Coucoumellisms

Ce qui ne va pas dans l'église catholique québecoise

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Mon, 01 Apr 2024 01:53:00 +0000

Imaginez une église plongée dans la noirceur, comme l’intérieur d’un tombeau. Tout à coup, les portes arrière de l’église s’ouvrent et la lumière faible d’un feu survient. L’invitation suivante nous est lancée:

“Frères et sœurs bien-aimés, en cette nuit très sainte où notre Seigneur Jésus-Christ est passé de la mort à la vie, l’Église invite tous ses enfants disséminés de par le monde à se réunir pour veiller et prier.”

Le feu est bénit, le cierge pascal est allumé et on procède vers l’avant en chantant les paroles anciennes: “lumière du Christ.” Le peuple répond avec “nous rendons grâce à Dieu.” Peu à peu, l’église s’éclaire à la lumière de multiples cierges allumés à partir du cierge pascal, jusqu’à ce que l’église entière soit complètement illuminée par des cierges allumés. C’est comme ressortir du tombeau avec le Christ.

Imaginez plutôt maintenant, qu’on a laissé une allée de l’église allumée par des lumières électriques (soit planifié de même, ou par oubli). Ça n’a plus du tout le même effet. On ne vit plus la même chose et on perd un peu le sens.

Imaginez encore, la lecture des écritures saintes, paroles pleines de sens; les mêmes qui ont retenti dans plusieurs langues depuis des millénaires. L’histoire du salut traverse le temps par ces paroles anciennes et saintes du peuple juif. À travers ces paroles, on est connecté à toutes les générations précédentes qui ont, eux aussi, répété les mêmes mots.

Imaginez à présent, qu’on remplace ces écritures par une version moderne, qu’on préfère à l’écriture sainte. Que lui manquait-elle, à l’écriture sainte, qu’on la remplace? Si elle n’était pas claire, il y a un temps prévu justement pour ajouter des clarifications et faire des commentaires. Ce temps s’appelle “homélie” et si ce n’est pas assez, il existe un autre temps, en dehors de la messe, qui s’appelle “catéchèse.”

Non seulement est-il contre le code canonique de remplacer la lecture de l’écriture sainte pendant la messe par toute autre lecture, aussi belle soit-elle, c’est un appauvrissement de la messe et non pas un enrichissement de celle-ci. C’est vanité de croire que nous pouvons remplacer la parole de Dieu avec notre propre parole.

Il va sans dire que j’ai été un peu déçue de la veillée pascale cette année. La liturgie de la lumière est une de mes préférées, plonger dans la noirceur pour renaître avec le Christ dans la lumière est une expérience qui me donne des frissons à chaque année. C’est pareil quand je réécoute ces paroles anciennes qui racontent l’histoire du salut; NOTRE histoire.

Quand on vient à la messe, surtout la messe de la veillée pascale, ce n’est pas pour de la nouveauté qu’on vient. Ce n’est pas pour une liturgie simplifiée ou infantilisée. C’est pour la solennité, le symbolisme et le sens profond que seule la tradition peut offrir.

Comme on dit en anglais: “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.” Si ce n’est pas cassé, n’essayez pas de le réparer.

Ce n'est peut-être pas pour rien que les églises les plus vibrantes sont aussi les églises qui gardent les traditions.

A House Divided

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Tue, 24 Jan 2023 02:33:00 +0000

Today's Gospel: Mk 3:22-30

The scribes who had come from Jerusalem said of Jesus, "He is possessed by Beelzebul," and "By the prince of demons he drives out demons."

Summoning them, he began to speak to them in parables, "How can Satan drive out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. And if a house is divided against itself,
that house will not be able to stand. And if Satan has risen up against himself and is divided, he cannot stand; that is the end of him. But no one can enter a strong man's house to plunder his property unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can plunder his house. Amen, I say to you, all sins and all blasphemies that people utter will be forgiven them. But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never have forgiveness, but is guilty of an everlasting sin."

For they had said, "He has an unclean spirit."

Reflection from Bishop Barron:

Friends, in today’s Gospel, scribes accuse Jesus of driving out demons by Beelzebul—by Satan.

The two great names of the devil in the Bible are "the accuser" and "the scatterer." Both are operative and visible in this story. And this helps us immensely to understand Jesus and his work.

We see in the Gospel of Mark that Jesus is known as an exorcist, someone who drives out the demonic. Jesus specifies that his work is in driving out Satan—which is to say, the accuser. The false way of organizing ourselves—present from the beginning—is through accusation, scapegoating, the establishment of us against them, insiders vs. outsiders.

The kingdom of God will be predicated on other assumptions—namely, love, nonviolence, forgiveness of enemies, the overcoming of division. When this vision of life comes into conflict with the powers of the world—which was more or less inevitable—Jesus becomes, himself, an accused victim, a scapegoat.

But instead of responding in kind, he takes upon himself that negative, satanic energy and swallows it up in the divine mercy.

My two cents:

The truly evil people of this world are doing EXACTLY this, pitting us against each other, in order to distract us, while they do their dirty work.

We are currently in an age of scapegoats. No one wants to take personal responsibility. That's what scapegoats (like those who didn't drink the Kool-Aid, right-wingers, pro-lifers or anyone who questions the current narrative) are for. If YOU made a bad decision in your life, you can blame it on society, or some group (racists, transphobes, etc.) in society instead of looking inside yourself and working on changing what is not right there.

Jesus came to heal. Sin is a disease of the soul. It is everything inside us that is twisted, hurt, angry, vengeful, etc. If you are triggered by things, making OTHER people responsible for your triggers is not the answer. Healing means taking a deep, long look at what triggers you and figuring out why, then dealing with it.

Satan doesn't want us to heal. He tries to keep us distracted. Anything good, he will try to destroy from within, by dividing it. Ironically, evil ALWAYS has its own house divided in the end and ends up destroying itself. God wins.

Caméra perdue à la sortie du sentier du Lac Kénogami

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Mon, 08 Aug 2022 00:37:00 +0000

Au cas où quelqu'un me cherche en faisant des recherches par image, je vais mettre ici quelques photos qui étaient encore dans ma caméra. Malheureusement, je ne peux pas mettre les plus récentes, je ne les avaient pas encore téléchargé.

Doit-on permettre l’aide à mourir?

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Sat, 26 Mar 2022 23:57:00 +0000

(Un travail que j'ai rédigé pour un cours de rédaction l'automne dernier.)

L’euthanasie est légale au Canada depuis 2015, mais est-ce qu’elle est un bien moral pour la société? Il ne suffit pas d’être légal pour qu’une chose soit morale. L’euthanasie n’est pas un soin, elle est une fuite. La personne qui veut mourir fuit la souffrance et une société qui voit la personne comme un fardeau fuit la responsabilité. Ce qui commence par le « droit » de mourir peut très bien devenir le « devoir » de mourir.

La souffrance insupportable, qu’elle soit physique ou psychologique, doit être adressée de manière convenable. La douleur physique incontrôlable est rare avec les avancées considérables des dernières années et est souvent due à un manque de formation. Il faut comprendre les facteurs qui peuvent influencer la douleur. « Heureusement, le système nerveux peut changer et devenir moins sensible et réactif […], mais cela prend du temps, des répétitions fréquentes et de la pratique. » (Hôpital d’Ottawa) La solution toute faite n’existe pas, il faut traiter les patients au cas par cas. De plus, ceux qui veulent mourir sont souvent déprimés, se sentent isolés ou ont l’impression d’avoir perdu la dignité. Or, le suicide n’est pas un traitement pour la dépression. En Oregon, entre autres, le nombre de suicides assistés augmente, mais moins de patients sont dirigés en psychiatrie. (Oregon Health Authority) (Aaron Kheriaty) Le suicide ne redonne pas la dignité. Les autochtones reconnaissent que leurs aînés sont une source de sagesse et de connaissances, et leur donnent une réelle place d’honneur. Pour eux, il « est très important d’établir des liens entre les jeunes et les aînés au sein d’une communauté par le biais d’activités avec lesquelles ils sont à l’aise ». (Réseau international des forêts modèles) La dignité vient du sentiment d’appartenance à une communauté et de la conviction d’être une personne de valeur. Quand on élimine la douleur physique et la souffrance psychologique, les gens n'éprouvent plus le désir de mourir.

Traiter une personne de fardeau qui épuise les ressources de la société est une vision déshumanisante qui peut pousser les gens à se sentir obligés de mettre fin à leur vie. Une injection coûte moins cher que certains soins et services, et le gouvernement semble avoir « [choisi] une voie facile et économique. » (Pierre Saint-Arnaud) D’autre part, se faire dire que leur vie ne vaut pas la peine d’être vécue est insultant pour ceux qui ont un handicap. Leur offrir l’aide médicale à mourir comme solution facile normalise « davantage le capacitisme auquel [ils sont] tous les jours confrontés. » (Conseil des Canadiens avec déficiences) Il serait plus avantageux d’investir dans des programmes qui les aideront à atteindre tout leur potentiel. Nick Vujicic, né sans bras ni jambes, est aujourd’hui reconnu internationalement comme conférencier inspirant et vit une vie pleinement valorisant. Bref, l’aide à mourir ne doit pas être plus facile à obtenir que l’aide à vivre.

La société a le devoir de soulager la douleur physique des gens, et de réduire leur souffrance et leur solitude. Plutôt que de voir les personnes comme un fardeau il faut chercher des moyens d’aider les gens à vivre selon leurs pleines capacités. L’euthanasie est une fuite et non pas une solution. Avec les ressources nécessaires, les gens sont capables de surmonter bien des épreuves.

Bibliographie

(Sources non incluses dans le cadre du cours)

Campagne Québec-Vie. « L’euthanasie et Le Suicide Assisté : Pourquoi Pas? » Campagne Québec-Vie, https://www.cqv.qc.ca/l_euthanasie_et_le_suicide_assist_pourquoi_pas. Consulté le 15 octobre 2021.

Clinique de la douleur de l’hôpital d’Ottawa. Contrôle de la douleur : approche interdisciplinaire, http://www.ottawahospital.on.ca/wp-content/uploads/2017/11/pain-clinic-education-sessions-handout-french.pdf. Consulté le 15 octobre 2021.

Conseil des Canadiens avec déficiences, Des experts des Nations Unies condamnent l’attribution de l’aide médicale à mourir aux personnes handicapées n’étant pas en fin de vie, et de ce fait, le Canada n’est plus un leader international en matière de droits de la personne, 29 janvier 2020, http://www.ccdonline.ca/fr/humanrights/endoflife/Media-Release-29Jan2020. Consulté le 15 octobre 2021.

Gouvernement du Québec. Exigences requises - Aide médicale à mourir. https://www.quebec.ca/sante/systeme-et-services-de-sante/soins-de-fin-de-vie/aide-medicale-a-mourir/exigences-requises/. Consulté le 15 octobre 2021.

Kheriaty, Aaron. « Oregon Assisted Suicide Law No Model for California. » The Mercury News, 2 septembre 2015, https://www.mercurynews.com/2015/09/02/aaron-kheriaty-oregon-assisted-suicide-law-no-model-for-california/. Consulté le 15 octobre 2021.

Nick Vujicic. https://nickvujicic.com/. Consulté le 16 octobre 2021.

Oregon Health Authority. Oregon Death with Dignity Act 2020 Data Summary. Oregon Health Authority - Public Health Division, 26 février 2021, https://www.oregon.gov/oha/PH/PROVIDERPARTNERRESOURCES/EVALUATIONRESEARCH/DEATHWITHDIGNITYACT/Documents/year23.pdf. Consulté le 15 octobre 2021.

Réseau international des forêts modèles, Apprendre de Nos Aînés : Des Jeunes Autochtones Renouent Avec Leur Culture, 2019, https://rifm.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/FactSheet_Fre_Elders.pdf. Consulté le 15 octobre 2021.

An Essay by my 18-year-old-self on Gerard Manley Hopkins

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Sun, 02 May 2021 01:41:00 +0000

A shout out to my grade eleven English teacher, John MacLean

I probably never would have discovered Gerard Manley Hopkins in the first place if it had not been for Mr. MacLean. The best literature teacher I ever had, even including my very small foray into university literature classes. University literature classes make me glad that I am studying translation instead and only have to take four literature classes - although I admit to being glad I took them, and especially enjoyed the medieval French and English literature. I think Mr. MacLean is still teaching English in a High School in Halifax N.S. somewhere.

Some comments before we get started

I'm surprised I even knew what alliteration, repetition and internal rhyme were. I'm guessing I read other people's commentaries on his poetry and they used those terms. I had plenty of time to forget what alliteration was until taking my two English Literature classes this semester. I don't think I had any clue who John Henry Newman was at the time either. It is strange to read myself mention him, now knowing what I did not then. I'm not sure how much of this is just putting together other people's thoughts, and how much are my own thoughts on his poetry. I am guessing it is more the former than the latter. I also don't always stick to the literary present and I am pretty sure that my poetry professor from this semester would be writing comments like "why does this matter?" in the margins because while I am perfectly capable of catching nuances, meanings and metaphors, it seems that I forget to write about what that changes for the reader (or society in general.) Still, it is not a half-bad essay. Which is why I am going to post it here. If you don't know Gerard Manley Hopkins, check him out.

I will add two of my favourite poems by Hopkins at the end of the Essay. The Deutschland is not (and was not) one of my favourites, (by which I do not mean to say that I do not like it, just that I like others better) but when you are limited in research, you do research on the poems that people have written about.

Gerard Manley Hopkins

Jeanne Chabot, June 19, 1990 - For English OAC Class

Gerard Manley Hopkins was born July 28, 1844, at Stratford, Essex. He was the eldest of nine children. His father, Manley Hopkins also wrote poems. Hopkins wrote his first poems in grade school. He received a grant to study at Balliol College, Oxford. Here, he wrote poetry while studying classics.

While Hopkins was studying at Oxford, the Oxford movement renewed relationships between Anglicanism and Catholicism. In 1866, Hopkins abandoned his Anglican upbringing and joined the Roman Catholic Church. He was received into the church by John Henry Newman. (Later Cardinal Newman)

Gerard Manley Hopkins left Oxford with an outstanding academic record. In fact, Benjamen Jowett then a lecturer, later the master of the College called him "the Star of Balliol." (1)

Hopkins joined the Society of Jesus in 1868. After entering the Jesuit noviciate, Gerard burned his poetry. He was determined as he said "to write no more, as not belonging to my profession." (2) However, he still kept a journal in which he described in detail his observations of nature and his thoughts on philosophy.

In 1874, Hopkins went to St. Bruno's College at St. Asaph in Wales to study theology. With encouragement from his superior there, he began to write poetry again. It was while he was studying at St. Bruno's that the Deutschland was wrecked. Hopkins was affected by the wreck, as was his superior who said he wished someone would write a poem about it. Hopkins took the hint and wrote "The Wreck of the Deutschland." It is one of his most significant works in which he tried out a new rhythm he had been aching to try before.

In 1877 Hopkins was ordained a priest. He became a professor of Greek at Dublin University in 1884. Hopkins was not happy in Ireland. He was overworked and was in poor health. It was in 1885, that he started writing what are now known as the "Terrible Sonnets" beginning with "Carrion Comfort."

In these Terrible Sonnets, Hopkins shows his depression which came about because of the conflict between the poet in him and his religious vocation. (3) This conflict reflects the ancient tension between the spirit and the flesh. (4) Hopkins had a great desire to express the delights and wonders of God's creation but felt it was not right according to his vocation.

On June 8, 1889, Gerard Manley Hopkins died of typhoid fever in Glasnevin.

After Hopkin's death, Robert Bridges, another poet and good friend of Hopkins', began to publish Hopkins' works. Slowly, they gained popularity and by the 1930s were quite popular.

Gerard Manley Hopkins is a unique poet. He is Victorian but is not like other Victorian poets. He liked to experiment with rhythms. He came up with the idea of "sprung rhythm," where each line contains one stressed syllable and any number of unstressed syllables.

Hopkins turned around the language of poetry. He used old words that people did not use anymore such as dialect words or phrases. He used long forgotten meanings of common words to give his poetry a different twist. He also studied other poetic devices besides the English ones, such as Anglo Saxon and Welsh. He experimented with these devices to express his thoughts and feelings in a unique way that leaves a great impression on the reader of his poetry.

In his poetry, Hopkins uses a variety of literary devices including echo, alliteration, repetition, rhyme and internal rhyme. Alliteration is common in his poetry. For example in line three of "God's Grandeur," he writes "It gathers to a greatness, like the ooze of oil." An example of internal rhyme is found in line six: "and all is seared with trade; bleared, smeared with toil."

Hopkins wrote to Bridges, "No doubt my poetry errs on the side of oddness..." (5) While it may not be odd exactly, it is true that his poetry is definitely unique.

Hopkins' poems express deep personal experiences, emotions and his delight at the Grandeur of God, His greatness and splendour. He was enthralled by the beauty of the created world. For example, in "Pied Beauty" he expressed his joy "in all things counter, original, spare, strange." (6)

Hopkins emphasized the inscape of every object. He believed that everything in nature has its own elusive "selfness." (7) Instress and inscape underlie his poetry. Both of these terms were Hopkins' coinages. Inscape is the essential inner nature of a person or object, while instress is the divine force which creates the inscape of an object or event.

Hokins' poetry combines the subtlety of perception, force of intellect and intensity of religious feeling. It contains imagination, observation, deep feeling and intellectual depth. (8)

Coventry Patmore wrote about Hopkins: "There was something in his words and manners which were at once a rebuke and an attraction to all who could only aspire to be like him." (9)

"The Wreck of the Deutschland"

In the poem "The Wreck of the Deutschland," written by Gerard Manley Hopkins, God is an important factor. In the first part, Hopkins talks about his faith in God. In the second part, he applies his faith in God to the wreck of the Deutschland, using symbols, personifications and irony.

In the first stanza of Part The First, Gerard Manley Hopkins talks about how God made him then goes on to say: "And does thou touch me afresh?/Over again I feel they finger and find thee." (10) Here is a unique way of saying God is still moulding him; shaping him. Hopkins puts words together so well that he gives them an impressive meaning that lasts.

Hopkins was a staunch Catholic and in "The Wreck of the Deutschland," Catholic symbols make their way to the surface over and over. In stanza three, Hopkins talks about Holy Communion as he says: "And fled with a fling of the heart to the heart of the host." (line 21) Holy Communion is a very important symbol in the Catholic Church. In fact, it is more than a symbol, it is a relationship with God.

