Layer 518 . . . Feminism, Burchill, Friendship, Pampering, Whining, and Masters of the Media Universe

.
Julie Burchill has always been a loose cannon - a kind of anarcho-feminist. Recently she popped up (again) in the Observer with this interesting column on women, men and friendship:

Spare me from the whining women who are giving feminism a bad name

The 'girls' night in' antics on Celebrity Big Brother highlighted all that is wrong with female friendship

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/29/julie-burchill-female-friendship-feminism

I have experienced jealousy, possessiveness, verbal abuse and violence from men, but I have also experienced jealousy, possessiveness, verbal abuse and violence from women, usually when I failed to respond to their advances. 

There are aspects to broad-bonding that make me feel I'd rather be a surrendered wife for an evening than have a girls' night in. At least you'd get some proper sex out of it.

"Pampering", for a start. When did women whose looks are not their living start conducting themselves like the simpering inmates of an Ottoman empire seraglio? Tellingly, spending a huge proportion of one's income on preening oneself for men's approval ("I'm doing it for me, not for men" – oh, give it a rest, you lying cow!) as a leisure option has gone hand in hand with the rise of ceaseless recreational moaning about men, and if I thought that I had to spend three-quarters of my time and money turning myself into a hairless, poreless living doll in order to get someone's affection, I'd probably resent them too. 

But the cult of pampering – like fashion – is not a thing that straight men make women do. Straight men couldn't care less – they generally just want women to have a wash, bring beer, show up and strip off. Women do it to themselves.

Sadly, a lot of what passes for feminism these days is just moaning about men, congratulating ourselves on nothing in particular, and mocking them for being big kids while doing everything we can to keep them that way.

But moaning about men doesn't make you a feminist – it just makes you a moaner who can't get along with men for reasons that are probably at least as much to do with your failings, flaws and foibles as they are with some imagined horridness on the part of men. 

Lots of women love to accuse men of being immature when the fellow in question displays a reluctance to "commit" – though what is childish about being self-sufficient and showing understandable reluctance to throw oneself into a smothery relationship with an obviously unhappy fellow human being (because surely only extremely unhappy people look to others for salvation) escapes me somewhat.

As a kid, I grew to define what I didn't want my life to be like by sitting behind moaning women on the bus, hearing them bang on about their aches and pains, both real and imagined. Too many allegedly smart women these days have merely substituted males for maladies and seem hellbent on moaning their lives away rather than changing them.

Einstein said that a definition of insanity was doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results, and I think of this when I hear a friend describing men – yet again – as fuckwits. Look, hon, I want to say, if men don't suit you, go celibate. Go lesbo (but not with me, thanks) but stop moaning!

The older I get, the more I find that the friendships I treasure, which leave me wanting more, are those based around doing specific things – from the living hell of kettlebell classes to the transcendent bliss of learning Hebrew – rather than just sitting around shooting the breeze in a gender-specific environment. Because even the most well-moisturised girls' night in tends to trickle down to a pity party as the years take their toll.

Still, it's just a bit of fun, right? All girls together! Put on the Adele records, break out the cava and let's pamper ourselves stupid. But there will be tears before bedtime, more likely than not, and men for once won't be to blame. The party's over and we did it to ourselves.

.........................................................

Over the past few years Oxzen has banged on somewhat about economics, finance and banking - subjects not exactly guaranteed to thrill or even interest the average blog reader. Paul Mason, Newsnight's economics editor, has become a particular favourite of this blog for his work on BBC2 and for his articles in the Guardian. How interesting, therefore, to come across this excellent 3-page spread in the Observer Review:

New masters of the media universe

Before the global meltdown, financial news was strictly for geeks and struggled to get on the news. Now, financial correspondents have become celebrities

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jan/29/business-economics-journalists-reporting-celebrities

by Elizabeth Day

Over the last four years, since the global financial crisis was triggered by the bursting of the US housing bubble and the domino-like fall of a series of over-leveraged, under-regulated banks, something curious has happened to business coverage. Where once it was the preserve of financial policy wonks and secretive, high-powered bankers who liked to discuss credit default swaps over breakfast, now it has emerged, blinking, into the mainstream.

