted that the very stability and comfort of the post–World War II liberal order has permitted the seeds of its own destruction to flourish. A society with firm scientific and political guardrails that protect health and freedom, can sustain “an underbelly of madmen and extremists—medical sceptics, conspiracy types and anti-democratic fantasists.”
Marriott continues,
Our society has been peaceful and healthy for so long that for many people serious disaster has become inconceivable. Americans who parade around in amateur militia groups and brandish Nazi symbols do so partly because they are unable to conceive of what life would actually be like in a fascist state.”
He observes that those who are cheering the rise of autocracy in the United States—who are intrigued with having Trump as king or dictator– “have no serious understanding of what it means to live under an autocratic government.”
Someone on Bluesky (I can’t find the reference) noted that something similar happened in Germany’s recent elections, where the extreme right made disturbing gains: bored rich people looking for something to spice up their lives get together in bars and on the internet to bond over hate. They forget that Hitler brought down unthinkable suffering upon the German people, not to mention the rest of the world.
When I was in elementary school, we memorized Emerson’s poem. We should continue having our kids memorize it:
The Concord Hymn By Ralph Waldo Emerson
By the rude bridge that arched the flood, Their flag to April’s breeze unfurled, Here once the embattled farmers stood, And fired the shot heard round the world.
The foe long since in silence slept; Alike the conqueror silent sleeps; And Time the ruined bridge has swept Down the dark stream which seaward creeps.
On this green bank, by this soft stream, We set to-day a votive stone; That memory may their deed redeem, When, like our sires, our sons are gone.
Spirit, that made those heroes dare To die, and leave their children free, Bid Time and Nature gently spare The shaft we raise to them and thee.
As long as Americans remain in touch with that spirit, we will resist Trump’s attempts to restore the monarchy. But it takes courage and constant vigilance to do so.
Added note: Make sure that you check out Heather Cox Richardson’s inspiring account of the events, which emphasizes the importance of small actors. Many of these contribution would be largely forgotten but for Longfellow’s Paul Revere poem.