In stanzas six and seven, Hopkins makes sure that we realize that suffering does not make God happy. Once again he expresses this so well as he says: "Not out of his bliss springs the stress felt [...] Nor first from Heaven (and few know this.)" (lines 41-43) Jesus suffered too and here, another major theme in the Catholic faith surfaces as Hopkins talks about "The dense and driven Passion and frightful sweat." The Passion of our Lord is a much-meditated subject in the Church.

In the first stanza of Part the Second, stanza eleven, Death is personified. Death speaks saying "'Some find me a sword; some/The flange and the rail; flame,/fang or flood.'" (lines 81-83) Here Hopkins reminds us that someday we will all die.

Irony is portrayed in stanza thirteen. Instead of staying in port, the ship headed out into the middle of a snowstorm as Hopkins puts it: "Into the snow she sweeps,/hurling the haven behind." (lines 97-98) The shipwreck might never have happened had they not ventured out anyway.

In stanza fifteen, Hope is personified in a very unique way. Hopkins adds a twist to the character of Hope in the way he describes her:

Hope had grown grey hairs,
Hope had mourning on.
Trenched with tears, carved with cares,
Hope was twelve hours gone. (lines 113-116)

This is a great portrayal of Hope. You can almost see her, bent over in dark clothes, mourning, in the middle of a storm, while everyone has given up.

As the ship started to go down, a Mother Superior took over in the panic. She and four other nuns stood in a circle holding hands as she called "O Christ come quickly." This is a recurring theme in the rest of the poem, as Hopkins was obviously impressed by her faith. Hopkins describes the event: "Till a lioness arose breasting the babble/A prophetess towered in the tumult, a virginal tongue told." (lines 135-136) Again he talks of her crying out in stanza nineteen as he says: "Sister, a sister is calling/A master, her master and mine! [...] and the call of the tall nun/to the men in the tops and the tackle rode over the storm's brawling." (lines 145-146) In stanza thirty-one Hopkins compares her call to a bell summoning others to God as he says: "the breast of the /Maiden could obey so, be a bell to, ring of it, and/Startle the poor sheep back! Is the shipwreck then a harvest, does/Tempest carry the grain for thee?" (lines 246-248)

In stanzas twenty-two and twenty-three, the number five is a symbol. Hopkins talks about the five wounds of Christ as he says: "Five!/The finding and sake/and cipher of suffering Christ." (lines 170-171) He talks about the cinquefoil which is a five-leaved flower or architectural ornament with five points. He talks of Saint Francis who received the sacred wounds of Christ as he says: "Joy fall to thee, Father Francis, [...] with the gnarls of the nails in thee, niche of the lance," (lines 178 and 180) and he talks of the five sisters in the wreck.

In stanza thirty, Hopkins compares the nun's death with the feast of the Immaculate Conception as he says:

What was the feast followed the night
Thou hadst glory of this nun? --
Feast of the one woman without stain.
For so conceived, so to conceive thee is done; (lines 236-239)

In stanza thirty-one, Hopkins' faith in God rises to the surface once more. When he says: Well she has thee for the pain, for the/Patience; but pity the rest of them!" (lines 242-243) he shows his own total dependence on God as well as the nun's.

In stanza thirty-five, the last stanza in the poem, Hopkins expresses a desire for everyone to know Christ as he does. He asks the nun to send "Our King back, oh, upon English souls!" (line 276) At the end, in his own special, unique way, Hopkins talks of the fire of his faith, as he says: "Our hearts' charity's hearth's fire, our thoughts' chivalry's throng's Lord." (line 281)

"The Wreck of the Deutschland" is a touching story of faith in times of deepest trouble, joy in times of deepest sorrow and hope in times of deepest despair. Gerard Manly Hopkins' sensitivity, creativity, imagination, and personal faith and conviction give the poem a life of its own and a certain touch no one else could ever hope to attain.

Endnotes:

1. John Cowie Reid, "Gerard Manley Hopkins" Encyclopedia Britannica, (Helen Hemmingway Benton, 1976) 8:1070-1071.

2. Ibid

3. Ibid

4. Benjamen Evan Owen, "Gerard Manley Hopkins" Encyclopedia Britannica, (William Benton, 1962) 11:737-738.

5. David Daiches, "Gerard Manley Hopkins" The Norton Anthology of English Literature, (W.W. Norton and Co. 1962) pp 1235-1239.

6. Gerard Manley Hopkins, Victorian Poetry and Poetics, (Houghton Mifflin Co.) p. 81.

7. Reid, "Gerard Manley Hopkins" Encyclopedia Britannica, (1976) 8:1070-1071

8. Ibid

9. Ibid

10. Hopkins, Victorian Poetry and Poetics, pp. 72-80, lines 7-8. All subsequent references will be made to this edition.

Bibliography:

Daiches, David "Gerard Manley Hopkins" The Norton Anthology of English Literature, United States:

W.W. Norton and Co. 1962. pp 1235-1239.

Hopkins, Gerard Manley Victorian Poetry and Poetics - Second Edition, New York: Houghton Mifflin

Co. 1968

Owen, Benjamen Evan "Gerard Manley Hopkins" Encyclopedia Britannica, Chicago: William Benton.

1962. 11:737-738

Reid, John Cowie "Gerard Manley Hopkins" Encyclopedia Britannica, Toronto: Helen Hemmingway

Benton. 1975. 8:1070-1071

"Wreck of the Deutschland, The" Encyclopedia Britannica, Toronto: Helen Hemmingway Benton.

1976. X Addenda: 159

The Windhover

To Christ our Lord

I caught this morning morning's minion, king-

dom of daylight's dauphin, dapple-dawn-drawn Falcon, in his riding

Of the rolling level underneath him steady air, and striding

High there, how he rung upon the rein of a wimpling wing

In his ecstasy! then off, off forth on swing,

As a skate's heel sweeps smooth on a bow-bend: the hurl and gliding

Rebuffed the big wind. My heart in hiding

Stirred for a bird, -- the achieve of, the mastery of the thing!

Brute beauty and valour and act, oh, air, plume here

Buckle! ad the fire that breaks from thee then, a billion

Times told lovelier, more dangerous, O my Chevalier!

No wonder of it: shéer plód makes plough down sillion

Shine, and blue-bleak embers, ah my dear,

Fall, gall themselves, and gash-gold vermilion.

1877

Pied Beauty

Glory be to God for dappled things –

For skies of couple-colour as a brinded cow;

For rose-moles all in stipple upon trout that swim;

Fresh-firecoal chestnut-falls; finches’ wings;

Landscape plotted and pieced – fold, fallow, and plough;

And áll trádes, their gear and tackle and trim.

All things counter, original, spare, strange;

Whatever is fickle, freckled (who knows how?)

With swift, slow; sweet, sour; adazzle, dim;

He fathers-forth whose beauty is past change:

Praise him.

1877

An Exercise in Close Reading - Paradise Lost - John Milton

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Mon, 19 Apr 2021 14:15:00 +0000

And chiefly Thou O Spirit, that dost prefer
Before all Temples th’upright heart and pure,
Instruct me, for Thou know’st; Thou from the first
Wast present, and with mighty wings outspread
Dove-like satst brooding on the vast Abyss
And mad’st it pregnant: What in me is dark
Illumine, what is low raise and support;
That to the highth of this great Argument
I may assert th’Eternal Providence,
And justifie the ways of God to men.
-- John Milton, Paradise Lost, Book One Lines 17-26 --

An exercise in analytical close reading of the text:

And chiefly Thou O Spirit, that dost prefer:

“And” implies something or someone else. Milton has already mentioned the Shepherd and the Heav’nly Muse. Now he comes to a third entity. “Chiefly” signifies that this particular entity is the most important. “Thou” with a capital T implies a number of things: 1. That the speaker is speaking directly to someone, 2. That the person is someone to whom great respect is owed, but paradoxically 3. Because of the use of “thou” instead of the more formal “you”, this person is also someone with whom the speaker may have an intimate relationship. “O” implies a sense of wonderment. “Spirit” with a capital S and “O” in front of it tells us this is not just any spirit, this is a great Spirit. A description of the Spirit follows. “That” links the Spirit to what follows. “Dost” puts an emphasis on “prefer.” This could have been written “that prefers” instead, but “That dost prefer” makes the statement stronger. “Prefer” means to elevate one choice over another.

Before all Temples th’upright heart and pure,

“Before” in this case means “even more than.” “All” indicates any or every one of the temples. “Temples” are places of worship, dwelling places for God. It is “the” and not “an” upright heart. We are not talking about just a heart, but the upright one.” “The” defines both “heart” and “pure” making “pure” a noun, not an adjective. To be “Upright” means to stand straight. To “walk upright” in the Christian faith means to be faithful to the truth, to do what is right and just. The “heart” is more than just an organ. The heart alludes to the soul. It was thought that that is where the soul resided. “The upright heart” suggests a person who is faithful to God. “And” joins “th’upright heart” to the “pure.” Both are preferred to temples in the Spirit’s eyes. The “pure” are those without wicked intent. They do not desire to hurt others.

Instruct me, for Thou know’st; Thou from the first
Wast present, and with mighty wings outspread
Dove-like satst brooding on the vast Abyss
And mad’st it pregnant:

“Instruct” means to show, to teach and to guide. It is in the imperative tense. The speaker wants the Spirit to instruct. “Me” is the object of “instruct.” The speaker is asking the Spirit for direction and inspiration in what he is about to undertake. “For” is a conjunction that indicates “why”. What follows is the reason for the speaker to ask the Spirit to instruct him. “Thou” refers back to the Spirit. “Know’st” appears here without an object. This is very important. The Spirit does not just know things. He knows. Period. He is all-knowing. “Thou” again indicates the Spirit. “From” indicates movement, either through time or space (or both.) “The” specifies “first.” “First” is not used as an adjective here, there is no noun to modify. “The first” indicates “the beginning.” “Wast” is the state of being, second person, singular. In the beginning, the Spirit was. “Present” confirms this. The Spirit was present at the beginning of time. “And” confirms that there is more to this idea. “With” joins the Spirit to what comes next. “Mighty” indicates something all-powerful. The Spirit is all-knowing, all-powerful and has been present from the first. “Wings” are suggestive of birds or angels or some other Spirit. Flight gives a creature greater mobility, which is why spirits are often depicted with wings. They can go anywhere, be anywhere. “Outspread” implies “flight” or protection. “Mighty wings outspread” gives the impression of power and majesty. If we had not already guessed who this Spirit is yet, “Dove-like” confirms it. The dove is the symbol of the Holy Spirt, the third person in the Trinity. “Satst” involves occupying a space, usually on some kind of seat. “brooding” has two meanings. It means either to mope, or, as in the case of a chicken, to incubate. “Mighty wings outspread”, the Spirit sat, like a hen sitting on her eggs, incubating them, growing creation inside. “On” indicates where the Spirit was in relation to “the vast Abyss.” “The” specifies “vast Abyss.” If the Abyss is “vast” then how much vaster is the Spirit “brooding” on it? The “Abyss” alludes to chaos, the “Tohu-Bohu” that was in the beginning. God spreads his mighty wings over this Abyss, and out of the chaos, He broods life. Creation is putting order into disorder. “And” indicates there is more to this idea. The speaker is still speaking directly to the Spirit, when he says “Thou.” Thou “madst” is a commendation. He gives praise to the Spirit for what he has made happen. “It” refers back to the “Abyss.” “Pregnant” entails new life. God broods over the Abyss, creates order and makes it capable of giving life. “Pregnant” also implies “full of meaning.” This new life, this new creation is full of meaning.

What in me is dark
Illumine, what is low raise and support;

“What” in this context means “that” or “whatever.” “In” indicates the relationship of “what” to “me.” “Me” refers to the speaker. “Is” designates existence. “Dark” in Christianity symbolises being lost, unable to see clearly, unable to walk “upright” without stumbling or bumping into things. A state of darkness is a state of deceit and sin. It can also mean lack of clarity or knowledge. “Illumine” is imperative. The Speaker is asking the Spirit to shed light on anything that might be unclear. “What” is defined by “low”. “Is” indicates a state of being. “Low” alludes to something or someone that is inferior. It implies either humility or inferiority. “Low” places itself in relation to “high.” The speaker asks the Spirit to “raise” what is low. God’s plan for humanity is exactly this. To raise us to equality with Him. Despite our weaknesses God can work through us for a higher purpose. “And” indicates more to this idea. The speaker also asks the Spirit to “support” him.

That to the highth of this great Argument
I may assert th’Eternal Providence,
And justifie the ways of God to men.

“That” begins the description of the desired outcome. “To” implies a forward movement. “The” specifies “highth.” “Of” links “highth” to “argument.” “This” indicates a specific argument out of many other possible ones. “Great” implies something that is wonderful, powerful and expansive. This is no small undertaking, which is why the speakers requests the aid of the Holy Spirit to complete it. “Argument” indicates reasoning. The speaker intends to back up his point of view in such a way as to achieve the “highth of this great argument.” In other words, to convince his audience as much as possible of its validity. He intends to go through every possible counterargument and refute it. “I” refers back to the speaker. “May” is conditional, it indicates something he hopes to do, but has not done yet. To “assert” is to confirm without a doubt. “The” specifies “Eternal Providence.” We are not talking about just any “providence.” “Eternal” appears with a capital E, showing that we are again talking of God. Only God is “eternal.” “Providence” implies that God is a source of eternal bounty and goodness. “And” joins two parts of the same idea. To “Justifie” is to validate. The speaker wishes to validate, uphold, defend and explain “the ways of God” to those who might not understand them. There is a reason why God does things, and the speaker hopes (with the help of the Holy Spirit) to clarify the reasons. “The” specifies “ways of God.” The “ways” of God are His actions, his decisions, his ultimate design. “Of” links “ways” to “God.” “God” is the all-powerful, all-knowing, Eternal, good Creator. “To” indicates movement. “Men” are the recipient of the justification of the ways of God. “Men” refers to all humanity here. The Speaker wishes to defend God’s ways and affirm his greatness to all humanity. Period.

Argument that can be made from the analysis:

Milton’s speaker exhorts the Holy, all-powerful, all-knowing, eternal Spirit, creator of all, to instruct him and guide him in his purpose. He seeks the guidance of the Holy Spirit to help him present and then refute through clear reasoning any possible doubt, contradiction, or counterargument against the justification of God’s ways and to reaffirm God’s greatness to all.

Christian Themes in Literature: Medieval texts vs Renaissance Texts

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Sat, 17 Apr 2021 21:51:00 +0000

Thanks to Martin Luther and his 95 theses, Christians were freed (among other things) from the troublesome necessity of doing good works (or paying for indulgences) to gain salvation. By Shakespeare’s time, many texts no longer have Christianity as a central theme; instead, Christianity is moved to the back burner in secular texts and rarely mentioned. In older medieval texts, even epic Pagan stories of kings and thanes like Beowulf have Christian themes running through them and allusions to a Christian God.

In Twelfth Night, upon a gentleman’s arrival at the gate, Sir Toby declares, “Let him be the devil an he will, I care not. Give me faith, say I.” (Shakespeare 1.5.125-126) In other words, leave him alone; release him of any expectations. Leave him free to be what he wants. What manner of person he is, what station in life he has, his rank or class do not matter; they are of little consequence. He could be the devil, Satan himself if he wanted to be, and it would not matter. Ironically, the person at the gate is neither a gentleman nor the devil but a lady in disguise. Sir Toby pauses for effect, “I care not.” He is unconcerned and indifferent to the consequences. Though others may care, he does not. “Give me faith, say I” he declares. “Faith” is an allusion to Martin Luther’s Sola Fide thesis or salvation by faith alone (not by works.) As Sir Toby understands it, even if a person is absolutely evil, as long as he has faith, he can still be saved. In this Protestant view, all one needs for eternal salvation is to believe and trust in God. This is the nobleman’s excuse for his own behaviour.

Sir Toby announces the gentleman’s arrival punctuated by a belch and already drunk early in the day. This state of inebriety is constant throughout the whole play and he is unrepentant. Why should he repent? If salvation is gained by faith alone, then what good does it do to repent? If we are guaranteed eternal salvation by belief in God alone, then religion can be tucked into a nice corner and not thought of much at all as it has no real relevance in this life, only in the next. Sir Toby’s lack of concern over his own actions extends to his frequent companion and fellow drinker, Sir Andrew as well as to his cousin’s servant Malvolio. He constantly makes fun of the first and uses him for his money, “some two thousand strong” (3.2.54) while also participating in a nasty prank on the latter.

Although belief is very necessary for salvation, the Bible seems to be of the opinion that works are also crucial. St James writes, “show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works” (James 2:18) One could argue that by rejecting certain dogmas, Protestantism is partly responsible for the dilution of faith and its removal from a place of prominence in British literature. Certainly, King Henry VIII’s split from Rome opened the doors to personal interpretation and making up one’s own rules.

In the 8^th century Bede “the Venerable” writes of a monastery wherein the Abbess Hild had established “a strict observance of justice, piety, chastity and other virtues” (52) in accord with St. James’ exhortation to show faith by deeds because “the demons also believe, and shudder” (James 2:21) Earlier in the same text, Bede writes of the Britons who, with an “increase in luxury” begin to indulge in “every sort of crime” (45) which results in their decimation and the Saxons’ taking over Britain. Wulfstan repeats this in his Sermo Lupi ad Anglos in 1014. (4) He implies that there are “worse deeds among the English than we have ever heard of among the Britons” and warns them to avoid making the same mistake, because actions are not without consequence. A society weakened from within by the evil actions of their citizens will not withstand a threat from without.

Arguably, there are numerous post-Reformation, Protestant texts which place faith fore and centre, Milton’s Paradise Lost, for one. Puritans in general put great focus on avoiding sin. Milton brings up the fact that rebelling against God often ends in unexpected and unpleasant consequences. Satan, surprised at having lost against God exclaims “Is this […] the seat / That we must change for Heav’n?” (1.242-243 1021) Clearly, post-Reformation Protestants do think that actions matter. Perhaps Shakespeare himself is using the character of Sir Toby to subtly point this out. Protestant theology cannot be held entirely responsible for the diminution of faith in texts as there are other factors including corruption in the Catholic Church and a cultural shift from a comitatus society to a feudal society and eventually the growth of a bourgeois class as well as the introduction of humanist ideas.