We are, it seems, a nation now obsessed by business and economics. In March, the writer John Lanchester publishes Capital, an epic novel examining the fall-out from the economic crash. A six-part docudrama about the city, produced by the team behind the psychological crime drama Luther, is being developed by the BBC.

Paul Mason, Newsnight's economics editor, says: "Our audience research has shown that despite the fact that we've massively upped our coverage of the economy, the audience wants even more. For our audience, who are very professional, Volvo-driving types, they want to see the big business people grilled."

Stories about the economy – the bailouts, the losses, the bankers' bonuses – have jumped to the top of the news agenda, replacing the slots previously occupied by political, sport or showbiz scoops.

For the first time in living memory, business correspondents are basking in the warm glow of the limelight. Every one of them I speak to recounts their own anecdote about the moment they realised their specialism had suddenly become cool.

What has driven this upsurge in interest? There have, after all, been recessions and bank collapses before (albeit not on the same scale). But the current financial crisis seems to have captured the public imagination in a particularly potent fashion.

According to Peston, the answer lies in the fact that we are now faced with an economic implosion . . .

"Suddenly it became clear in 2007, when the markets were closing down and then Northern Rock collapsed, that what was happening in these funny organisations called 'banks' mattered to all of us because, as taxpayers, we're bailing them out," he says. "We're getting poorer as a result of their actions. People just got it overnight, about how important understanding business is."

People have realised that the way money goes round the world really matters.

"As journalists, we had the immediate short-term issue, which was that people needed to understand the recession. But I like to think there is a wider civic issue too, because it's outrageous how long the public at large have been so laidback about understanding what goes on."

"It's like food: we used not to care so much about how it was produced but now we want to know what goes in it. In the same way, people need to understand that finance is about understanding how the world operates."

The desire of vast swathes of the television audience to get a grip on what is happening means there is an ever-more pressing need for a communicator to act as go-between. In the conjoined spheres of business and economics, the role of the correspondent is paramount.

Faisal Islam agrees: "At the heart of the financial crisis is complexity and people are looking for ways in which that complexity can be decoded. It poses a challenge for journalists because, essentially, complexity has been used and abused by financiers and politicians to mask what they didn't know and we, as journalists, have to explain that.

"We have to get to the bottom of what really happened at RBS or HBOS because the people who caused it really haven't been held to account."

It helps, of course, that many of the disgraced financiers are such extraordinary characters – there is nothing better designed to leaven a dry discussion of off-balance sheet securitisation than a Bonfire of the Vanities-style tale of excess, ego and self-destruction. In the UK, there is Sir Fred Goodwin, the disgraced Royal Bank of Scotland chief executive, who lavished £350m on new office headquarters, enjoyed the use of a private jet and admitted having an affair with a senior colleague in the run-up to the bank's collapse. After RBS's £45bn taxpayer-funded rescue, Goodwin left with a £342,500 annual pension.

In America, there is Dick Fuld, the former CEO of Lehman Brothers, modern art enthusiast, real-estate millionaire and a man with a manner so gruff and brutal, he was nicknamed "the Gorilla" on Wall Street.

"It's almost like a soap opera you get locked into," says Jeff Randall. "If I tell the story with dividends and yields, I've lost you, but if I tell the story of Fred Goodwin, it becomes more engaging… There are all these characters who can be power-mad, slightly crazy, venal, weak – all the human foibles – and that would make a good drama, except these people were playing for real and for higher stakes."

.................................................

With friends like Facebook…

Facebook's reaction to proposals to tighten up on privacy rights shows its lack of respect for others

by John Naughton

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jan/29/facebook-data-privacy-rights-regulation

Facebook made this announcement on its official blog: "Last year we introduced timeline, a new kind of profile that lets you highlight the photos, posts and life events that help you tell your story. Over the next few weeks, everyone will get timeline. When you get timeline, you'll have seven days to preview what's there now. This gives you a chance to add or hide whatever you want before anyone else sees it." Note the authoritarian tone: "Everyone will get timeline." Translation: you'll get it whether you like it or not. We will return to this later.