The answer to questions of both personal interpretation on one hand and corruption on the other might be found with Abbess Hild’s monastery, in Bede’s Ecclesiastical History of the English People. “After the example of the primitive church, no one there was rich, and no one was poor, for all things were common to all, and none had any private property.” (Bede 52.) Abbess Hild takes the example of the Church in its earliest form, bases herself closely on its ideas, concepts and way of life. It would be a return to the source, the “primitive church”, the original community of Christian believers. “No one there was rich.” In other words, no one has more money than they could use, no one has a lavish lifestyle or an overabundance of belongings. No one is of higher stature than another; all are equal. “And no one was poor.” Essentially, no one is deprived of means of sustenance or shelter nor are they deprived of fraternity or acceptance. It also means that no one would be considered insignificant or inferior. “For all things were common to all.” This can be understood in two ways. First, everyday tools for life, food, shelter and knowledge would be shared. The community is a reciprocal society, based on comitatus, like in Beowulf. There is mutual dependence. Second, there would be a common goal, an accepted understanding, a shared faith, and prevalent values and morals. This implies much dialogue, debate and study, as well as some recognition of authority. Bede confirms that she “obliged them” to devote much time “to the study of the Holy Scriptures” and to “works of justice.” (52) Everyone participates in communal life, and “none [has] any private property.” This might not necessarily mean that no one is allowed to own anything at all, but if anyone owns something, it would be voluntarily put to the common good and use of the community.

Is it a coincidence that the further we get away from a comitatus society, the more corrupt it seems to get, to the point where even the Church itself is corrupt and people in it often seem to be there for ulterior motives? Perhaps this is why the Christian faith is so central in earlier texts, and even seen as something heroic, as a nobleman who “closely [binds] his spirit’s coffer” and “seeks mercy, consolation from the Father in heaven, where for us all stability stands.” (The Wanderer 13.114-115 66-68) or a king that is “peerless, blameless in everything.” (Beowulf 1885-1886) while in many later texts, the Church is often the focus of critique. The more society develops from tribes to kings of small kingdoms to kings of larger kingdoms and ultimately to kings who have power over a large country (absolutism) the more power and greed become real temptations. If the Church is not separated from the state, the same becomes true for the Church, people see in it a way to gain influence, power and riches, and genuine faith is pushed aside. There are no more heroes. “It is no wonder that misfortune should befall us, […] because men [do not] care what they [do] in word or deed.” (Wulfstan 4)

All of these texts are pertinent even today. Christians may well ask themselves what place they give to their faith in their lives. As Wulfstan seems to ask, where are the heroes? Contrary to Sir Toby’s opinion, what we do matters. Before we head out to change the whole world, we might take a hint from Abbess Hild and start by recreating elements of the original community of believers in our own homes and neighbourhoods. After all, five men from her monastery later become bishops, all of them “men of singular merit and sanctity.” (Bede 52)

Works Cited:

Beowulf

William Shakespeare, Twelfth Night

St. James, Letter

Bede "the Venerable", Ecclesiastical History of the English People

Wulfstan, Sermo Lupi ad Anglos

Milton, Paradise Lost

Walt Whitman: Religious Democracy

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Tue, 13 Apr 2021 20:26:00 +0000

Born on May 31, 1819, in West Hills, Long Island, New York, Walt Whitman is a controversial figure in American Poetry, considered by some to be “America’s Poet” and by others a self-centred windbag. Contrary to poets like T.S. Eliot or Ezra Pound, Walt Whitman does not look for meta-narratives to find meaning in the world. Instead, he finds meaning in what is in front of him. All the mundane things we see and do give just as much meaning to life as the mystical epiphanies we experience. The physical is just as important as the spiritual. Walt Whitman challenges the polarization of both Gnostic religious ideas in a society still influenced by puritanism and the idea of democracy as uniformity of thought and expression within the context of a young republic.

Whitman was born towards the end of the Industrial Revolution, only 36 years after the end of the American Revolution. At 13, he learned to set type in a printer’s officer. At 16, he was spending summers along the coast of Long Island and teaching and boarding with families during the school year. He spent much of his youth (from 1837-1848) in or around New York City. He preferred the society of the “common people”; fishermen, farmers, mechanics, bus drivers, etc. He was fond of visiting such places as wharves, shipyards and factories. From 1849 to 1851 he spent some time travelling through Pennsylvania, Maryland, Louisiana, Missouri, Wisconsin and up to Niagara and Canada. In 1851, he returned to Brooklyn where he started a Newspaper, then sold it to become a carpenter. In 1855, he printed his first edition of Leaves of Grass. (Miller 46-48) In 1856-57, the second edition of Leaves of Grass was printed with new additions and a letter of praise from Emerson which begins with: “Dear Sir, I am not blind to the worth of the wonderful gift of ‘Leaves of Grass.’ I find it the most extraordinary piece of wit and wisdom that America has yet contributed.” (qtd. in Miller 100)

Whitman begins “Song of Myself” with words that come across as self-centred and pompous, “I celebrate myself, and sing myself, / And what I assume, you shall assume” but interestingly enough, near the end, he writes “You will hardly know who I am or what I mean.” (1:1-2 and 52:11), He is not celebrating himself so much as he is celebrating individuality. Whitman’s idea of democracy is not “identity” or sameness of ideas, but rather “variety” or multiplicity of ideas. He challenges the belief that equality means everyone must be or act the same. He believes instead that “opposite equals advance”, that “there can be an equality that comes not through reciprocal duties, but by way of the asymmetry of persons, unpredictably multiplied and divided.” (qtd. in Bromwich 518-519) These multitudes of thought and action are found throughout “Song of Myself,” especially where he catalogues individuals; “The butcher-boy puts off his killing-clothes […] Blacksmiths with grimed and hairy chests environ the anvil […] The negro holds firmly the reins […] The pure contralto sings in the organ loft. (12:1 and 3, 13:1 and 15:1)

While democracy is seen as a good thing, Whitman realizes that it can never be perfect. In “Imagining the New World of American Democracy” he writes:

[…] only here in America, out of the long history and manifold presentations of the ages, has at last arisen, and now stands, what never before took positive form and sway, the People – and that view’d en masse, and while fully acknowledging deficiencies, dangers, faults, this people, inchoate, latent, not yet come to majority, nor to its own religious, literary, or esthetic expression, yet affords to-day, an exultant justification of all the faith, all the hopes and prayers and prophecies of good men through the past – the stablest, solidest-based government of the world. (193)

These deficiencies and faults are also sung in “Song of Myself” entwined among the positive:

The Quadroon girl is sold at the auction-stand, the drunkard nods
By the bar-room stove,
The machinist rolls up his sleeves, the policeman travels his beat,
The gate-keeper marks who pass, (40)

The idea of democracy as a multiplicity of ideas allows for freedom and development and is still pertinent today. Why does opposite equal advance? Because there is always a ying to the yang. It is only when we acknowledge opposite aspects of the same maxim (mercy and justice for example) that we can truly find balance in life. Religion has a similar view, that belonging to a community of believers challenges individuals to work on themselves. It is through human relationships that our character is developed.

Walt Whitman comes across as someone who dislikes religion. He does not look for meaning in organized religion or in meta-narratives like Ezra Pound or T.S. Eliot. “The scent of these arm-pits aroma [is] finer than prayer,” he writes, “This head more than churches, bibles, and all the creeds.” (“Song of Myself” 24:29-30) He tells of a young soldier he visited during the civil war, “He asked me if I enjoyed religion. I said: Perhaps not, my dear, in the way you mean: and yet maybe it is the same thing.” (qtd. in Miller 61) Whitman’s approach to poetry is to observe, to “lean and loafe at [his] ease observing a spear of summer grass.” (“Song of Myself” 1:5) Free verse reflects the idea of loitering, he welcomes words and thoughts as they are instead of labouring like Robert Frost to make them fall into meter, rhythm or structured stanzas. While Frost focuses on labour, Whitman focuses on meditation. His apparent lack of structure may seem less poetic, but it creates more freedom. It is “not words, not music or rhyme I want, not custom or lecture.” (“Song of Myself” 5:4) He breaks free of conventional ideas on poetry at the same time that he challenges conventional ideas about democracy and religion. For Whitman, everyday actions such as going to work or singing are just as meaningful as singular mystical experiences. Here, his ideas are similar to Frost’s; labour, games, song, childbirth, travel, the mundane is important, it gives us meaning. (“Song of Myself” 15)

All of the ordinary things we do every day are rites. Your morning cup of coffee, as you take time out, just for yourself, to sit down and read the news or meditate, is a ritual. Community gatherings, crossing a ferry, getting together to build something, mending a wall, going to work, this is all part of human experience. Whitman sanctifies the everyday and divinizes the commonplace. (Murray 440) “The similitudes of the past and those of the future […] The others that are to follow me, the ties between me and them” are the rituals we have in common. (“Crossing Brooklyn Ferry” 2:3 and 6) The Catholic Church calls it “the communion of Saints” in which all the faithful, past, present and future pray the same litanies and repeat the same rites. In this way, Whitman too, is religious. “I am the mate and companion of all people,” he says, “all just as immortal and fathomless as myself.” (“Song of Myself” 7:7)

Religion, for Whitman, is both spiritual and physical. Sexuality is a religious experience. He challenges the Gnostic puritan idea that the body is sinful. “Welcome is every organ and attribute of me, and of any man hearty and clean, / Not an inch nor a particle of an inch is vile, and none shall be less familiar with the rest.” (“Song of Myself” 3:20-21) Whitman sees the body as just as good and sacred as the soul. “A Woman Waits for Me,” added to a later version of Leaves of Grass was controversial because of its celebration of the glory of the body and nobleness of sex. (Miller 49) In a similar way, the Catholic faith describes sexual union as comparable to communion in the Eucharist. Intimacy between God and man is similar to the intimacy between husband and wife. Intimacy is communion, and that communion is procreative. There is a natural “urge and urge and urge / Always the procreant urge of the world” to renew itself, and poetry reflects this urgent call. (“Song of Myself” 3:7-8) Whitman describes himself as “turbulent, fleshy and sensual, eating, drinking and breeding.” (“Song of Myself” 24:2) For Whitman, “copulation is no more rank [...] than death is.” (“Song of Myself” 24:2” He directly defies puritanism’s idea that pleasures of the flesh are evil.

Perhaps the biggest problem people might have with Whitman’s poetry is his tendency to make seemingly useless lists of mundane things. For someone who does not “want words”, he can be quite wordy. He may come across as long-winded and meaningless, but his catalogues have a purpose. They name the things that matter. Religion is more than mystical experiences, it is also the physical, mundane realities of life:

The duck-shooter walks by silent and cautious stretches,
The deacons are ordain’d with cross’d hands at the altar,
The spinning-girl retreats and advances to the hum of the big wheel,
The farmer stops by the bars as he walks on a First-day loafe and looks at the oats and rye, (“Song of Myself” 15:6-9)

Whitman uses lists to make the ordinary extraordinary. (Murray 436) Lists in the Bible share a similar purpose. Genealogy links Jesus to David, and again to Noah and then Adam. Though dry reading, it links Jesus to royalty, making him a king.

Whitman distances himself from the occurrences catalogued, except to here and there make a remark in parenthesis. “(I love him, though I do not know him)” he says of “the young fellow [driving] the express-wagon.” (qtd in Murray 451) He cuts across social and racial distinction, lists all kinds of people, from different social backgrounds, of different races, doing all kinds of things. In his essay “Tedious Whitman,” Caleb Murray notes the acknowledgment of the subject. The poem becomes a way of interacting with the reader:

The prostitute draggles her shawl, her bonnet bobs on her tipsy and pimpled neck,
The crowd laugh at her blackguard oaths, the men jeer and wink to each other, (qtd in Murray 451)

Instead of turning away, the speaker reveals a preferred affective-ethical reaction (‘Miserable! I do not laugh at your oaths nor jeer you.’)” In this declaration, we are invited to move through the discomfort we might feel in the prostitute’s shame to a restoration of relationality. We are invited to see her, to acknowledge her. Religion is about restoring relationships and making ethical choices. (452-453) It means “moral development, duty, the idea of man’s duty in the abstract, and duty toward his fellows, toned and colored by that something above him or enclosing him out of which prayer and worship arise.” (qtd in Murray 442)

Paradoxically, Whitman writes both mystical visionary phrases and banal descriptions. (Murray 453) He says things like “And I know that the hand of God is the promise of my own” and elsewhere in the same poem writes “Where the quail is whistling betwixt the woods and the wheat-lot” or “where cobwebs fall in festoons from the rafters.” In his eyes, both are equally religious. (“Song of Myself” 5:11, 33:24 & 28) The ordinary is just as much a miracle as the extraordinary. “Seeing, hearing, feeling, are miracles, and each part and tag of me is a miracle.” (“Song of Myself” 24:27) Nature is more convincing than dogma. “Logic and sermons never convince, / The damp of the night drives deeper into my soul.” (“Song of Myself” 30:6-7)

Walt Whitman is still pertinent today. In a society that has increasingly become more polarized, in which individuals are often incorrectly defined by the groups they belong to as if human beings were incapable of thinking “outside the box,” (or ostracized if they do dare to think outside the box, as if they were somehow a traitor to their group) Whitman is a reminder that balance is important. The spiritual does not nullify the mundane. Work is not more important than rest. Mercy does not cancel out justice. Community does not abolish individuality. People are individuals first; they are not defined by nor representative of any one group. These ideas are reflected by Martin Luther King: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Whitman’s poetry is not about everyone joining hands to sing the same part in perfect harmony. His poetry sings the individuality of a multitude of people and therefore celebrates a plurality of ideas. Of course, there needs to be some common thread, but humanity has plenty of those. Forcing people to all think and act the same does not actually create harmony. The term "singing in harmony" does not mean "singing the same part." When a choir sings in harmony, the altos, sopranos, contraltos, base and tenors all sing different parts, the tenor does not drown out the alto and the sum of all the parts is more beautiful together than each individual part on its own. Similarly, a flower garden with a multitude of different flowers all arranged together creates a spectacular view, even prettier than each individual flower on its own. If we take away that individuality, we are only settling for something less.

It may not always be easy to understand Whitman, but “failing to fetch me at first keep encouraged,” he writes at the end of “Song of Myself, “I stop somewhere waiting for you.” (52:14&16)

Works Cited

Bromwich, David. “Whitman’s Assumptions ‘Song of Myself,’ in Leaves of Grass, Walt Whitman.” Social Research: An International Quarterly, vol. 85, no. 3, Fall 2018, pp. 503–19. https://muse-jhu-edu.lib-ezproxy.concordia.ca/article/707601/pdf

Murray, Caleb. “Tedious Walt: A New Whitman for Religious Studies.” Journal of the American Academy of Religion, vol. 87, no. 2, May 2019, pp. 434–59. DOI.org (Crossref), doi:10.1093/jaarel/lfz005.

Thomson, James. Walt Whitman the Man and the Poet. New York: Barnes & Noble Inc., 2011.

Whitman, Walt. “Crossing Brooklyn Ferry.” The Norton Anthology of Modern and Contemporary Poetry. Third Edition, vol. 1 Modern Poetry, W.W. Norton and Co., 2003, pp 18-22

Whitman, Walt. “Imagining the New World of American Democracy.” New England Review, vol. 41, no. 1, Middlebury College, 2020, pp. 192–93. Project MUSE, doi:10.1353/ner.2020.0030.

Whitman, Walt. “Song of Myself.” Poetry Foundation, 12 Apr. 2021, https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/45477/song-of-myself-1892-version.

Gallicisms: Translation Problems

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Wed, 07 Apr 2021 13:25:00 +0000

(From an essay I wrote for a translation class - posting it here for anyone who might be interested in knowing more about the challenges that translators face. I really enjoy translation myself - it's like a challenging word-game.)

A number of challenges face translators such as false friends, structural differences, missing terms, ambiguity, words that have several meanings and so on. One of the biggest stumbling blocks for French-to-English translators are Gallicisms. The Oxford Canadian Dictionary defines “Gallicism” as “A French word or usage, esp. one used in another language.” English-speaking people living in Quebec and surrounded by French often end up using Gallicisms. To run down to the “dep” instead of the corner store is one example. Another example is the use of French structure in an English phrase, or to literally translate a French expression instead of using the English expression already in use. “You’re in the moon” is one instance of a French expression being literally translated. The English version of “tu es dans la lune” is “your head is in the clouds” or “you’re on cloud nine.” It can be quite difficult to avoid Gallicisms while translating, especially if you have grown up around French or with a Francophone parent. You may not even realize that an expression such as “you’re in the moon” is in fact, not English because you have heard it said so often. A translator may avoid the trap of Gallicisms letting a rough draft sit for awhile before going back to it, avoiding always going with the first word that comes to mind and checking phrases in a search engine. We will look at these below.

Once you have your rough draft completed, you may be tempted to go over it right away to correct errors and then send it off. However, the proximity of the original French, still in your head, may keep you from seeing problems in the translated text, such as French sentence structure or expressions. It is always better to let the rough draft sit for as long as possible, overnight if you have time, in order to come back to it with a fresh mind. After such a break, Gallicisms and any other problems in your text will stand out much better and it will be easier to identify them so they can be corrected.

When translating from one language to another, the first reaction when one word in the source text resembles a word in the target language is to use that word in the target text. Translating from French to English is no exception. For example, when seeing the phrase “Je suis actuellement à Paris” a translator’s initial reaction might be to translate this as “I am actually in Paris.” But “actuellement” and “actually” are false cognates or “false friends”. “Actuellement” means “in the current moment” while “actually” means “really” or “in fact.” The proper translation here would be “I am currently in Paris.” One way to avoid false cognates is to look up the words in a French-only or an English-only dictionary if you are not sure of the meaning. Letting your rough draft sit awhile, as previously mentioned, may also help you catch them, and so may checking your sentences in a search engine, as we will see.

A good way to find out if a phrase is colloquial is to copy it into Google or some other search engine, put quotes around it, and search. If you come up with only a few results, the phrase is probably not very common. If you get hundreds of thousands of hits, then your phrase is likely colloquial. You can also use a search engine to look up the subject you are translating. Check the vocabulary and expressions used in similar articles on the same subject. This will give you a good idea what phrases and terms are used in that context.

Taking a break, thinking twice before using a similar word and using a search engine are all good ways to help avoid problems like Gallicisms in your French-to-English translation. Research is a big part of translation so do not hesitate to look things up and double-check yourself! Translation is like a puzzle and working through it to find the perfect phrase to express the same thing in your target language can be very fulfilling.

RECONCILIATON: Where do we go from here?

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Sun, 06 Dec 2020 00:17:00 +0000

Many Canadians cannot imagine such a thing today, but in the Great Lakes region, from the late 17^th century to the early 19^th century, neither Indigenous peoples nor Europeans were populous enough for either to impose their ideas on the other. Instead, they met and negotiated on a “middle ground.” By 1815 however, this was already changing.[1] (Cecil Chabot, “Renewing on Middle Ground”) When the British North America Act was passed in 1867, it created a conflict of interest. It effectively made the Government of Canada both responsible for “Indians and lands reserved for Indians” and for negotiating treaties and settlements with said Indians and purchasing land from them. (Bob Joseph, 21 Things You May Not Know About the Indian Act, p.7) These two factors led to the loss of the Nation-to-Nation relationship and the start of a paternalistic relationship between the Canadian government and Indigenous peoples. Increasingly repressive and assimilatory policies on the part of the government had severe repercussions on Indigenous peoples in Canada, from the drafting of the Bagot Commission Report in 1847 to the closing of the last residential school in 1996. Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples now need to work together on practical strategies for recognizing and healing intergenerational trauma, recovering lost language and culture, negotiating self-government and self-determination, and building cultural exchange and mutual understanding.

Image source: http://www.otc.ca/pages/what_is_reconciliation.html

HEALING INTERGENERATIONAL TRAUMA

“It was all normal to us as kids, me and my younger siblings.” Says Victor Linklater of Moose Cree First Nation. “We grew up with it, saw a lot of things we shouldn’t have seen and heard a lot of things we shouldn’t have heard… Kids like me… had to deal with parents who drank… and partied, then you gotta go to school, Monday morning. There was a whole mess of us… maybe the whole (student population) was like that.” In 1920, the Indian Act was amended to make school attendance compulsory for all Indigenous children aged 7-15. Duncan Campbell Scott, Deputy Superintendent General of Indian Affairs at the time, preferred residential schools, in order to keep the children away from the influence of their parents. (Bob Joseph, 21 Things, p. 120) Many of them never came back home and many more came back traumatized and dysfunctional. Without adding physical or sexual abuse, simply separating whole generations of children from their parents at an age when they still needed them was a very short-sighted idea. Children need stability, support and affection in their lives in order to grow up into mature, autonomous and capable adults. No institution is capable of replacing the role of parents. Residential schools resulted in substantial numbers of dysfunctional adults.

“Alcohol played a major factor in a lot of people’s childhoods in our community and it was the norm, and I didn’t want that for my family.” Says Greta Moses, also of Moose Cree First Nation. Moses’s parents were trappers, in the bush most of the year or doing seasonal work like tree planting in the summer. When she and her siblings were of school age, they were dropped off at a group home, where they would stay most of the year, while going to school. “You have a feeling of abandonment.” Moses explains, “When I really think about it now, it’s almost like how the children must have felt when they were left in the residential schools. They were literally taken away and a lot of them didn’t get to see their parents.” She admits “A lot of times I would cry myself to sleep at night.” Grief, Moses says, was found to be a major factor in people’s trauma; loss of family, loss of language, loss of culture and loss of identity among other things. “There’s a lot of healing programs now … because they see a need for it. If you’re a residential school survivor or second-generation, there is [sic] funds for people to access to work on their healing. … If you’re ready to take on the next step of your healing, it’s there, ready and available if you look. A lot of people are just not ready to deal with their trauma. It’s just too heart-breaking for the layers to come off.”[2]

For Linklater, sports, music and one teacher, John Delaney[3], played a huge role in keeping him out of the drinking culture. Something to focus on seems to be another good path out of the cycle of abuse. So is being able to communicate properly, according to Raven Edwards-Brown, member of Akwesasne First Nation. “A lot of my (family,) they can’t communicate properly, because they don’t feel emotion, or if they do… it’s internally and they can’t physically show it. Or… they push people away.” And trauma from violence, she believes is different. “It’s hard to physically touch them. Even just a hug, or anything. I feel like not only can’t they express themselves… they can’t touch.” The first in her family to finish high school and go on to college, Edwards-Brown is breaking the cycle through art, music and writing. She writes her own songs and poetry and she interviews people as part of her classes in journalism at Dawson College. “I really like interviewing people.” She says, “Just talking to them, getting their stories. Storytelling is a huge part of communicating what others cannot.”

While much of the healing that needs to be done is in the hands of First Nations themselves, there are things that non-Indigenous people can do, starting with acknowledging that intergenerational trauma does exist. According to Linklater, there are two main things that can be done. The first is for governments to recognize that First Nations are still here and to follow the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. The second, he says, is “more of a one-to-one, like we’re doing. Communities can start opening up to Indigenous peoples in their backyards and inviting talks, seminars, just get together right? Just learn from one another and not let it be dictated by ‘the officials’… a grassroots approach.”

LANGUAGE AND CULTURE

In 1896 the Programme of Studies for Indian Schools from the Department of Indian Affairs stated the importance of replacing Indigenous languages with English. Children were not allowed to speak their language, even among themselves, and were punished for doing so. (Bob Joseph, 21 Things, p. 118) Many First Nations people today, do not speak their language fluently. Parents who had been to residential schools themselves often taught their children English instead of their own language so that it would be easier for them to go to school.[4]

Today, across the country, both Indigenous languages and culture are being revived. Separate language schools are opening, and classes are given in schools. Cree classes have been a part of the curriculum in the public school in Moose Factory, Ontario, since at least the 1970s. In Akwesasne, Edwards-Brown tells me, there are Freedom Schools, where older people who know the language and ancestry teach the children. “There’s something unsettling with having the culture but not knowing the language.” She says. “I feel like, not that a culture isn’t a culture without language, but I feel like language has a lot to do with it. Because it’s… been there… since the beginning of our people.” Until the age of six, Edwards-Brown lived in Akwesasne and was learning the language. “I… was getting pretty good at it and I was almost fluent. And then we came to Quebec and I had to learn French.”

Globally, aboriginal languages are being replaced by majority ones. A small number in Canada are still commonly spoken, including Cree, Inuktituk, Gwich’in and Innu, but the rest have dwindling native speakers, few of which are under the age of 60. Some believe that the death of a language signals the death of a culture, however, others are not so pessimistic. Despite the decline of aboriginal languages, the same cannot be said of the culture. Hunting, fishing and harvesting practices remain, as well as potlatches on the West Coast, pow wows, the Sun Dance on the prairies, and other cultural events, including music and sports events. There are Indigenous musicians, artists, entertainers, writers and even chefs. The Aboriginal Peoples Television Network is the best-known Indigenous Television network, but it is not the only one. There is also a multitude of radio programs. (Greg Poelzer and Ken S. Coates, From Treaty Peoples to Treaty Nations, pp. 130-139)

In Moose Factory, Moses says, “They incorporated outdoor ed into the education system so that our tradition is not lost. They’re still teaching kids how to build a fire, how to set snares, how to set traps. That is something we didn’t want lost. As for Edwards-Brown, on top of relearning her language, she is also learning beadwork, making medicine pouches, going to pow wows and learning to put on the regalia, among other things.

SELF-GOVERNMENT AND SELF-DETERMINATION

When Newfoundlanders joined Canada in 1949, they joined “as a distinct people with a distinct language, history, culture and set of relationships to a particular territory.” Says Cecil Chabot, Doctor of History and adjunct faculty member in Concordia University’s First Peoples Studies Program. Twenty years later, the White Paper, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau’s attempt at abolishing the Indian Act and Indian Status in order to give Indigenous peoples equal status with all other Canadian citizens was rejected because it was based on the same assimilatory policies seen throughout the country’s short existence to date. “What the majority of Indigenous peoples wanted,” Chabot explains, “was to participate in Canada, not as individuals assimilated into the body politic like new immigrants, but as equal partners in confederation – as peoples with unique languages, cultures, traditions and relationships to their lands. (Cecil Chabot, “Reconciliation and Decolonization: How might we risk getting them wrong?”)

What First Nations want is the right to self-determination, (the right to decide who they are and who can be a member) self-reliance (the ability to participate in politics and the economy without being reliant on anyone else) and the right to self-government (the right to make decisions about things that affect them directly.) (Bob Joseph, Indigenous Relations, pp. 49-52) There are differing outlooks on what self-government should look like, from determining membership by blood quantum (percentage of ancestry) and creating essentially a separate state with its own citizenship and passport, to what some call the Two-Row Wampum, where two distinct societies would live side by side without much association, to a three-tiered government; (federal, provincial and aboriginal), and differing views in between. Not all are feasible, either politically or in practice. (Greg Poelzer and Ken S Coates, pp. 31-58) What has been done, with success, is giving First Nations governance over local affairs, similar to the power a municipality would have. The Nisga’a treaty[5] and the creation of Nunavut[6], are two of the biggest recent settlements between the government and First Nations, allowing them considerable jurisdiction over certain territories and making them responsible for the people, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, who reside there. Besides these two, a number of smaller agreements have also been made, mostly in the north where Indigenous peoples are either in the majority or a large minority. (Greg Poelzer and Ken S. Coates, pp. 165-167) Self-government, Linklater tells me, “would take on an Indigenous lens with regards to… the economy. To run anything, you need money. Without an economy, there is no self-government. You’ll still be relying on the “Big Hand” as it were, to come down to save you… I think that the economy is the number one item to achieve self-government. After that, everything will fall into place.”

REBUILDING INTER-CULTURAL RELATIONSHIPS

“Why is it that white people are so scared of us?” wonders Linklater. “I get… this feeling, I don’t know what it is… an uneasy gap, the word ‘scared’ comes to mind. And you know, we’re not scary people.” Bob Joseph, blogger and counsellor on Indigenous relations, offers some insights, especially geared towards entrepreneurs, but also relevant for individuals who just want to make reconciliation a reality, starting with R.E.S.P.E.C.T.:

Research: Informing yourself about the people you will be contacting before you meet with them.
Examine: Using your research to plan, not assuming things will be done the way you are used to.
Strategize: Planning both verbal and non-verbal communication with care.
Present: Getting to know each other before presenting plans and being able to laugh at yourself.
Evaluate: Asking yourself what worked and what didn’t work.
Customize: Realizing that First Nations are varied, what works for one may not work for another.
Transform: Returning with customized ideas, giving long-term relationships time and patience. (Bob Joseph, Indigenous Relations, pp. 71-139)

In short, if you go with the flow, are open to their concerns, and able to laugh at your mistakes, you should have little trouble relating with most[7] Indigenous people.

Moose Factory, where Linklater, Moses and Chabot are from, is a long-standing middle ground between Indigenous people and Europeans. There has been a European presence there since 1673.[8] Colonialism is not the only story here; Orkney islanders often came because they faced similar things in their own land. They came, married into the communities and added their traditions and stories to the culture. (Cecil Chabot, “Renewing on Middle Ground”) They depended on the Cree, not the other way around, and adjusted to Cree relational norms or customary law. The Cree in turn fostered good relationships with newcomers. (Cecil Chabot, “Problems with Defining Aboriginal Rights as Special, Immutable and Collective?”) Solidarity; working together and caring for the weak and vulnerable, subsidiarity; self-governance and self-determination and human dignity; respect for who First Nations are and what they bring, are key principals for rebuilding inter-cultural relationships. (Cecil Chabot, “Reconciliation and Decolonization”)

A recent article in the Abbotsford News spoke of a First Nations mother who was upset that her daughter was told to list five positive stories or facts about residential schools for an assignment at school. (Vikki Hopes, “Abbotsford mom angry that students asked to list positive stories about residential school”) This is perhaps not the best way to address things, especially at a time when many residential school survivors and their children and grandchildren are still dealing with inter-generational trauma. Residential schools cannot be considered a positive thing. Purposely taking children away from their parents in order to assimilate them, thereby creating real issues of abandonment, grief, loss of identity, lack of parenting skills, a cycle of abuse and alcoholism cannot be considered a positive thing. Perhaps a better question to ask is, what are some of the things those who were opposed to government policies did to try to mitigate the consequences? Some people, such as physicians Dr. G. Orton, and Dr. Bryce spoke out against appalling conditions in residential schools and offered advice which the government ignored. (Bob Joseph, 21 Things pp. 118-119) Chabot also mentions in a January 2019 talk[9] given at McGill University’s Newman Centre, that at least one residential school run by Oblates[10] refused to teach the children in English, preferring for them to keep their language and traditions.[11]

“I feel like there is a lot of tension between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people,” says Edwards-Brown, “but… there is a lot to be done with forming a proper connection, like… simply listening to each other and understanding each other.”

Although repression, abuse and loss of identity and culture is a result of the Canadian government’s efforts to assimilate Indigenous peoples, much of the rebuilding and the healing will have to be done by First Nations themselves. Indigenous peoples must be allowed to take the lead in initiatives to build stronger, self-sufficient communities. Decisions on health, welfare and education should be theirs to determine. Healing is a difficult process that must be undertaken by each individual. Renewal of language and culture will help with healing and regaining a sense of identity. Self-Government is something that will have to be worked out with the Canadian government, not as a broad one-solution-fits-all, but by negotiating different agreements with individual groups, as not all Indigenous communities have the same resources, needs, priorities or viewpoints. Support from non-Indigenous people can come in many forms, partnerships between Indigenous and non-Indigenous groups and individuals, cultural exchanges, or mutual support, solidarity and encouragement. Reconciliation needs to be something we can all live and work with. As Linklater tells me, “We come from a very rich heritage and culture and strong history that we’d love to share… we’d love partnership with people who are willing to do it.”

Bibliography

Chabot, Cecil. “Problems with Defining Aboriginal Rights as Special, Immutable and Collective? Lessons from the Context of Moose Factory, Canada.” A Talk Given at Queen’s University, Belfast, Northern Ireland. September 2009.

Chabot, Cecil. “Renewing on Middle Ground.” Convivium Magazine. August 2017

Chabot, Cecil. “Reconciliation and Decolonization: How Might we Risk Getting Them Wrong?” A Talk given at the University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada. April 2019.

Edwards-Brown, Raven. An interview with Raven Edwards-Brown. November 2020. https://youtu.be/rZaCR2XCLi8

Hopes, Vikki. “Abbotsford Mom Angry That Students Asked to List Positive Stories about Residential Schools.” 2020. Abbotsford News. November 25, 2020. https://www.abbynews.com/news/abbotsford-mom-angry-that-students-asked-to-list-positive-stories-about-residential-schools/.

Joseph, Bob. 21 Things You may not Know About the Indian Act: Helping Canadians Make Reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples a Reality. Indigenous Relations Press. April 2018

Joseph, Bob. Indigenous Relations: Insights, Tips & Suggestions to Make Reconciliation a Reality. Page Two Books, Inc. May 2019.

Linklater, Victor. An interview with Victor Linklater. November 2020.

Moses, Greta. An interview with Greta Moses. November 2020.

Poelzer, Greg and Ken S. Coates. From Treaty Peoples to Treaty Nation: A Road Map for All Canadians. UBC Press. October 2015.

[1] Indigenous peoples are still a majority, or at least a large minority in most of Canada today, outside of the southern corridor, where most non-Indigenous people live today. (Cecil Chabot, “Renewing on Middle Ground”)

[2] “They don’t want to work on the grief on (specific people) because they don’t want to forget that person. In the beginning, that’s what I thought grief (therapy) was; working on someone and forgetting about them. And it’s like they were erased from your mind. But it’s not. It’s working through the pain associated with that person and whatever relationship you had with that person. If you had trauma, or any unresolved issues … with this person, that’s what you work on … It’s like coming to peace with that person.” (Greta Moses, interview)

[3] John Delaney was the founder of the Moose Factory YMCA and used the principles of Y leadership to instill strong values into the many youth who went through his Y leaders program. Many of the current leaders in the community are people who went through his program. He had a massive influence on them and provided a new way of thinking, a healthy way of thinking, an example that things could be better if we work at them. He provided an outlet, something else to focus on, besides the problems and the drinking. I had the pleasure of having Mr. Delaney both as an enrichment teacher and a Phys Ed teacher, participating in his Y Leader’s Corp, and playing in and refereeing basketball games in his YMCA league, as well as having him as a friend, with whom I kept up a written correspondence until his death in 2005. His daughter, Christina (Victor Linklater’s wife) continues his legacy today. He is a truly inspiring example of what can be done when Indigenous and non-Indigenous people come together and work for the better good.

[4] Christina (Delaney) Linklater told me in August 2019, that although her non-Indigenous father encouraged it, her mother did not feel at ease with teaching her children Cree.

[5] The Nisga’a treaty put more than 2000 square kilometres under Nisga’a jurisdiction and responsibility and included a payment of almost $2 million as well as a significant allocation of salmon both for personal consumption and commercial sale. It gives the Nisga’a the ability to make laws (subject to the superiority of the Constitution and the Criminal Code) and makes them responsible for such things as providing health care, education and social services to people living in that territory, among other things. In return for some funding, they gave up income tax and sales tax exemptions. (Greg Poelzer and Ken S. Coates, “Governance and Civic Engagement: Land claims” From Treaty Peoples to Treaty Nation, p. 166)

[6] “Nunavut has allowed the Inuit to participate in Canadian confederation by means of political and legal structures that combine Inuit and Western governance traditions and place Inuktitut beside English and French as official languages.” (Cecil Chabot, “Reconciliation and Decolonization: How might we risk getting them wrong?”)

[7] Some Indigenous activists that Edwards-Brown has interviewed are not interested in connecting with non-Indigenous people. “There ARE non-Indigenous people that are willing to understand, that are willing to connect,” Edwards-Brown says, “It’s kind of hard to have a conversation with people who are not open to that. To have conversations that we should be having. But we can’t have those conversations with people who get defensive, who want to block the other side out, who want to stay in their bubble.”

[8] In 1673, the Hudson’s Bay Company established a fur-trade post in what would come to be known as Moose Factory. Moose Factory is now predominantly Cree, and over half the island is reserve land, since the signing Treaty Number 9 in 1905. An interesting fact: the manager of the fur trading post back in the day was called a “factor”, and the word “factory” in this context does not mean “manufacturer” but is rather another name for “trading post.” Until recently, an accent similar to that of Orkney Islands in Scotland was common in Moose Factory. It can still be heard, especially among those older than fifty. Orcadian fiddling tunes were played on Cree fiddles, step dancing is making a come back, plaid cloth, as well as moose hide is a part of traditional clothing, and bannock, which originates in Scotland, is a staple in the Moose Factory diet often accompanied with nice hot tea. Last names such as Linklater, Sutherland, MacDonald and McLeod are proof of inter-cultural marriages and descendants of Cree can also be found in the Orkneys today, as wives and children accompanied HBC employees back home. Cecil Chabot interviewed a few of these, on a trip to the Orkney Islands for his research and upon hearing one of them speak in a recording, I could have sworn I was listening to an elder from Moose Factory speak.

[9] I was present at that talk.