The truth is that companies such as Facebook are basically the corporate world's equivalent of sociopaths, that is to say individuals who are completely lacking in conscience and respect for others. In her book The Sociopath Next Door, Martha Stout of Harvard medical school tries to convey what goes on in the mind of such an individual. "Imagine," she writes, "not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern of the wellbeing of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish, lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken. And pretend that the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem to accept without question, like gullible fools."

Welcome to the Facebook mindset.

.

Layer 50 Funerals, Fascists, Ties, Drips and Plumbers.

.
I don’t know anyone who gives a damn about international motorsport, or its governing body (the FIA), or the FIA’s president, a certain Max Mosely, 68 years old son of former British fascist leader and prominent Hitler supporter Oswald Mosely. Nor does anyone I know care about Bernie Ecclestone, billionaire dwarf and egomaniacal dictator of the Formula 1 Grand Prix circus.

So why bother writing about them? I find the politics of these very wealthy individuals and organisations very interesting. This Max Mosely must be some guy. As indeed must tough guy Bernie. It’s always hilarious to see Bernie, who must be 5ft 3 and in his seventies, still with his seventies haircut, strolling around a Grand Prix grid, linked arms with some fit young amazon. Go Bernie! The Hugh Hefner of racing drivers.

To paraphrase Mrs Merton, “Tell me Miss, what is it you find so attractive about billionaire Bernie?”

Ever since he was exposed in the tabloids for his enjoyment of sado-masochistic sex with groups of prostitutes dressed as Nazis, Mosely’s sanity and suitability to be the head of an international organization has been somewhat open to question. So much so that the FIA was forced to hold a vote this week as to whether he should continue as its president.

Now I can see that it may not have been easy growing up with, and living with, the thought that your dad is, or was, a prominent Hitler-loving fascist. Especially in a country that sacrificed hundreds of thousands of lives and most of its national wealth in defeating Hitler and the Nazis.

And the idea that some old boy should use some of his wealth to purchase some harmless private fun/therapy in an SM dungeon isn’t so bad when you consider there’s no actual crime taking place and apparently no victims. Seems like some perfectly legitimate wealth redistribution. He may even have been very generous with his girls.

But it’s interesting that there were several F1 teams who have said very loudly that he should be put out to pasture, or be forced to resign, to spend more time with his Nazi whores, if that’s what he enjoys. The more vociferous and anti-Max of those F1 teams appear to be Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Ferrari, Honda and Yamaha. So that’s the entire set of the former Axis countries, Germany, Italy and Japan - lined up against fascist nutters and dictators being in prominent posts and positions of power and authority.

I don’t see this as something ironic, and I don’t suspect there’s anything hypocritical or anti-British going on here. I do think that Germany, Italy and Japan have had to go through decades of shame and self-flagellation as a result of their fascist, militaristic and brutal past. They’ve needed to think deeply about their politics, and about political systems that transgress human rights and decent human values. And they recognise that for ethical and moral reasons no-one should associate himself with even the trappings of Nazism and fascism if they wish to retain any credibility and integrity, and be considered suitable for responsible and representative roles in society.

Even a thicko like the party-loving squaddie and ‘war on terror’ enthusiast Prince Harry now gets this particular point. But not our Max, apparently. He’s decided to brazen it out, and he’s apparently got the support of the overwhelming majority of FIA members, who voted for him to remain in post. Well - better a fascist you know, whom you like and trust, than one you don’t.

What do these people require of their leader? Probity? No. Integrity? No. Though he may well have lots of these qualities, in many ways, for all I know.

People in power, for the most part right-wing rich people, mostly require their leaders and representatives to be hard-faced, stony-hearted tough guys who know how to play hard-ball in their interests. I guess Max fits the job description, and they can’t bear to let him go.

Or maybe I’m being very unfair. Maybe he’s just a very clubbable and hospitable old boy who has lots of like-minded friends with fascist leanings, friends and associates whom he’s cultivated over the years, who are standing by him in his hour of need. Sieg Heil!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Back to synchronicity. I was listening to a news report just now about the number of men wearing ties in the US dropping to 6%. Sales of ties have apparently fallen by 50%. Those tie-wearers must be buying them by the hundred to maintain even 50% of sales, by my reckoning.