[10] Catholic Religious order of priests and brothers, with a joint order of nuns, who were (and still are) active in different missions and schools across the James Bay area and much of Northern Canada since around 1844. (“Our History,” OMIAP, accessed December 5, 2020. http://omiap.org/?page_id=151 )

[11] One elder, a survivor of that school, had to have Prime Minister Harper’s apology translated to her, because she did not speak English.

L’influence des règles classiques sur la représentation de l’action dans Phèdre de Jean Racine

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Mon, 30 Nov 2020 22:12:00 +0000

Présentée pour la première fois en 1677, Phèdre de Jean Racine est un bel exemple du genre tragique de la deuxième moitié du XVIIe siècle. Dans cette pièce on peut voir les courants intellectuels, littéraires et politiques du temps. Le classicisme influe l’action de Phèdre à travers le contexte politique et intellectuel de l’époque, les courants littéraires, les genres préférés et les formes de texte exigées. L’œuvre reflète la pensée du jour, s’insert dans les courants littéraires, est un des meilleurs exemples du genre tragique préféré à cette période et respecte parfaitement les formes et les règles classiques.

CONTEXTE HISTORIQUE

La deuxième moitié du XVIIe siècle voit apparaître beaucoup d’œuvres théoriques en France, comme le Discours de la méthode de René Descartes en 1637. C’est l’âge de la raison. On veut remplacer le désordre baroque par l’ordre classique qui est l’illustration de cette raison. « Ce que l’on conçoit bien s’énonce clairement, et les mots pour le dire arrivent aisément. » dit Nicolas Boileau dans Art Politique en 1674. De plus, il y a une volonté politique de célébrer l’ordre monarchique. Contrairement au Moyen Âge, le roi a le pouvoir absolu. On veut le présenter comme centre de l’univers.

Le Cardinal de Richelieu, grand ministre du roi Louis XIII crée l’Académie Française en 1635 pour normaliser la langue française et et sauvegarder les œuvres publiées. Le Cardinal forme aussi le Groupe des cinq, afin d’utiliser leurs ouvrages pour codifier le théâtre. Sous son influence, on rédige les règles classiques.

Les auteurs qui écrivent bien et selon les règles du classicisme se font reconnaître par l’état et reçoivent une pension et la promotion. Le mécénat (ou patronage) privé est découragé en faveur du mécénat de l’état. On va maintenant tourner surtout autour de la cour royale et dédier ses œuvres au roi. L’état aura un plus grand contrôle sur ce qui s’écrit et sur la manière de l’écrire. Cela facilite la promotion de la monarchie et le pouvoir absolu. Dès 1637, après la querelle autour de l’œuvre Le Cid de Pierre Corneille, les règles classiques deviennent officielles.

Phèdre de Jean Racine est une pièce inspirée de l’antiquité grecque; elle suit le courant d’un retour vers le classique. C’est une pièce qui traite de personnages de la cour royale de la Grèce ancienne mais les thèmes politiques, comme la succession par exemple, sont aussi pertinents dans la période courante. « Pour le choix d’un maître Athènes se partage : Au prince votre fils l’un donne son suffrage, Madame ; et de l’État l’autre oubliant les lois, Au fils de l’étrangère ose donner sa voix. On dit même qu’au trône une brigue insolante Veut placer Aricie et le sang de Pallante. » (Acte 1, scène 5, p. 39) La pièce respecte toutes les règles classiques et est écrit de façon que Louis XIV puisse se voir dans le personnage du roi. Racine fait triompher le pouvoir légitime et la succession est garantie.

COURANTS LITTÉRAIRES

Dans la deuxième moitié du XVIIe siècle, des courants baroques comme la préciosité persistent encore. Celle-ci est un jeu mondain des sentiments et de l’expression littéraire qui se joue dans les grands salons en dehors de la cour royale (et de son influence). Elle utilise des métaphores et des périphrases pour développer un langage qui devient vite très compliqué. Le classicisme au contraire, se méfie des sentiments, veut mettre de l’ordre dans la littérature et promouvoir la raison. Il se veut un retour vers les grands classiques de l’antiquité grecque et latin. On se méfie des sentiments. Le drame survient lorsqu’un personnage ne maîtrise pas ses sentiments.

Dans Phèdre de Racine, ce sont les sentiments non-maîtrisés de Phèdre qui mènent à la tragédie. Œnone raconte à Hippolyte; « Elle meurt dans mes bras d’un mal qu’elle me cache. Un désordre éternel règne dans son esprit. » (Acte 1, scène 2, p. 28) Elle se laisse mourir d’amour pour Hippolyte. Lorsqu’elle croit son mari mort, elle avoue son amour à Hippolyte sans attendre ni réfléchir. Thésée n’est finalement pas mort, et Phèdre, toujours malmené par ses sentiments, accuse Hippolyte de son propre « péché » pour se sauver. Quant à Thésée, c’est son impulsivité qu’il ne domine pas, et qui le pousse à condamner Hippolyte sans le questionner.

GENRES

Les deux seuls genres jugés dignes d’être vus dans les grands théâtres de la deuxième moitié du XVIIe siècle sont la comédie et la tragédie. Les deux sont réglées par les normes du classicisme et doivent démontrer le modèle à suivre. Ceux qui ne maîtrisent pas leurs sentiments ou qui se laissent aller dans l’excès ne peuvent pas bien finir. C’est surtout pour cette raison, que Le Cid a choqué l’Académie Française. Le mariage de Chimène et Rodrigue est un mariage d’amour. La passion emporte sur la raison et cela ne fait pas un modèle à suivre selon les mœurs classiques. [1]

La comédie, influencée par la farce médiévale et de nature plus mondaine, est considérée inférieure à la tragédie, plus triviale et moins hautaine. Elle est une satire sociale qui met en scène des faits cocasses et se moque de l’excès la préciosité.

La tragédie est le genre par excellence, qui permet de se faire reconnaître. Elle met en scène des personnages plus élevés, des princes et des nobles. Elle est souvent de nature politique ou liée aux intérêts de l’état. On parle de luttes de pouvoir entres personnages. Elle est inspirée des œuvres de l’antiquité gréco-romaine qu’on estime être ce qui s’est fait de mieux.

Phèdre est considérée comme une des plus grandes œuvres de tragédie classique de la littérature française du XVIIe siècle. Elle respecte toutes les règles classiques, elle est écrite dans un style élevé et les personnages sont des nobles. Elle soulève des problèmes liés à l’état, comme la succession, et elle fait triompher le pouvoir absolu. Phèdre illustre très bien la méfiance qu’on a des sentiments. Elle démontre clairement les conséquences quand on ne maîtrise pas ses sentiments et ses impulsions. Thésée l’a compris trop tard : « Allons, de mon erreur, hélas ! trop éclaircis, Mêler nos pleurs au sang de mon malheureux fils ! » (Acte 5, scène 7, p. 110)

FORMES DES TEXTES

Les règles classiques sont une série de règles qu’on a rédigé pour se défaire du désordre baroque. On veut que les textes soient clairs, concis et bien structurés. Les règles se résument en trois grands thèmes, unité de lieu, unité d’action et unité de temps.

Pour éliminer tous les chemins chaotiques par lesquels les pièces baroques avaient tendance à passer, on décide qu’une pièce, pour respecter l’idéal classique, doit se dérouler dans un seul lieu. La querelle sur l’œuvre Le Cid de Corneille porte justement, en partie, sur le fait que cette pièce ne respectait pas l’unité de lieu car elle se déroulait dans plusieurs endroits de la ville au lieu d’un seul.

Contrairement aux œuvres baroques qui pouvaient contenir une histoire à l’intérieur d’une autre, et des intrigues secondaires, une pièce classique doit contenir une seule action avec un commencement (l’exposition), un milieu (le nœud) et une fin (le dénouement). L’exposition doit être entière, courte, claire intéressante, vraisemblable et inclure toute l’information dont on a besoin pour suivre l’histoire. Le nœud est composé des obstacles et péripéties des personnages et doivent se limiter à cette action unique. Le dénouement doit être nécessaire, complet et rapide. La pièce doit respecter les bienséances, on ne doit pas voir de sang ou entendre de langage vulgaire et la sexualité peut être implicite mais pas explicite.

Pour être vraisemblable, l’action de la pièce ne doit pas dépasser 24 heures. Les spectateurs doivent avoir l’impression de rentrer dans la pièce en temps réel. On veut les faire oublier qu’ils sont au théâtre. Cela permet de mieux s’identifier avec les personnages et facilite aussi l’influence qu’ils auront sur le public. On veut que les personnages soient des modèles à imiter.

Phèdre de Racine respecte les trois unités. L’action est unique, elle se déroule dans un seul lieu du palais et elle ne dépasse pas 24 heures. Elle respecte les consignes de bienséance et vraisemblance. Elle se conforme aux exigences de l’exposition, du nœud et du dénouement.

À la fin du premier acte de Phèdre, nous savons tout ce que nous devons comprendre pour nous situer dans l’histoire. Hippolyte se confie à son gouverneur Théramène que Phèdre lui fait la vie difficile et qu’il est amoureux d’Aricie mais « Mon père la réprouve, et par des lois sévères, Il défend de donner des neveux à ses frères : D’une tige coupable il craint un rejeton, Il veut avec la sœur ensevelir leur nom. » (Acte 1, scène 1, p. 25) Phèdre se confie à sa nourrice Œnone qu’elle est désespérément en amour avec Hippolyte qui ne le sait pas. Panope, femme de la suite de Phèdre, vient annoncer la mort de Thésée, roi et mari de Phèdre. Voilà toute l’information dont nous avons besoin pour suivre le reste de l’histoire.

Les obstacles intérieurs sont plus faciles à intégrer dans une pièce qui respecte les règles classiques que les obstacles extérieurs. Le nœud de Phèdre est donc composé d’obstacles intérieurs; des passions non-maîtrisées. Croyant son mari mort, Phèdre dévoile son amour à Hippolyte. Survient alors une péripétie : on découvre que la mort de Thésée n’est qu’une fausse rumeur. De peur qu’Hippolyte en parle à Thésée, Phèdre agit rapidement en l’accusant faussement de l’acte dont elle est coupable. Sans vérifier les accusations, Thésée s’emporte et condamne son fils. Ces passions non-maîtrisées mènent à la tragédie.

Dans le dénouement de Phèdre, on voit la mort d’Œnone, la confession et la mort de Phèdre, le regret de Thésée, la mort d’Hippolyte et une résolution de la relation entre Thésée et Aricie. « Que malgré les complots d’une injuste famille, Son amante aujourd’hui me tienne lieu de fille. » (Acte 5, scène 7, p. 111) Les questions de succession sont résolues, le complot est découvert et la vérité est dévoilée, mais pas à temps d’éviter la tragédie. L’action est complète.

La pièce de théâtre Phèdre de Jean Racine est un des meilleurs exemples de la littérature classique du XVIIe siècle. Elle respecte toutes les règles classiques tout en étant un succès populaire, divertissant et intéressant. Elle est un excellent exemple du courant littéraire et du genre tragique de la période.

[1] C.R.I.S, Association. n.d. “La Querelle du Cid - Le Cid - Pierre Corneille, - mise en scène Yves Beaunesne, - theatre-contemporain.net.” theatre-contemporain.net. Consulté le 28 novembre 2020. https://www.theatre-contemporain.net/contacts/Le-Cid-18302/ensavoirplus.

Authority, Participation and Obedience: The Power Dynamics Behind Covid-19 Responses

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Thu, 05 Nov 2020 03:09:00 +0000

Without a doubt, Covid-19 can be a dangerous disease for a small percentage of the population, affecting certain people in various ways, including breathlessness, chronic fatigue and brain fog.[1] Fear of the disease has brought on many new protocols and restrictions. But just how fearful should we be? In 1961, Stanley Milgram conducted experiments in destructive obedience, to test how far individuals would go before disobeying authority. Further experiments were conducted by Thomas Blass who, in 1999 wrote “The Milgram Paradigm After 35 Years: Some Things We Now Know About Obedience to Authority.” According to Milgram and Blass, obedience is deeply ingrained. Most individuals will obey when certain elements are present: when orders come from a figure of authority, when any suffering is perceived to be minimal and for the greater good and when peer pressure to comply is present. 2020 has been like one big Milgram experiment. People have generally conformed to restrictions and lockdowns around the world because they come from authorities and experts, because they believe that the greater good will outweigh any negative repercussions and because of pressure to conform.

Both Milgram and Blass found that individuals had a higher tendency to obey if orders came from a figure of authority, from an institution of reputability or from persons considered to have experience in the matter.[2] With few exceptions, governments around the world, backed by the World Health Organization (WHO), the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and other Health organizations, have issued restrictions and lockdowns in an attempt to control the spread of Covid-19. Most people obey, because they trust that these organizations are experts with our best interests in mind, and that the information that they are giving us is correct. However, as Blass explains, an individual’s own personal experience might undermine the authority of a presumed expert.[3] We are constantly being bombarded with the number of cases and the number of deaths attributed to Covid-19, but if we take the time to do our own research, we will find the number of deaths overall is comparable to last year. In Britain, the death rate is a mere 1.5% higher than the five-year average, and on a normal trajectory for the end of the year.[4] The number of deaths in Canada rises gradually almost every year due to the population ageing and 2020 saw an increase of about 13 000 deaths overall, not a huge rise despite all of the Covid-19 cases we had from March to June.[5] Restrictions, lockdowns and social distancing may have had something to do with that. However, if we look at similar statistics for Sweden, which has so far refused to lock down,[6] it does not look like there will be a huge spike in deaths there either.[7] On the CDC web page, the Infection Fatality Ratio (IFR) averages around 0.026 overall.[8] [9] It seems that at least more or less the same people would have died regardless. Is it possible that people who would normally die of flu or pneumonia are dying of Covid-19 instead? It is important to do our own research in order to avoid relying too much on presumed experts.

Milgram and Blass also observed that people will obey when they perceive that orders are given for the common good or “designed to attain a worthy purpose,”[10] If they have value, cooperation is important.[11] It is generally believed that any sacrifices made to reduce the spread of Covid-19 will be temporary, benefits will outweigh the losses, no one will be hurt in the long term and that the contrary, refusing to obey, will result in great loss of life. After the lockdown, the Canadian economy picked up in August and September of 2020, growing 10% in the third quarter.[12] However, the future is uncertain for small businesses and with new lockdowns taking effect, confidence is once again being shaken as many businesses are being forced to close or reduce operations a second time.[13] Elsewhere in the world, in places like South America, unable to depend on government aid, people must defy stay-at-home orders and go out to work in order to eat.[14] In India, lockdowns put millions out of work, leaving them with little money or food. Migrant workers were forced to return to their villages, sometimes walking hundreds of miles. Many of them never made it home.[15] Joe Wallen of the Telegraph writes that people in India suffering from other diseases are dying because most of the resources are directed at stopping Covid-19 and people can no longer afford to pay for treatment anyway. NGO’s like the Red Cross can no longer provide blood transfusions to people who depended on them because donors are afraid to visit hospitals. Government policies may have kept Covid-19 death rates relatively low but has resulted in a wave of deaths from other diseases.[16] In Britain, more than 2 million operations were cancelled, and screenings, scans and treatments put on hold. Cancer waiting times have increased, lowering life expectancy and survival rate. Over 100 000 people are waiting for routine surgery and only half the usual amount of operations can be carried out, due to new protocols.[17] In Montreal, physiotherapist Marcia Aquino has noted a decline in many of her elderly patients in a CHSLD since family members who would help them with their exercises, could no longer visit. some are no longer able to walk at all.[18] If we look at the outcome of the Covid-19 response from all its angles, will it have been worth the consequences? It is important to view all angles of policies before assuming that they are all truly for the common good.

Peer pressure to comply, or coercive pressure as Blass refers to it, seems to warn of negative consequences if we do not obey.[19] On any given day, the top news headlines for Covid-19 look like this: “Death of an 80-year-old who attended a small party in B.C. shows danger of at-home events” (CBC News), “Legault stresses that red-zone rules are crucial as Quebec records 25 more COVID-19 deaths” (CTV News), or “New daily record of 82 coronavirus infections in Saskatchewan, 707 active cases” (Global News).[20] We follow protocol because we are constantly being told that not doing so will result in more deaths. No one wants to be the one who infects their loved ones, leading to their death. Signs promoting social distancing, hand washing and mask wearing are everywhere. Police are routinely checking public spaces to make sure people follow protocol. There is a “correct” way to think. Those who protest the masks are ridiculed. Any mention of hydroxychloroquine has people smirking in derision, even if it is only to treat side effects of the virus.[21] T-cell findings and the theory that they may result in a lower herd-immunity threshold[22] have been brushed off in favour of the theory that we should shut down until there is a vaccine. [23] Even government leaders are feeling the pressure. British Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced a second lock down in early November, just weeks after laughing at the idea.[24] In Sweden, the government preferred to avoid any policies it wouldn’t be able to keep up long-term and adopted mostly voluntary measures. Chief epidemiologist Anders Tegnell believes that the voluntary regulations have worked quite well so far. He says, “We know that [with] these kinds of measures that we put in place in Sweden we can basically go on with them for months and years if necessary.” Even so, a group of 2000 doctors and public health workers signed an open letter asking the government to impose stricter regulations in an effort to further suppress spread of the virus. “Our nation should not be the exception in Europe” it claimed.[25] One of the first things that a totalitarian government does is take over the media, censor disagreement and bombard its citizens with propaganda. Propaganda does not have to be lies. It can also be truth taken out of context and it can come from non-governmental groups. Organizations that stand to profit, such as pharmaceutical companies or vaccine manufacturers who stand to make money from an eventual vaccine, can also use information and media in order to influence us. Keeping an analytical outlook on information can help us to avoid blind obedience.

Individuals will obey for various reasons, and, as Milgram points out: “Obedience may be ennobling and educative and refer to acts of charity and kindness, as well as destruction.”[26] Indeed, obedience is essential if we want to have any kind of order in society. However, it is useful to think about why we must obey, not only in order to help us avoid the consequences of disobeying laws that will keep us safe, but to help us avoid the consequences of blindly assuming that everything the experts say is the absolute truth, that what we are doing is truly for the better good, and that peer pressure is not making us lose sight of reality. In the case of Covid-19, this means having a nuanced view of what is going on so that we might avoid focusing so much on Covid-19 that we cannot see the collateral damage.

[1] Laura Donelly, “‘Long Covid’ Could Turn out to Be a Bigger Problem than Excess Deaths,” The Telegraph, October 5, 2020, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/05/health-expert-warns-long-covid-could-turn-bigger-problem-excess/

[2] Stanley Milgram, “Behavioral Study of Obedience,” Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1963, Vol. 67, No 4, pp 371-378 and Thomas Blass, “The Milgram Paradigm,” Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 1999, Vol 29, No 5, pp 955-978.

[3] Blass, “The Milgram Paradigm”

[4] Sarah Knapton, “‘No Sign of Second Wave’ as ONS Data Shows Normal Level of Deaths for Time of Year,” The Telegraph, October 20, 2020. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/10/20/second-wave-not-sight-ons-figures-show-deaths-just-15-per-cent/

[5] “Deaths in Canada 2020,” n.d. Statista, Accessed October 26, 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/443061/number-of-deaths-in-canada/ The average increase over the last 20 years is about 4600 deaths. 2015 also saw an increase of 13 000 deaths and 2017 an increase of 12 000 over the previous years, while some years barely have an increase or even see a decrease (bringing the average down.)

[6] Johannes Ledel, “Sweden Sticks to Its Guns as COVID-19 Cases Rise,” CTVNews, October 23, 2020. https://www.ctvnews.ca/world/sweden-sticks-to-its-guns-as-covid-19-cases-rise-1.5157463

[7] “Sweden: Death Rate 2010-2020,” n.d. Statista, Accessed October 30, 2020. https://www.statista.com/statistics/525353/sweden-number-of-deaths/?fbclid=IwAR2GBfZrUT8O9omvOMvuIehqAGdZyptHP7ay0grY4LC75vsaTSTdrY4Q5uw The number of deaths overall from 2010 to 2019 in Sweden hovers from about 88 000 to about 92 000 per year (from January to December of the same year.) As of October 5, 2020, the number of deaths was at 71 647.

[8] CDC, 2020, “Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19),” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, February 11, 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/planning-scenarios.html The death ratio for Covid-19 averages around 0.00002 for ages 0 to 19, around 0.00022 for ages 20 to 49, around 0.0075 for ages 50 to 69 and around 0.0745 for ages 70 and over according to the CDC.

[9] Also see the W.H.O. web page for further statistics: https://covid19.who.int/ 1 204 028 deaths out of 46 840 783 cases worldwide = 2.5%.

[10] Milgram, “Behavioral Study of Obedience.”

[11] Blass, “The Milgram Paradigm.”

[12] Shelly Hagan and Erik Hertzberg, “Canadian Economy Shows Strength in August, September for Record Third Quarter,” Financial Post, Accessed November 2, 2020. https://financialpost.com/news/economy/canada-economy-grows-0-7-in-september-for-record-third-quarter

[13] Shelly Hagan and Erik Hertzberg, “Slump in Canadian Small Business Confidence Signals Sharp Slowdown in Economy,” Financial Post, Accessed November 4, 2020. https://financialpost.com/entrepreneur/small-business/slump-in-canadian-small-business-confidence-signals-slowdown

[14] Sebastián Lacunza, Anthony Faiola, and Terrence McCoy, “Latin America, Unable to Flatten Its Curve, Struggles to Cope with Pandemic.” Washington Post. Accessed November 2, 2020. https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/the_americas/coronavirus-latin-america/2020/09/11/6a2ecd82-f20b-11ea-999c-67ff7bf6a9d2_story.html

[15] Vikas Pandey and Anshul Verma, “Death and Despair as Covid Migrants Flee Cities.” BBC News, Accessed November 4, 2020. https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-asia-52776442

[16] Joe Wallen and Mohammad Sartaj Alam, “Hidden Victims of the Pandemic: Blood Bank Stocks Run Low as India’s Healthcare System Buckles.” The Telegraph, September 29, 2020. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/global-health/science-and-disease/hidden-victims-pandemic-blood-bank-stocks-run-low-indias-healthcare/.

Additionally, Sarah Swain of 9News writes that India saw 8.2 million people contract the virus and around 123,000 people died of it, one of the lowest rates in the world at under 2%. She mentions that researchers have found a link between the number of deaths and the conditions people live in. People living in places where they are exposed to more microbes have a better immune system. Which raises the question: Why are we now taking measures to reduce our exposure to microbes? https://www.9news.com.au/world/coronavirus-india-slum-conditions-could-make-immune-to-covid-19/491646d2-f375-49f0-ae2c-c4b5313256bd

[17] Margarette Driscoll, “Hidden Victims of the Pandemic: The Patients Left Ill and Dying as the NHS Closed for Covid,” The Telegraph, October 18, 2020. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/health-fitness/body/hidden-victims-pandemic-patients-left-dying-nhs-closed-covid/

[18] Two out of six patients who tested positive in the CHSLD where Aquino works between March and August this year died, but both already had just days to live regardless. Of all the deaths due to Covid-19, how many more were also already dying of something else? This would also add some perspective to the numbers.

[19] Thomas Blass, “The Milgram Paradigm.”

[20] “Death of an 80-year-old who attended a small party in B.C. shows danger of at-home events”

“Coronavirus: What's happening in Canada and around the world on Oct. 29,” CBC News, October 29, 2020, https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/coronavirus-covid19-canada-world-oct-29-1.5781406

Katelyn Thomas and Daniel J. Rowe, “Legault stresses that red-zone rules are crucial as Quebec records 25 more COVID-19 deaths,” CTV News, October 29, 2020, https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/legault-stresses-that-red-zone-rules-are-crucial-as-quebec-records-25-more-covid-19-deaths-1.5166073

Thomas Piller, “New daily record of 82 coronavirus infections in Saskatchewan, 707 active cases,” Global News, October 29, 2020, https://globalnews.ca/news/7430522/coronavirus-covid-19-sask-update-october-29/

[21] Hydroxychloroquine, often used to treat malaria, is a drug used in cases of autoimmune diseases, among other things, it keeps the body from attacking itself. It is not a cure for Covid-19, it can only be used to treat certain symptoms. Side effects may outweigh the benefits depending on the patient, but it has been used successfully by some doctors. However, just mention the name and people will treat you like you are crazy. More here about Dr. Raoult and his treatment of Covid-19 patients in Marseille: https://www.rfi.fr/en/france/20200624-french-doctor-didier-raoult-championed-hydroxychloroquine-respond-covid-inquiry-france-mps-medicine

[22] Exposure to certain diseases, such as the common cold, does not create immunity, but rather a “memory” of the disease, which increases the number of T-Cells ready to fight it. This is why we can still catch colds over and over again, but while children may bring a cold home to their parents that they themselves are suffering bad symptoms from, their parents may have nothing more than a scratchy throat and a slightly runny nose. https://www.contagionlive.com/view/emerging-data-support-lasting-covid19-immunity-t-cells

[23] Stacey Lennox, “The Politicization of COVID-19 Science Is Dangerous and Inexcusable,” Pjmedia.Com, Accessed November 3, 2020. https://pjmedia.com/columns/stacey-lennox/2020/08/17/the-politicization-of-covid-19-science-is-dangerous-and-inexcusable-n800730

[24] Michael Deacon, “MPs Lined up to Give Boris Johnson a Whack... While He Dangled Helplessly, like an Outsized Piñata.” The Telegraph, November 2, 2020. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2020/11/02/mps-lined-give-boris-johnson-whack-dangled-helplessly-like-outsized/

[25] Paul Waldie, “Why Is Sweden Staying Open amid the Coronavirus Pandemic?” The Globe and Mail, Accessed November 4, 2020. https://www.theglobeandmail.com/world/article-why-is-sweden-staying-open-amid-the-coronavirus-pandemic/

[26] Milton, “Behavioral Study of Obedience.”

Évolution des contes de chevaliers: De la chanson de geste au roman courteois

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Mon, 19 Oct 2020 03:05:00 +0000

(Originellement écrit pour un cours de litérature française du 11e au 17e siècles.)

La Chanson de Roland, chanson de geste qui se distingue dans le genre par son caractère épique, est un des plus anciens poèmes héroïques écrits en français. Elle a été composée vers la fin du XIe siècle, possiblement par un dénommé Turold, mais on ne peut être certain s’il l’a composée ou s’il l’a tout simplement copiée. Environ cent ans plus tard, vers 1180, Chrétien de Troyes composait Yvain ou le chevalier au lion, un des plus célèbres romans courtois. Ces deux textes racontent, de façon grandiose, les exploits de preux chevaliers, qui se démarquent par leur loyauté, leur courage et leur fierté. Depuis la Chanson de Roland les contes chevaleresques ont connu certaines transformations et on voit apparaître, dans Yvain ou le chevalier au lion, des femmes dans de rôles importants face aux chevaliers et des éléments de magie qui entourent les exploits. Dans la chanson de geste la femme est un accessoire de l’homme mais elle passe à une place d’influence et d’honneur dans le roman courtois. Dans la chanson de geste on retrouve des exploits basés plutôt dans la réalité alors que dans le roman courtois, le chevalier se retrouve dans une histoire influencée par des objets magiques ou des archétypes.

Dans la littérature courtoise, les femmes sont beaucoup plus présentes dans la vie du chévalier que dans la chanson de geste par leurs actions et par la fidélité qu’on leur jure. Dans la chanson de geste, on raconte les exploits de l’héro et les hauts faits du roi, des évêques, des autres seigneurs, mais la femme, quand elle est mentionnée, est subordonnée aux actions de l’homme ; elle est un attribut, un accessoire de l’homme. Ce qui est le plus important pour le chevalier dans la chanson de geste c’est de ne jamais être lâche devant l’ennemi. On va préférer mourir plutôt que de fuir. « Maudit soit le fuyard ! Dût-on mourir, personne ne vous fera défaut. » (la Chanson de Roland, p. 145) Fuir serait la mort sociale. Le but est de passer à l’histoire. Quant à la littérature courtoise, elle raconte également les exploits de l’héro et de ses compères, mais en plus, elle raconte l’amour que le chevalier a pour une femme. La femme a un rôle à jouer, elle va influencer le chevalier, avoir sa propre opinion, agir de son plein gré et marquer l’histoire. Dans Yvain ou le chevalier au lion, sans l’aide de l’habile et astucieuse Lunete, Yvain n’aurait probablement jamais gagné l’amour de sa dame. « Lunete a accompli là du bon travail, car ce qu’elle vient d’obtenir représente bien ce qu’elle désire le plus au monde. » (Yvain ou le chevalier au lion, p. 121) Pour le chevalier, ne jamais être lâche devant l’adversaire est aussi important dans la littérature courtoise que dans la chanson de geste; son honneur dépend de ses exploits, mais il dépend aussi de sa politesse et de sa courtoisie. Le but est de gagner et de garder l’amour de sa dame. D’ailleurs, dans la chanson de geste, le chevalier va vouer une loyauté à la France, à son roi et à son seigneur. Il forme une alliance avec d’autres hommes. « Pour son seigneur on doit subir de grands maux, endurer de grands froids et de fortes chaleurs, on doit perdre de son sang et de sa chair. » (La Chanson de Roland, p. 151) Il n’y a pas de mention d’alliance avec les femmes. En revanche, dans la littérature courtoise, la loyauté envers sa dame est aussi importante pour le chevalier que la loyauté envers son suzerain. On va jusqu’à créer des scènes semblables à un adoubement : « Elle lui prépare une cotte d’écarlate vermeille, fourrée de vair, avec de la craie encore dessus. Elle n’omet pas de lui procurer tout ce qui est requis pour le parer. » Le chevalier déclare son amour et sa fidélité à sa dame comme s’il vouait sa loyauté envers son suzerain : « Messire Yvain joint aussitôt les mains et, en véritable ami, se met à genoux pour lui déclarer : “Ma dame, jamais, en vérité, je ne solliciterai votre pitié, je vous remercierai plutôt de tout ce que vous voudrez me faire, car rien ne saurait me déplaire.” » (Yvain ou le chevalier au lion p. 41) Les femmes alors, occupent une place d’influence et d’honneur dans la littérature courtoise, ce qui n’est pas le cas dans la chanson de geste.

La littérature courtoise ajoute des éléments de magie tels des objets magiques ou des archétypes; éléments qu’on ne voit pas dans la chanson de geste. La chanson de geste est sensiblement basée sur la réalité et les préoccupations de l’élite de la société (du moins, celles des hommes) même si elle reste une œuvre de fiction hyperbolique. Les exploits des chevaliers sont plus glorieux, plus épiques, plus grands que nature. Partout, il y a des exagérations dans les textes : « Olivier dit : “J’ai vu les païens. Jamais nul homme sur terre n’en vit plus.” » (La Chanson de Roland, p. 145) Et on décrit les batailles jusque dans des détails sordides: « Le compte Roland voit l’archevêque à terre ; hors de son corps il voit, gisant, ses entrailles, et sous son front s’écoule sa cervelle. » (La Chanson de Roland, p. 237) L’exagération existe aussi dans la littérature courtoise : la beauté d’une femme ou l’accueil d’un homme qui surpassent les mots, ou encore, un orage tel qu’on croit la fin du monde, mais on laisse de côté les détails morbides et on y ajoute des objets magiques, inspirés des comptes arthuriens, comme la fontaine qui provoque des tempêtes (Yvain ou le chevalier au lion, p. 21) ou encore l’anneau magique que Lunete fait porter à Yvain pour qu’il soit invisible. (Yvain ou le chevalier au lion, p.25) Or, des archétypes, dans la chanson de geste, on n’en voit pas. Les actes du chevalier sont une réflexion de son caractère, il n’y a pas d’influence extérieure. Quand Roland refuse de sonner son cor, la décision vient complètement de lui. « Je préfère mourir que subir la honte. » (La Chanson de Roland, p.149) Dans la littérature courtoise, à l’opposé, on voit les sentiments Amour, Haine, ou Honte se personnifier. Inspiré des histoires d’antiquité, on introduit dans l’histoire des archétypes qui semblent avoir une légère influence sur les évènements du fait de leur présence. Quand Yvain tue le chevalier Esclados le Roux, Amour prend sa revanche en le faisant tomber amoureux de la veuve Laudine. « Sans même le savoir, la dame venge bien la mort de son seigneur. Sa vengeance a même plus de prise qu’elle n’aurait pu en avoir elle-même. Amour l’a vengée en attaquant doucement Yvain qu’il a frappé au cœur en passant par les yeux. Ce coup meurtrit plus longuement qu’un coup de lance ou d’épée. » (Yvain ou le chevalier au lion, p. 30) Des éléments de magie s’ajoutent donc à la littérature courtoise et ont une influence directe ou indirecte sur les évènements ou sur les actions des protagonistes.

Les chevaliers sont aussi preux dans la littérature courtoise que dans les chansons de geste et leurs exploits sont aussi épiques mais l’honneur que l’on recherche n’est plus dans le seul but de passer à l’histoire mais plutôt dans le but de gagner ou de garder l’amour d’une dame. La politesse et le contrôle de soi sont des valeurs devenues plus importantes. La femme a une grande influence sur le chevalier et des éléments de magie tels des objets magiques ou des archétypes influencent l’histoire et la façon dont le chevalier va s’y prendre pour chercher l’honneur. Les sentiments prennent plus de place dans le roman courtois, au point de devenir des personnages.

The Evolution of Neurodiversity: How Culture influences our values

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Thu, 15 Oct 2020 02:33:00 +0000

(Another essay I had to write for a class)

Thomas Wolfe once said: “Culture is the arts elevated to a set of beliefs.” Our values are not only evident in our arts and culture, they can be influenced by them. Since 1998, when the term neurodiversity was first used by sociologist Judy Singer, autism has gone from being culturally portrayed as a disability in need of a cure to being viewed as a “different ability” in need of acceptance and accommodation. The emergence of the term neurodiversity into mainstream society is an example of a broader phenomenon which uses culture to change our values by changing the language we use to speak about them, using peer pressure to influence individuals and exploiting identity politics.

By changing the language we use to speak about different issues and values, the way society looks at them can be changed. In 1999, American philosopher and gender theorist Judith Butler noted that “Language plays an important role in shaping and altering our common or ‘natural’ understanding of social and political realities.”[1] In the same year, sociologist Judy Springer published the book Disability Discourse based on her sociology honours thesis in which she first coined the term neurodiversity. She was especially acclaimed for her chapter “Why Can’t You be Normal for Once in Your Life?” When she was growing up, she says, “we thought children were born blank slates that parents could write on. When my daughter was born, I had to revise my thinking.”[2] This re-thinking naturally led to a new language around autism which trickled down from academia into mainstream culture. Other themes, such as cultural, sexual and gender diversity exploit the same argument; that differences are natural, that humans are simply “wired” differently and that these variations should be celebrated, accepted and accommodated. It was no great leap then, to introduce the word neurodiversity, in order to suggest that autism is not a disorder in need of a cure, but rather a different variation in neurology that should be accepted, supported and celebrated.

Novelist Doris Lessing notes that humans are group animals; we often join groups to find like-minded people. However, groups eventually change the thinking of individuals who belong to them and it is easier to conform than to maintain an independent opinion.[3] Up until the late 1990s, our idea of an autistic person was someone who, like Raymond in the 1988 comedy-drama Rain Man might have one super-talent like solving complicated math problems in seconds, but who was otherwise mentally handicapped, could not be reasoned with, had extreme difficulty communicating with others and could not be let out alone in society. Enter stage left: the internet. In 1997 journalist Harvey Blume wrote in the New York Times: “In cyberspace, many of the nation's autistics are doing the very thing the syndrome supposedly deters them from doing -- communicating -- often in celebration of the medium that enables them to do so.”[4] Online forums such as Independent Living permitted autistics to share experiences, exchange information and swap ideas, without feeling mentally drained afterwards.[5] When autistic people first joined these online groups, it was often for mutual support in figuring out how to blend in with neurotypical people. Eventually, as the idea of neurodiversity gained popularity, the concept that autistic people did not need to be “fixed” but that instead, society needed to accept and accommodate them took hold. Group thinking influenced individuals, and we would be hard-pressed to find high-functioning autistic people today who think that they need a cure.

James Davison Hunter, the man who coined the term “culture wars,” mentions in an interview with Jason Willick[6] that identity politics exist because of our need to identify with a group, in both our affirmations and our negations. Even within the autism community, where the medical view focuses on the disability and is centred on finding a cure and the social view focuses on how society causes the disability through lack of services and is centred on finding acceptance and accommodation, there can be a sometimes-intransigent divide in viewpoints. The word “cure” has become controversial, mostly with independently functioning people who do not think that they need “to be fixed.” They view the idea as offensive as if society were trying to eliminate them.[7] While it is true that people on the spectrum can and do live independently and contribute to society, for parents like Amy Lutz, mother of a low functioning autistic child, the idea that autism is a “strange gift,” as Steve Silberman calls it in his book NeuroTribes: The Legacy of Autism and the Future of Neurodiversity, is mind-boggling. For families of those with extreme neurological symptoms who require a lifetime of care, the issue of autism in its more adverse forms needs to be addressed before making the claim that lack of services causes more suffering than the disorder itself.[8] As Denis Dutton, editor of the scholarly journal Philosophy and Literature points out, ideas should be more than just vague theory or jargon, they should be based on common sense.[9] It may be counter-cultural and politically incorrect to question neurodiversity, but to dismiss the problems of low functioning autistic people creates yet another divide in never-ending identity politics.