Yesterday, for the first time in months, I needed to think about ties, in order to find my black tie, to wear for a funeral. I’d forgotten where my tie collection is currently located. Literally forgotten, ever since I carried out my last domestic re-organization, all those months ago. And I’d also forgotten how many of the damned things I still have hanging around the place. I’m sure I’ll never wear more than 3 or 4 of them ever again, if that.

Time to think of 101 uses for an old tie. I reckon Max Moseley could think of a few. Or maybe I should just throw them away? But hold on. I bet there’s a new generation of youngsters coming along who will think wearing antique ties is really funky, once there have been a couple of generations who have stopped wearing them.

Maybe I’ll have a grandson one day who will appreciate grandad’s silk ties. I remember a time in the 1960’s when I was happily tie-dying and recycling my grandad’s old button-up vests! I was wearing them with pride, as shirts, thinking I looked really cool. And thinking about funerals, I must sort out my will, and put the ties into the care of a Trust.

I feel a song coming on. The Ties They Are A’Changin’. Tie Waits For No Man.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

The funeral gathering was blessed with beautiful sunny, warm weather. Everyone was able to sit out in the garden and enjoy the return of the sun. It would have been very different if we’d had the previous day’s cold, dull, wet weather.

My friend’s family are all delightful people; incredibly warm, humorous, thoughtful and civilized. It’s so interesting how the actual funeral in the morning can be so full of mourning, grief and the pain of loss, but in the afternoon, when good people who rarely see one another are gathered together en masse and able to chat and enjoy one another’s company, it becomes a completely different, a completely opposite sort of gathering, full of laughter, positive energy and high spirits. Which is how a funeral ‘wake’ ought to be.

When my three cousins lost both their mother and father within months of each other a couple of years ago I made up my mind that we should try to meet up as a group as often as possible. We’ve done it a couple of times, but not often enough. I need to get back to instigating those gatherings. I really like my extended family - my many cousins, nephews, nieces, aunts and uncles. We’re all far too ‘busy’, and we live too far apart these days, but I really don’t just want to see my family together at funerals.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

In the middle of the funeral gathering, in the middle of the afternoon, someone noticed there was water dripping through the kitchen ceiling. Immediately the cry went up, “Who’s in the bathroom? Who’s left the tap running?”

As it turned out, no-one was, and no-one had. There was no evidence at all of any water leaking or overflowing in the bathroom above the kitchen. Panic. What the hell was going on? Meanwhile the drip had turned into something much more sinister - a great sagging blister of water, threatening to burst and to collapse the kitchen ceiling. The kitchen had been the hub and the nerve centre of this food- and drink-focused afternoon.

The family carried out a quick audit of those present to see whether anyone was qualified to take charge of the situation. Nobody was. There was an electrician, but he didn’t exactly inspire confidence. “Call an emergency plumber!” “No - call the insurance company!” “Take all the food and drink out of the kitchen!” What to do?

In the event an elderly neighbour somehow appeared on the scene, an uninvited guest, armed with spanners, a stepladder, a sharp knife, bits of timber, etc. Everyone stood back deferentially. Thank God - someone with some practical skills and know-how.

We had journalists, educationalists, hairdressers, musicians, students, cabinet makers, professional fund-raisers, and lots of retired people representing other professions - all useless. I tried to make myself useful by emptying out a dustbin in the garden and positioning it under the leak.

Eventually the ceiling came down, of course, and the dustbin was at least useful for carrying away the debris, bit by bit. Maybe it was better that it happened when there were lots of family and friends around to share in the disaster, caused, as it turned out, by a badly-soldered pipe in the ceiling whose leakage had chosen this particular day to announce its long-term insidious effects.

As someone said, we’ll all look back in the future and say, “Remember the day of the funeral, when the ceiling fell down?” And laugh.

-----------------------------------------------------------

And finally, the boy who cried wolf . . .