Changing the way we speak about issues such as autism can challenge the way we think about them in a positive way, pointing to a more socially just world, however, it is important to maintain a certain independence in our thoughts, keeping in mind the influence that groups can have on us. By avoiding identity politics and carefully considering nuances even if they do not fit a certain narrative, we can avoid errors like leaving people with severe forms of autism out of the discussion.

[1] Judith Butler, “A ‘Bad Writer’ Bites Back,” New York Times, 1999

[2] Samantha Craft, “Meet Judy Singer Neurodiversity Pioneer,” http://www.myspectrumsuite.com/meet-judy-singer/

[3] (Lessing, Doris, “Group Minds,” in Prisons We Choose to Live Inside, (Harper Collins Publishers and House of Anansi Press, Inc, 1988), 594-597.

[4] Harvey Blume, “Autistics, freed from face-to-face encounters, are communicating in cyberspace,” The New York Times, 1997, https://www.nytimes.com/1997/06/30/business/autistics-freed-from-face-to-face-encounters-are-communicating-in-cyberspace.html

[5] Blume 1997

[6] Jason Willick, “The Man Who Discovered ‘Culture Wars,’” The Wall Street Journal, 2018

[7] Jacqueline Stenson, “Why the Focus of Autism Research Is Shifting Away from Searching for a ‘Cure,’” NBC News, 2019, https://www.nbcnews.com/health/kids-health/cure-autism-not-so-fast-n1055921

[8] Amy S.F. Lutz, “Please Stop Whitewashing Autism.” Psychology Today, 2015. https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/inspectrum/201509/please-stop-whitewashing-autism

[9] Denis Dutton, “Language Crimes: A Lesson in How Not to Write, Courtesy of the Professoriate,” The Wall Street Journal, 1999

Looking Ahead to 2055

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Sun, 27 Sep 2020 13:36:00 +0000

(An essay I have to write for an English Composition class - I need to chop off almost half of it, reduce it to 600 words, but I wanted to post it here before I do.)

Interpreting the signs of the times is just as important as reading history if society desires to avoid repeating the same errors. On the eve of 1984, in response to George Orwell’s Dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four (first published in 1949), Isaac Asimov wrote Asimov’s New World (Toronto Star) which looks 35 years ahead to 2019. Looking ahead once again to 2055, three themes that have the power to influence the world for good or for evil need to be taken into consideration: technology, ideological polarization and a desire for human perfection.

The kind of technology that is being developed and put into our devices and homes gives us the both the potential to learn and to control things around us. Alexa and Siri will turn lights on, help us find resources for homework and lock the front door. Smart TVs are equipped with video cameras and voice recognition. In a few years, nanotechnology inserted into humans would allow them to directly access the internet. By 2055 Virtual Reality (VR) could very well have us taking virtual trips to the Louvre or Iguazu Falls without leaving our living room. We could conduct business meetings or visit friends and family. Face recognition technology, voice activation and recognition technology, GPS tracking and movement-activated video will have infiltrated every corner of our lives. Our houses could recognize every person who lives there, making keys obsolete and personalizing each person’s experience at home. This kind of technology could very well have us living in a wonderful, positive world like the one Asimov saw, where anyone can educate themselves, life is vastly improved, mundane jobs are done by bots and everyone has access to anything they might want or need. On the other hand, it also has the potential to create an Orwellian world, in which a ruling elite controls the information we see, censors not only speech, but thought, knows exactly where we are and what we are doing at all times, and either swiftly punishes or distracts anyone who is out of line. How much power are we willing to give others over ourselves in order to make our lives “easier”, especially with the threat of increased ideological polarization also looming?

If there is one thing that has changed in recent years in politics, especially American politics, it is polarization. We live in a world of fragile egos that cannot deal with critique or differences of opinion. We refuse to recognize that the other side has anything to say. We have become increasingly more extreme in our positions on issues. We are no longer able to openly discuss controversial issues. More and more of us “cancel” those we disagree with, censor “politically incorrect” viewpoints, shout down our adversaries and act like victims if someone contradicts on us on even just one point. The imposition of “correct thinking” as seemingly benign as employee training or workshops could easily end up like China’s re-education centres or the former Soviet Union’s Gulag. Already, people disenchanted with Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are increasingly looking for optional social media that will not censor them. By 2055, technology will have made it increasingly easier to control, censor and punish “incorrect thinking”. If the trend continues, groups of like-minded people will start to seek each other out and go underground. There could very well be an underground “resistance” that refuses to go with the Status Quo, people hiding in remote areas, going off-grid, steering clear of new vaccines or implants and refusing to use computer technology in order to avoid being traced. We all have different and sometimes contrary needs hence dialogue and compromise are necessary. We can only strive for a decent world for everyone, the perfect world does not exist.

It seems that the more we advance in the health sciences, the more we idealize perfection. We want to stay young, beautiful and healthy. We are afraid of illness, suffering, disability, deformity and death. Life is deemed unworthy if we are disabled in some way, and we want to control death. We want to chose when and how and with whom it will happen. 200 years ago, death was very much a natural part of life. Now we sanitize both life and death. Never have we had a world so sanitized as in 2020 with Covid19. We would rather not see suffering. Our parents are often “forgotten” in old age homes. We prefer to abort children with Down’s Syndrome even though they definitely can and do live happy, fulfilled lives. We offer assisted suicide to those who have become too ill, too old, or too disabled. Restrictions on assisted suicide continue to slide. It is a lot easier for a society with an ageing population to fix the problem of who will care for the elderly by providing the option of assisted suicide. By 2055, the pressure that the elderly already feel to “not be a burden” will become increasingly stronger. We could very well be looking at the compulsory euthanasia of anyone who is no longer be able to care for themselves. Like people with Down’s Syndrome, the elderly will disappear. Parents of children with Down’s Syndrome or Autism receive hate notes from people who are incensed that the latter exist. We could be looking at a future where aborting those children is compulsory. Forced abortion already exists in China. In 2055 we will likely have the technology and the medical resources to make people’s lives easier. We will have technology that could make it easier to do things independently, that would allow people with disabilities to work, play and socialize, artificial limbs that respond to mental controls, medical advancements that would relieve or at least manage suffering. Virtual reality would allow people to not only forget their suffering for awhile, but to do things they couldn’t do in real life. Imagine quadriplegics playing virtual soccer! On the other hand, we could also be looking at test-tube babies; choosing babies’ DNA or even genetically modified humans. We could be looking at people going underground or off-grid in order to hide their ageing parents or disabled children from the authorities.

Nineteen Eighty-Four was a prophetic warning. Asimov’s New World, on the other hand, was much more positive and closer to reality. While the year 1984 did not see the kind of technology that an Orwellian world would need to exercise that kind of control over people, in 2020, we are well on our way to developing it. We have choices to make. Do we use technology to make life easier for the individual, or to make it easier for a ruling elite to control individuals? Do we make ourselves dialogue with people who disagree with us, or do we play the victim and refuse to take other points of view into consideration? Do we make death an escape from suffering, caring and responsibility, or do we focus on making it easier to choose life even if it is not perfect? The choices we make will determine whether we find ourselves in a bright, exciting future along the lines of Isaac Asimov’s vision for 2019 or a dark, controlled future like the one George Orwell describes in 1984.

101 Reasons to be happy, Reason number sixty-eight

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Fri, 11 Sep 2020 13:33:00 +0000

Hiking/backpacking/rucking... whatever you call it or how you do it, just out walking in nature...

Who I am is More Important than What I am

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Tue, 30 Jun 2020 13:17:00 +0000

If you judge a group of people by their worst individuals, then NO group of people is innocent of hateful crimes and if you judge each individual by the social/ethnic groups they find themselves in, then every individual must be guilty of hateful crimes. This is what Marxism looks like. It doesn't care about the individuals, it only cares about the ideology. It puts people in groups and pits "haves" against "have nots" or "aggressors" against "victims" without ever looking at the individual actions of a person.

Marxism would have you judge every individual based on WHAT they are and not WHO they are. If you do not judge all teachers or sports coaches based on the actions of the worst among them, if you do not judge all Hollywood directors based on the actions of the worst of them, then neither can you judge ALL priests nor ALL police officers based on the actions of the worst of them. There are sexual predators, physical abusers, and abusers of power in ALL of these groups. And yet I don't see anyone calling for shutting down public schools or sports clubs or Hollywood. We KNOW that we can't judge everyone based on the actions of a few. Oh, unless they are Catholic priests or police officers, clearly.

Marxism doesn't care about the individual. Take Chairman Mao for example from the Chinese Communist Party. He held "correct thinking" to be more important than any individual, your spouse, your child, your parents, even yourself. "incorrect thinking" was punished in the Soviet Union, in Communist China, in Cuba and in Venezuela. Take a look at this video from 1970; Communists on Campus, and listen to the Marxist/Communist student activists spouting ideology one-liners with no real depth or understanding of problems nor how to solve them. They consistently quote Chairman Mao's Red book, they believe (and I quote directly from them:) "The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is the banner of freedom and independence of our people and also a powerful weapon of building socialism and communism." In retrospect, we might call them delusional, but so is ANYONE who thinks that THEIR version of Marxism will be any different! It's been tried enough times, in different enough times, places and situations that we should KNOW by now that it doesn't work! As Dr. Jordan B. Peterson says, "How many people have to die?" I quote again, from the video, a clip taken at a talk, where the speaker says this: "The people who will be speaking on this panel... they were chosen because of their correct practice..." If THAT doesn't say it all, I don't know what does. With Marxism, there is ONE correct way of thinking, ONE correct practice, you will follow party lines or suffer the consequences.

Take Russia for instance, Dr. Peterson, who has read the Gulag Archipelago by Solzhenitsyn, among other books, tells this story in his lectures: After the newly emancipated farmworkers had harvested the crops (and it wasn't a great harvest) the grain was all taken to the cities, none was left for them. (Because it had to be EQUALLY distributed, see?) Those farmers who now had no grain could not even go back into the fields to search for maybe the few grains that had been left behind, with which to feed their families, because that was punishable by death. If they found more grain, that too, had to be shipped to the cities. Thousands starved. As Dr. Peterson says, with equality of outcome, "we are all equal to starve to death."

No one is equal in everything. We all have advantages and disadvantages. We all have good things in life and we all have to deal with some bad things. We do not have the same talents or interests. We do not want to put in the same effort or time for the same purpose. Only by great tyranny can you force every person to be "equal."

Here's what you DON'T do: you DON'T assume a priest is a pedophile simply because he is a priest. You DON'T call the cops on a Black man for simply being a Black man. You DON'T yell at an Indigenous girl to "go back to the reserve" simply because she's Indigenous. You DON'T beat up the white kid simply because he's white. You DON'T shoot the police officer simply because he's an officer.

If you are going to judge a person, you DON'T judge them by their skin colour, ethnicity, career, choice of sport or religion. You DO judge them by their individual actions. Are they an asshat or not?

Here's what you DO. Does your life suck? Quit wanting to bring others down to your level, so everyone's life can equally suck. Instead of working on other people, you start with the person that you CAN change. Yourself. What would make your life better? What would make your life worthwhile? What are YOU doing (or not doing) that is preventing you from having that life? Change THAT. Years ago, when I felt that life was like a prison, I made a few changes in my attitude and I decided to work pro-actively towards a few goals. This changed everything. My life is not perfect, and it isn't even all that much different, but it is good. If we all worked on OURSELVES, this world would be a much better place.

Catholic Social Teaching and Racism

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Wed, 10 Jun 2020 18:06:00 +0000

I read through this document called Catholic Social Teaching and Racism. I want to comment on the following bits of it.

The Many Faces of Racism:

"Catholic teaching “emphasizes not only the individual conscience, but also the political, legal and economic structures...”[6] Racism is about people and about group behaviors and societal organization. Individual racism includes conscious acts, spontaneous attitudes, “the tendency to stereotype and marginalize,”[7] indifference, and “the triumph of private concern over public responsibility…” [8]
"Laws such as U.S. segregation or South Africa’s apartheid [9] represent blatant systemic racism. More subtle racism treats groups as “second-class citizens with regard, for instance, to higher education, to housing, to employment and especially to public… services...”[10] Even more subtle racism is now masked in appeals to equality that guarantee that past inequalities are perpetuated by blocking corrective efforts. “At times protestations claiming that all persons should be treated equally reflect the desire to maintain a status quo that favors one race and social group at the expense of the poor and non white.”[11] Social, economic, educational, and political advantages from the past are cemented as the often unconscious privilege of the present. Thus, “Racism obscures the evils of the past and denies the burdens” that history imposes on people of color today.[12]"

This makes two important points that aren't always mentioned: 1. Equality does not mean "not racist" and 2. Not all racism is systemic racism.

1. "At times protestations claiming that all persons should be treated equally reflect the desire to maintain a status quo that favors one race and social group..." In other words, if we have laws that favour one group over another, even though all are "treated equally" one group is undermined and that is still racism. Take First Nations for instance, for whom "ownership of the land" did not exist. They had their traditional territories and each family had their traditional hunting ground. For First Nations, you do not own the land, the land is personified, the earth is your mother and she provides for you. Because the First Nations did not "own" the land in the same sense that Europeans own land, the Europeans claimed all this "unowned" land for their King(s). But the land was NOT theirs to claim. This would be part racism and part complete ignorance of First Nations' way of thinking. It never occurred to the Europeans to figure out First Nations' social structure or their relationship to the land. That was a mistake. This difference in how land is viewed was the basis for unjust laws that, while treating all as "equal", disadvantaged the First Nations' because their social structure and way of life was completely different.

Not being racist doesn't just mean treating everyone the same and having the same laws for all people. It means treating everyone as an individual first, and second, taking into consideration the language, customs, culture, social structure, etc of different nations, and when necessary, coming to a compromise that benefits all parties.

2. Racism is prejudice based on race. Prejudice can be based on a number of things, including class, wealth, family, age, etc. Racial prejudice IS racism. Activists have redefined racism to mean systemic racism, but not all racism is systemic. Much of it is individual. You can have a country in which all people are given the same opportunities, but you will still, unfortunately, meet people in your life who will judge you and discriminate against you, based on your race, sex, language or whatever. We cannot change other people's hearts, however, we CAN make our laws as just as possible for everyone. The problem with changing the definition of racism is that we target one single group for it. We change the narrative: only "white" people can be racist, and no "white" person can be a victim of racism. We HAVE a term already for segregation, apartheid, slavery, genocide, the holocaust, laws that favour one race over another, laws that discriminate one race, concentration camps, etc. THAT is systemic racism. It is MUCH worse than individual racism. Individual racism is NOT systemic racism. It is, quite simply, any person who judges another, or mistreats them, based on their race. ANYONE can commit individual racism or be a victim of it.

The whole Revolution Tranquille in Québec in the early part of the 20th century was actually due to systemic racism. In an English-Canadian society, French-Canadians had very little rights. In fact, even IN Québec, where the vast majority of the population spoke French, French-Canadians were not allowed to take on higher-level jobs. You could not climb the corporate ladder or hold office if you were not English. Irish-Canadians were similarly discriminated against. I put "white" in quotes because "white" is not a race. It is a group of races, better defined as "European." Where my mother grew up, French-Canadians were "not to be trusted." So, if people had a choice between hiring an English-Canadian or a French-Canadian, they often preferred to hire the English-Canadian. My father and possibly my uncle or a friend of his were roughed up by police in northwestern Canada BECAUSE they were French-Canadian. Sound familiar? Denying that ONE certain group (based on skin colour - not even race) can be victims of racism takes away their voice. It makes them invisible. Their stories do not count. Their experience is no longer valid. They are told that they "cannot understand racism" because they "cannot be victims of racism" and they are cancelled. They don't exist, because they don't fit the narrative.

I was beaten up and targeted for bullying (by individuals, not the whole society) because of my skin colour for YEARS when I was growing up. If you silence me, because my story doesn't fit your narrative, it feels exactly like the relentless bullying I went through as a child. It feels like someone is holding their hand on my mouth to keep me quiet. You are putting me in a box and telling me that everything I suffered as a child is "nonexistent" based on my skin colour. You are gaslighting me. If any other child, of any other race, had been bullied because of his race, that would be racism. But because I am white, it is not. It is actually, ironically, racist to determine that, based on race, a person cannot be a victim of racism.

It is also counter-intuitive to shut us up and tell us that we "can't" understand, because we are actually ON YOUR SIDE.

Inter-generational Trauma

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Tue, 09 Jun 2020 16:55:00 +0000

I don't know if any of this might also pertain to African Americans in the States, but I grew up in Northern Canada, among Cree people. Many of them had problems with alcohol, broken homes, depression, etc. No one talked about "intergenerational trauma" back in the '70s and '80s or the effects of residential schools. I've only started to hear about that in the last 10-15 years or so. But it makes sense to me. Generations of children were taken from their parents and brought up in institutions designed to strip their language and culture from them, turn them in to "Europeanized", good, Christian "Indians" whereupon they were returned to their communities - where they were lost because they did not know how to live out on the land, did not know the ways of their people anymore, did not have the proper means to support themselves because a European education was worthless in a community that didn't have European style jobs. Their people were hunter-gatherers, not store clerks or butchers or enterprisers. Some of them worked for the Hudson Bay Company, but back in the earlier part of the 20th century, other than the HBC, there just weren't a lot of places you could go to work at. Their European education didn't help them much and made them feel even more isolated from their people. Add to that, the fact that children learn important things from parents, like how to be a parent themselves later on in life, how to show affection, how to stay together, how to have a mature relationship, and these children hadn't had that, because they'd barely been around their parents. Two generations of children not growing up with their parents, two generations of children not knowing who they were (basically being told that who they were was bad, that "White" is better) was enough to create a seriously dysfunctional society.

This wasn't everyone's experience of residential schools by the way. At least one school refused to teach the children in Engish, preferring to teach them in Cree. The Oblate fathers and brothers, back in the day, all learned and spoke fluent Cree, as did the sisters who were there. My brother tells the story of one elderly Cree lady, who attended Steven Harper's official Apology to those who had gone to residential schools, and she had to have it translated because she SPOKE NO ENGLISH. When it was over, she was actually upset, because they had spoken only of the bad things, and not of the good things.

I know of others for whom the schools were mostly not a bad experience. But for many, it was. Enough that by the time I was going to school, the effects of intergenerational trauma were everywhere. At school, there were constant putdowns and constant jeering. You would be jeered at if you were proud of any accomplishment. You would be put in your place if a teacher singled you out for praise. I was jeered at simply for smiling because it was my turn to ring the bell to signal the end of recess. I remember one teacher grew tired of all the constant put-downs she kept hearing and stopped all work and made us write one nice thing about everyone else which she then posted on the wall. Sadly, while it was nice to see compliments, it didn't do much to quell the constant negativity. It was a toxic environment. I learned at a young age to never show pride in anything I did, to never show weakness, never cry, never look sad or too happy. At the end of the school year, teachers would hand out awards, and one after one, my peers and I would march up to receive them, awkwardly, trying to make it look like we didn't care. In high school, boys especially, purposely did not do as well as they could so that they would not receive awards. When I was in high school, sometimes if it was your birthday, your friends might add birthday wishes to the morning announcements. Someone did that for me once, and people used that occasion to tell me to "take a break on my birthday" and go away, they didn't want me around, participating in certain activities. Even today, if you single me out for attention it makes me feel very uncomfortable. If I don't smile and look happy, people will think that I don't appreciate anything, but it still makes me extremely uncomfortable to do so. I don't like job interviews, because those require self-promotion, and we didn't do self-promotion growing up. THAT is inter-generational trauma. It affected me, despite the fact that I grew up in a loving home, and both my parents are "white." That was just one facet. Other children I grew up with weren't as lucky. Some of them lived with alcoholic or abusive parents as well. The abuse didn't have to be physical, sometimes it was just negligence. Often it was emotional. Sometimes it was just the absence of affection. The number of suicides in my community and other Indigenous communities are much higher than anywhere else in Canada. If I hadn't had the parents I had, nor the sense that someday, I could get out of there, I might have been tempted by suicide myself.

Now that people have dug deeper and put a finger on the problem, many healing programs have started up. There are land-based healing programs, where you go out on the land and learn the old ways. There are other programs as well, where you are taught to take responsibility for your own healing, to dig down and bring up those things that hurt you, to understand them, and to realize that other people have their issues as well, but you can only change you. Still others have brought back old traditions, have gathered up the old teachings from elders who still remember them, and are teaching them again. They are bringing back the cultural symbols, the legends and stories that told people how to live good lives and make the right decisions. Most of the old legends had some kind of moral teaching in them. I have listened to stories told by my peers, of how people (even those close to them) hurt them deeply, and of how they have let go of that, how they acknowledge that those people have their own healing to do which allows them to heal and become stronger.

I write this because while I don't really know the situation of Black people in the US, I can imagine that, while the details of the story may be different, the results might be the same. I imagine that Black people are living with their own inter-generational trauma and that for this reason, there might be more social dysfunction. (single-parent homes, broken families, crime, etc.) Maybe I am totally off. But maybe looking at that trauma and calling it what it is might be a start to some healing. Maybe it is already being done? I don't know, because I have never heard the words "inter-generational trauma" used while referring to African Americans. If "white" people also recognized the trauma for what it was and supported the healing that might help with reconciliation?

101 Reasons to be happy, Reason number sixty-seven

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Mon, 25 May 2020 20:57:00 +0000

Old photos

Catholic during coronavirus

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Sat, 23 May 2020 16:59:00 +0000

Since the beginning of the coronavirus shutdown, eating was never banned, only eating out in restaurants. Talking and writing were never banned, only restricted to the bare essentials in public places. Praying was never banned, only praying in groups in public places. Listening to music was never banned, only going to public concerts. Drinking alcohol was never banned, only drinking at public bars. And get this: masses were never banned, only public masses.

As Catholics, we believe that the Holy Mass is the most important prayer. Jesus's sacrifice on the cross is what saved the world and Holy Mass is the continuation of that sacrifice. The continuation, not the repetition, as protestants think, (there is a difference) of that sacrifice. On the night that he instituted the sacrament of the Eucharist, Jesus said: "Do this in memory of me." That's a direct order, and it's in the Bible. God made himself man and came to earth to save us from sin, but He doesn't just magically wipe all our sins away. First, we still have freedom of conscience. We can choose to believe and act like we believe, or we can choose to disbelieve and act however we want. Second, He wants us to participate in our salvation. Our prayers are important and can be very influential, even if, sometimes, that influence is worked only upon our own attitude and not our circumstances; even if sometimes, our prayers are not answered in the way we'd hoped for or expected. "Ask, and you shall receive." Jesus said. "Where two or more gather in my name, there I will be." He instructs us to be persistent in prayer, like the widow asking the judge for justice. Prayer (and especially the mass) is important for our salvation because inevitably, we are the ones who choose whether or not to receive the gift. It is also important for the salvation of the world because through prayer, many come to be saved.

Therefore, it is vitally important that masses continue to be said. Mass is essential.

Throughout this whole coronavirus shutdown, masses were never banned. Private masses have continued to be said, every day, the whole time. Many of them were made virtually public through television and online streaming. Listening to mass online is not, obviously, the same as attending mass with your whole community in a church. We are missing out on the community part, and we cannot physically receive communion. Community is important; we cannot grow in faith or be challenged without community. Community forces us to compromise, to rethink our ideas, to consider other points of view. This is essential on our path to sainthood. Receiving the Holy Eucharist is also important, it is physical, spiritual food.

However, receiving the Holy Eucharist is not a Sunday obligation. Attending mass is. You may attend mass and not receive Holy Communion. You may do this all year. Catholics in good faith, who have been baptized, have received their First Holy Communion, have no unconfessed mortal sin and are not living in a sinful situation have only a once a year obligation to receive the Eucharist. Catholics who have good reason to avoid going to mass, (for health reasons or other) may also be dispensed from presence at a public mass. In this exceptional time, Bishops are following directives from the government, in the best interests of the general population (to their best knowledge) and have cancelled public masses. But mass continues on: every day, across the world, at all hours of the day, priests are saying private masses and we can virtually join some of them, thanks to public media, in continuing this most sacred rite of salvation.

None of this is unprecedented. Services in Churches in 1918 were also cancelled because of the Spanish Flu. Clearly, they started up again afterwards.

Until soccer programs start up again and the government is still banning church services, I refuse to worry about the so-called government conspiracy to ban church going. If that happens, then and only then, will I start to worry. For the record, the Bundesliga in Germany started up just this past week, and apparently, Churches in Germany have begun public masses since before that. So that's a good sign that I probably have nothing to worry my head about.

There are people out there who believe that the whole coronavirus shutdown is a conspiracy between the elite and governments, or an experiment to see if they can control our lives. They refuse to believe that there was ever any danger from this disease. There are also people out there who think everything should be shut down until the virus is eradicated despite what that would do to the economy or people who can't just work from home. People need to eat. They also get depressed (well, extroverts do, anyway) if they are in isolation for too long. The goal of the shut down was to slow down the virus, it was never to eradicate it, and I am pretty certain that it was never to permanently shut down churches either.

As far as I can see, governments are mostly doing their best, with the information they have, and the varying points of view on how to deal with the situation, through trial and error - and yes there will be errors - to keep deaths to a minimum, (as a pro-life people, we Catholics should appreciate this) and as far as possible, protect the general public. Most of us will likely get the disease but, by slowing down the rate at which we catch it, presumably, those of us who need urgent care will have access to that care from health professionals who are neither burnt out nor busy with hundreds of other similar patients.

Things are already starting to reopen. I will just sit here and wait for the rest to reopen. I am just thankful that I am not in the position to make the decisions for the general population myself, and thus I am spared the criticism on all sides that it is either being done all wrong, that too much is being done or that not enough is being done. Who am I to complain? None of the rest of us would find the perfect solution that no one could find fault with either. To be honest, not even Jesus, were he head of the government right now, be able to implement any kind of policy without having half the population criticizing it for one reason or for the exact opposite reason. These are difficult times, no one has a perfect solution, no one really knows much about this virus, and I think that exceptional understanding should be granted towards those who do have to make the decisions.

In the meantime, we can learn from the saints about the spiritual desert, about individual meditation, the hermit's life and more. All of these things are great ways in which to grow in faith while waiting for churches to reopen to the public again.

A Comparison of Two Canadian Authors Whose Works have Inspired Me

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Thu, 21 May 2020 15:59:00 +0000

Farley Mowat and Lucy Maud Montgomery

(This was originally written for an English Composition class I had this past winter)

What Canadian child has not grown up either laughing over the antics of Mutt, the dog that wouldn’t be, or at all the trouble Anne (with an E) Shirley got into, growing up at Green Gables? Farley Mowat and Lucy Maud Montgomery are two internationally renowned Canadian authors. However, they grew up in very different circumstances, in different places and at different times; this influenced their writing as we shall see. Both authors wrote endearing, sometimes funny, sometimes downright hilarious stories that have warmed the hearts of Canadians, as well as people around the globe, and are well worth the read, especially if you want a glimpse of what it is to be Canadian. Here, we will take a short look at their personal lives, the kinds of books they wrote, and their writing style.

Lucy Maud Montgomery was born in 1874 and grew up on Prince Edward Island, with her grandparents. Her mother died of tuberculosis when Lucy was very young, and her father left her with her maternal grandparents to raise her. Lucy missed out on the affection of her parents; her grandparents did not particularly provide the affection she needed. As a young woman, she became a schoolteacher in Cavendish, but at the death of her grandfather returned home to care for her grandmother for the next 13 years. It was during those years that Anne of Green Gables was written and finally published. After the death of her grandmother, she married the Reverend Ewan Macdonald, a Presbyterian minister and moved to Leaksdale, Ontario, where she continued to write short stories, poems, articles and novels. Lucy died in 1942 in Toronto, Ontario and was buried in Cavendish, P.E.I. close to her childhood home.

Lucy Maud Montgomery

Many of Lucy Maud Montgomery’s well-known books are about orphans such as herself. Anne of Green Gables is the most famous one, but also well known is Emily of New Moon. Her main characters are mostly girls, most of whom do not quite fit into the society of the time. She wrote of imaginative dreamers, social outcasts and independent spinsters who overcame their differences and made a place for themselves in the world.

Lucy Maud Montgomery’s writing style is introspective, or introverted. She focuses on the personality of people, their dreams, their inner thoughts and the development of their character. Her writing is also somewhat of a critique of society; women are more than just homemakers, practical and sensible. Women can have dreams, intelligence and imagination. They can be people of influence.

Farley Mowat, on the other hand, was born in Belleville, Ontario in 1921. When he was still a young boy, he lived for several years in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan with both of his parents. His father was an avid hunter, and Farley himself spent long hours on the banks of the Saskatoon River near his home, as well as out on the prairies. As a boy, he spent a lot of time observing animals, and as an adult he travelled all over Canada, especially to remote areas, to study animals in the wild. It was when he came back from a two year trip to the Arctic that he began his career as a writer. Farley Mowat died in 2014 in Cobourg, Ontario.

Farley Mowatt

Many of Farley Mowat’s books are based on his own experiences as a child or an adult: The Dog who Wouldn’t Be, Owls in the Family, The Barrens, Never Cry Wolf, The Boat that Wouldn’t Float, to name a few. The main character of his books is often himself, or some other boy and the theme is almost always nature, animals, remote peoples and the wild.

Farley Mowat’s writing style is much more descriptive of the outside world, unlike Lucy Maud Montgomery, he may not be focused on the interior life, however, his observations of animals and animal behaviour are very perceptive and at times, downright hilarious. His style is very lighthearted, humorous and easy to read.

These two authors, as different as they may be, represent the differing landscapes and personalities of Canada. They are a definite must-read.

Bibliography

“About Farley Mowat | Farley Mowat First Editions.” n.d. Accessed March 15, 2020. https://farleymowat.ca/about-farley-mowat/.

“About L. M. Montgomery | L. M. Montgomery Institute.” n.d. Accessed March 15, 2020. https://www.lmmontgomery.ca/about/lmm/her-life.

101 Reasons to be happy, Reason number sixty-six

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Thu, 21 May 2020 15:15:00 +0000

Words! Descriptive words, funny words, old words, new slang... The history behind the words, the culture, the imagination...

I am currently studying translation at Concordia University in Montreal. One of my classes was on the influence of the French language on the English language in Québec. In that class, we not only saw borrowings from the French language, such as "dépanneur" or "méchoui" for example, we also looked at Canadianisms. Words that are commonly used in the English language around the world, but that ALSO have a specific Canadian use (meaning.) Here are a few examples:

Canadianisms

To table – bring forward for discussion or consideration at a meeting (parliament)

ROC – Rest of Canada (parts of Canada outside of Québec)

Have-not province – province whose per capita tax revenue falls below a certain average level, and is entitled to receive equalization payments from the federal government

Drop the gloves – to remove one’s gloves (in hockey) to demonstrate willingness to fight

Nunavummiut – the people inhabiting the territory of Nunavut

To stickhandle – 1. skilfully control the puck with the stick, 2. manoeuvre skilfully around

MNA – Member of the National Assembly

To download – 2. To shift or relegate responsibilities or costs for (a program) from one level of government to a lower one

Javex – chlorine bleach

Acclamation – the act or instance of election by virtue of being the sole candidate (politics)

Hat-trick – the scoring of three goals, points, etc by one person during a game

Riding – a district whose voters elect a representative member to a legislative body; a constituency or electoral district

We were asked by our professor to come up with a text that used 6 of the above words. Here is mine:

Canadianisms and Regionalisms - The GreenWorld IT Story

John was elected representative of the GreenWorld IT department by acclamation. No one else wanted the job, they were all introverts and proud geeks who preferred to be behind their computers. The first thing John would have to do was meet with the big boss’s secretary Gilda Blomstrom and finagle a way to get in to see the big boss’s assistant. He figured he could find a way to the big boss after that.

Gilda Blomstrom was a no-nonsense woman of an indecipherable age whose canary yellow hair looked like it had been bleached with Javex. She immediately barraged John with a hundred questions. He skilfully stickhandled his way around those questions he did not want to answer and somehow managed to turn things around to imply that she was inviting him in to see Mr. Knockbottom, the assistant. He quickly made his way past her before she realized what he’d done.

Mr. Knockbottom had a tiny pencil moustache, slicked back hair, and was dressed in a tight, grey, pinstriped business suit. He rose immediately to his feet and demanded to know what John was doing there. John wanted to drop the gloves right there, and wipe the pompous sneer off of Mr. Knockbottom’s face. Instead, he gave him his most fake, friendly smile and proceeded to very politely let him know how things stood in the IT department. Seeing the urgency of the situation, Mr. Knockbottom grudgingly let him through to see the big boss.

The big boss was a tiny man, barely 5 foot 3, and hardly visible behind his big desk. John proceeded to disclose the complaints of the IT department, punctuated by comments from Mr. Knockbottom. He then presented the big boss with a list of proposals, which, to his relief, the big boss readily agreed to.

John returned to the dark basement offices which were the IT department, and his co-workers gathered around him. “Did you manage to talk to Gilda Blomstrom?” They asked.

“Hat trick!” John proudly announced. “I managed to talk to all three and got what we want!” The office immediately erupted into much back thumping and cheering.

101 Reasons to be happy, Reason number sixty-five

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Wed, 25 Mar 2020 02:29:00 +0000

Gin and Tonic

Gin & Tonic

Kniteologically Possessed

noreply@blogger.com (Jeanne) — Tue, 24 Mar 2020 23:18:00 +0000

You’ll need to read one or both of the following articles in order to understand this post. Cast Off - How knitters Turned Nasty and Knitting's Infinity War Part III - Showdown at Yarningham

Talk about #ideologicallypossessed as Jordan Peterson calls it:

“Ideology is a much-abused word. Many who bandy about this term are under the mistaken notion that ideology is synonymous with strongly holding to philosophical or theological truths. On the contrary, ideology is, instead, an intellectual system of ideas or rigid abstract formulas mixed with scientific jargon and some empirical facts that claims knowledge about reaching perfection in the temporal order. ” - George Marlin, “Catholicism: Not Ideology”.

Ideologies tend to use one group of people as the scapegoats. In Nazi Germany, it was the Jews, in the Soviet Union, it was the Bourgeoisie.

Ideologies also turn people on the same side against each other. In the Soviet Union, people were sent to the Gulag for the silliest reasons. Because they weren’t socialist enough.

Ideologies tend to worship their ideal and want everyone else to do the same. Anyone who is not a purist is sent to the Gulag. Heck, even those who are purists are sent to the Gulag on pretenses.

Ideologies tend to hold to the belief that if only everyone held to the same ideology, it would be Heaven on earth. But you can’t impose things on other groups of people! This is what caused problems with Black slaves and the forced assimilation of Indigenous peoples in the first place! The belief that if these people were not like Europeans then they were somehow inferior or insignificant or even sub-human! Turning the tables around and cancelling out so-called white people is doing the exact same thing. It won’t get you anywhere.

Earth is never going to be Heaven. There isn’t an ideology that’s going to make it so. There is always going to be suffering because that’s life. Stuff happens, people die, people betray you, natural disasters happen. And you make the best of it. And you realize that you are stronger than all that. You can’t change anyone else, you can ONLY CHANGE YOURSELF. To quote Dr. Peterson: “Set your house in order before you criticize the world. ” (12 Rules for Life - I recommend reading them) If enough people work on themselves to be the best people they can be, maybe that will make society tolerable.

Calling out people for actual acts of racism is one thing. To completely cancel out a whole group of people as “not having a say” in anything (because, gasp, they dared to ask people to be considerate…) is a whole other thing.

To reference my brother Cecil, there will never be reconciliation until BOTH sides view the other as human beings, worthy of dignity and respect. Not only that, we have to look at them as individuals, not as a “group. ” The radical polarization that is currently going on right now is ridiculous. You’re putting labels on people. You can’t label people as this or that because they wear the colour blue or listen to folk music. You can’t label people as this or that because they disagree with you on this one political thing, even though they agree with you on all the others. You can’t label people as this or that because they would like you to be considerate, but your ideology requires you to be rude and inconsiderate in order to make a point. You can’t label people because they’re the wrong colour.

THIS is actually pretty scary. If this is the only other option besides Trump, honestly, I prefer a buffoon, an internet troll like him, to spending 10-25 years in some gulag, because I'm not “woke” enough. Or simply because I’m “white. ”