It turned out that one of my friend’s nephews, who’s known to be a bit of a joker and a piss-taker, a lad with lots of wild, frizzy hair, had seen some drips coming from the ceiling the previous day, and had mentioned it to his mother . . .

Layer 39 The Consolations of Philosophy

.




Life In A Box

My cat lives in a box:
These days she never rocks
Or rolls on grassy knolls;
Though she’ll sometimes stroll
When the sun is shining
But soon starts pining
For life in her box.

These days I live in a box:
Protected by doorlocks,
Avoiding the pain,
All the slings, arrows and rocks,
The shocks and the wounds
Of outrageous fortune
Outside my box.

My cat and me:
We see things similarly,
We prefer lives of simplicity,
Predictability and pleasure - you see
Epicureans are we:
Happy and free
Enjoying lives in a box.

February 2008


Hamlet III 1

To be, or not to be:
That is the question -
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune . . .

For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong . . . ?

Suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune is something I’ve thought a lot about these past 12months. Sooner or later I’ll make an effort to write something about them, and about the annus miserablis of 2007.

Epicurus

Alain de Botton’s “The Consolations of Philosophy” is a terrific book, and was made into an excellent TV series. And speaking of rocking and rolling, which I’m still very keen on, someone says on the back cover of TCOP, “No doubt about it, philosophy is the new rock and roll”. Really?
OK. Let’s rock.

The book begins with the death of Socrates, put to death by the citizens of Athens for failing to worship the gods, for introducing religious novelties, and for corrupting the young men of Athens. And to think that we reckon WE live in intolerant times.

He could have pleaded for his life and promised to change his ways, of course, but he calmly told the jury, “I shall never stop practising philosophy, and exhorting you, and elucidating the truth for everyone I meet.” And so he died for his beliefs and his principles. What a guy.

Now as it happens, I was born on a day that, according to a certain book I own, is The Day of Glaring Truth. This apparently means that people born on this day see themselves as representing a cause, and as such are idealists, no matter how negative the material they are revealing.

Little bit of self-revelation there. “They are not schooled or scholarly trained individuals but rather people who have learned through the hard lessons of experience. They can assume scholarly status through their own form of thorough study, and in their field they can come to be regarded as experts. It is usually difficult to disagree with their arguments since they are able to amass such an impressive body of knowledge to back up what they say.”

Their symbol is The Empress, who represents creative intelligence, and embodies mankind's dreams, hopes and aspirations. Strengths - curious and knowledgeable. Weaknesses - judgemental and accusatory.

Oh yes, j'accuse. I might change the name of my blog to The Glaring Truth.

However, I come to bury Socrates, not to praise him. What I’m interested in here is Epicureanism. And wisdom. Philo = love. Sophia = wisdom. And I'm interested in happiness. And the meaning of life.

Epicurus emphasised the importance of sensual pleasure. “Pleasure is the beginning and the goal of a happy life. I don’t know how I shall conceive of the good if I take away the pleasures of taste, if I take away sexual pleasure, if I take away the pleasure of hearing, if I take away the sweet emotions that are caused by the sight of beautiful forms.”

By ‘emotions’ I believe he was really talking about awe and wonder, and what Zen calls satori, and talking about how we can access metaphysical, spiritual, sublime revelation, and experience satori, by using all our senses.

In my view the use of our physical senses can transport us into metaphysical realms, and the greatest happiness and feelings of well-being can arise from ‘ordinary’ sensual experiences. Perhaps even looking contemplatively at a photograph, for example, let alone a great painting. Awe and wonder.

According to TCOP, at the heart of Epicureanism is the thought that most of us are as bad at intuitively answering the question “What will make me happy?” as “What will make me healthy?” It seems the task of philosophy, according to Epicurus, is to help us interpret our indistinct pulses of distress and desire and thereby save us from mistaken schemes for happiness.

Epicurus lived in a simple house a few miles from the centre of Athens, ate simple food, drank water rather than wine, and was happy with a dinner of bread, vegetables and a handful of olives. He had come to some striking conclusions, says TCOP, about what actually made life pleasurable. The essential ingredients may be elusive, but they’re not very expensive.

1. Friendship.

His house was essentially a commune, with common rooms for meals and conversations. Maybe he was the first commune-ist.

TCOP says the household of Epicurus resembled a large family, but without sullenness or sense of confinement, only sympathy and gentleness.

“In small comments, many of them teasing, our friends reveal they know our foibles and accept them, and so, in turn, accept we have a place in the world,” says de Botton.

“True friends do not evaluate us according to worldly criteria, it is the core self they are interested in; like ideal parents their love for us remains unaffected by our appearance or position in the social hierarchy, and so we have no qualms in dressing in old clothes or revealing we have made little money this year.”

A handful of true friends can deliver the love and respect that even a fortune may not.

2. Freedom

TCOP says “Epicurus and his friends made a second radical innovation. In order not to have to work for people they didn’t like, and answer to potentially humiliating whims, they removed themselves from employment in the commercial world of Athens. (‘We must free ourselves from the prison of everyday affairs and politics.’) They began what could best have been described as a commune, accepting a simpler way of life in exchange for independence. They would have less money but would never again have to follow the commands of odious superiors.”

They bought an allotment near their house, just outside the old Dipylon gate, and grew a range of vegetables. “Their diet was neither luxurious nor abundant, but it was flavoursome and nutritious,” says TCOP. Epicurus said, ‘The wise man chooses not the greatest quantity of food but the most pleasant.’

“Simplicity did not affect the friends’ sense of status because, by distancing themselves from the values of Athens, they had ceased to judge themselves on a material basis. There was no need to be embarrassed by bare walls, and no benefit in showing off gold. Among a group of friends living outside the political and economic centre of the city, there was - in the financial sense - nothing to prove.”

3. Thought

“There are few better remedies for anxiety than thought. In writing a problem down or airing it in conversation we let its essential aspects emerge. And by knowing its character, we remove, if not the problem itself, then its secondary, aggravating characteristics: confusion, displacement, surprise.”

De Botton says there was much encouragement to think in the Garden, as Epicurus’s community became known. Many of the friends were writers. “There must have been unbroken opportunities to examine problems with people as intelligent as they were sympathetic.”

They were especially concerned to analyse their anxieties about money, illness, death and the supernatural. The spiritual aspect of life seems to have been a key issue. Epicurus argued that there is nothing but oblivion after death, and that ‘what is no trouble when it arrives is an idle worry in anticipation’. It’s senseless to worry about a state one will never experience. “There is nothing dreadful in life for the man who has truly comprehended that there is nothing terrible in not living.”

Wealth in itself should not make people miserable. “But the crux of Epicurus’s argument is that if we have money without friends, without freedom and an analysed life, we will never be truly happy. And if we have them, but are missing the fortune, we will never be unhappy.”

---------------------------------------------------------------

Social injustice and economic turmoil may deny us prosperity, but this may be foregone without great regrets if we have the things that are essential for happiness.

Epicurus divided our needs into three categories.

a ) Natural and Necessary.

Friends . . . Freedom . . . Thought

Food . . . Shelter . . . Clothes

b) Natural but Unnecessary

Grand house . . . Private baths . . . Banquets

Servants . . . Meat . . . Fish

c) Neither Natural nor Necessary

Fame . . . Power

Happiness is thus dependent on some complex psychological goods, but relatively independent of material ones. These ideas are provocative for those who equate happiness with the fruition of grand financial schemes, and misery with a modest income.

“Money’s capacity to deliver happiness is already present in small salaries and will not rise with the largest. We will not cease being happy with a greater outlay, but we will not, Epicurus insisted, surpass levels of happiness already available to those on a limited income.”

To illustrate this point de Botton suggests we look at the need, or otherwise, of renting an expensive villa for holidays. It’s possible to spend money on a villa and still not be happy, especially if we feel isolated and friendless. Whereas we can be happy in a tent if we’re with someone we love and feel appreciated by.

True needs may seem very different from confused initial desires. “The possession of the greatest riches does not resolve the agitation of the soul nor give birth to remarkable joy.”

De Botton says, “Objects mimic in a material dimension what we require in a psychological one”.

He also says, “Our weak understanding of our needs is aggravated by what Epicurus termed the ‘idle opinions’ of those around us, which do not reflect the natural hierarchy of our needs, emphasising luxury and riches, seldom friendship, freedom and thought. It is in the interests of commercial enterprises to skew the hierarchy of our needs, to promote a material vision of the good and downplay an unsaleable one. And the way we’re enticed is through the sly association of superfluous objects with our other, forgotten needs.”

A jeep instead of freedom. A house instead of friendship. A swimming pool instead of thought and conversation.

De Botton points out that we receive little encouragement to attend to modest gratifications - playing with a child, conversations with a friend, an afternoon in the sun, cheese on fresh bread.
Lucretius wrote verse extolling the virtues of simplicity and inexpensive things.

“People may recline in company on soft grass by a running stream under the branches of a tall tree and refresh their bodies pleasurably at small expense. Better still if the weather smiles on them, and the season of the year stipples the green grass with flowers.”

In sum, we need a home (“a hut”); friends; to avoid superiors, patronisation, infighting and competition; we need time to think and mediatate and enjoy conversations; basic clothing; a sense of humour and spontaneity.

All of these are seen as requirements for Zen living as well.

De Botton concludes: “Happiness may be difficult to attain. The obstacles are not primarily financial.”

How come I never heard about Epicurus, let alone Zen, when I was in secondary school? And how come these philosophies are not required study in the National Curriculum?

The Consolations of Philosophy. Penguin 2001.

http://www.alaindebotton.com/philosophy.asp


--------------------------------------------------------------

The full Shakespeare text:

Hamlet III, 1

To be, or not to be:
That is the question -
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them?
To die: to sleep;
No more: and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd.
To die, to sleep;
To sleep; perchance to dream; ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil;
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life,
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong . . . ?

Layer 20 Fully Evolved Humans

.
A Positive View of Human Potential

If we’re successful in helping children to develop personal, social, emotional and spiritual intelligences, where does it all lead? What do fully evolved human beings look like?

The humanistic psychologist Abraham Maslow studied people whom he regarded as exceptional human beings, and described the characteristics of ‘self-actualised’ people. The actualisation process means the development or discovery of the true self and the development of existing or latent potential.

• They tend not to be overly religious in the orthodox sense of the word, but have a belief in a meaningful universe and a life which could be called spiritual. Their ideas of right and wrong are based on their own experience rather than blind acceptance of social conventions. Nevertheless, the characteristics of self-actualised HBs are very similar to the ideals and values taught by the great religions - “the transcendence of self, the fusion of the true, the good and the beautiful, contribution to others, wisdom, honesty and naturalness, the transcendence of selfish, greedy and personal motivations . . . the decrease of hostility, cruelty and destructiveness; the increase of friendliness, kindness, etc”
• Fully developed individuals have a kind of humility - the ability to listen carefully to others, to admit that they don’t know everything, and an understanding that other people can teach them something.
• The self-actualised perception is less distorted by desires, anxieties, fears, hopes and false optimism or pessimism.
• Self-actualizing people are dedicated to some work, task, duty or vocation which they consider to be important.
• Creativity is a universal characteristic of a self-actualised person. Creativeness is almost synonymous with health, self-actualization, and full humanness. Characteristics associated with this creativity are flexibility, spontaneity, courage, willingness to make mistakes, openness and humility. This creativity is similar to the creativity of children before they have learned to fear the ridicule of others, while they are able to see things clearly and freshly.
• Self-actualizing people are less inhibited, and therefore more expressive, natural and simple. They are self confident and have self respect. They lack the fear of making mistakes and their flexibility allows them to be able to change as situations change; they are able to break habits, to face indecision and changes without undue stress.
• A characteristic of the self-actualized person is the low degree of self conflict. The more they become unified as an individual the more they see the possibility for more unity in the world.
• These people find happiness in helping others. They enjoy their work, and they enjoy play; their work becomes play.
• They have respect for themselves based on the knowledge that they are competent and adequate. They rely fully on their own capacities. They are the most individualistic members of society and at the same time the most social, friendly and loving. They are governed far more by inner directives - their own nature - and natural needs than by those of their society or their environment. They are less needful of praise, honours, prestige or rewards.
• Self-actualizers have ‘psychological freedom’. They do not need or value unwarranted fame, celebrity or notoriety. They have a feeling of power in the sense that they have a feeling of self-control. They have control of themselves and their destinies; they are not afraid of themselves, ashamed of themselves, or discouraged by their mistakes. It is not that they are perfect; they make mistakes too, but they take them in their stride.
• They are able to make their own decisions - even in the face of contrary popular opinion. They resist their surrounding culture when it does not accord with their own point of view. They can become extremely independent and unconventional when they feel their basic principles are involved.
• For these individuals self-discipline is relatively easy because what they desire to do agrees with what they believe is right. They are responsible because they believe responsibility is rewarding.
• Whereas average humans are motivated by making good their perceived and actual deficiencies in their lives (coping behaviour) - seeking to fulfil basic needs for safety, love, respect and self-esteem - self-actualised individuals are focused mainly on their need to develop their higher potentialities, capacities and intelligences.
• Maslow believed that the term motivation did not really apply to the most mature individuals. They are spontaneous, they are doing what is natural; they are merely expressing themselves.
• They have a deep feeling of kinship with the whole human race. They are capable of friendship with people regardless of race, creed, class, education or political beliefs. “This acceptance of others cuts across political, economic and national boundaries.”
• On the other hand, their circle of friends is usually quite small, involving others who are similar in outlook and ability. They can be very tolerant of others’ shortcomings, and yet they are very intolerant about dishonesty, lying, cheating, cruelty, and hypocrisy. Healthy individuals tend to seek people with similar character traits, such as honesty, sincerity, kindliness and courage. They are less attracted by superficial characteristics and more attracted by someone’s emotional, intellectual and spiritual qualities.
• Healthy individuals are not without problems - they too suffer moments of guilt, anxiety, sadness and self-doubt. Neither are they universally calm and free of temper outbursts. However, they generally exhibit joie de vivre, enthusiasm for life, and a good sense of humour. They enjoy laughter, and enjoy bringing smiles to the faces of others.
• Their relationships are never exploitative. Because they have great respect for themselves they are able to be more respectful to others. “The love that is found in healthy people,” said Maslow, “is much better described in terms of spontaneous admiration and the kind of receptive and understanding awe and enjoyment that we experience when struck by a fine painting.” These people need less love from others and are able to remain alone for long periods, but at the same time they are able to give love - they are more loving people.
• They are attractive and attracted to others, and find it easy to enjoy friendship and intimate relationships without fear. At the same time they are not afraid to be constructively critical of others, to be exponents of ‘tough love’ even, because they consider it to be unloving to let someone go on making the same mistake again and again just because other people don’t have enough courage or caring to tell them.
• Healthy individuals enjoy life more: not that they don’t have pain, sorrow, and troubles, just that they get more out of life. They appreciate it more; they have more interests; they are more aware of beauty in the world.
• They have less fear and anxiety, and more confidence and relaxation. They are far less bothered by feelings of boredom, despair, shame, or lack of purpose. “They spontaneously tend to do right, because that is what they want to do, what they need to do, what they enjoy, what they approve of doing, and what they will continue to enjoy.” This network of positive intercorrelation falls apart into separateness and conflict if someone becomes psychologically sick.
• Putting it another way, “Self-actualising people enjoy life in general and in practically all its aspects, while most other people enjoy only stray moments of triumph, of achievement, or of peak experience.” They never tire of life. They have the capacity to appreciate the sunrise or sunset or relationships or nature again and again.
• The healthy individual shows far less fear than the average adult. Lesser individuals are less influenced by truth, logic, justice, reality and beauty. Healthy individuals do not often feel threatened by the world around them, as they have great confidence in their ability to handle whatever confronts them. They are also unthreatened by the unknown and the mysterious. This is in sharp contrast to the neurotic person’s fear of the unfamiliar and the mysterious. Maslow quotes Albert Einstein as being typical of this fearless attitude: “The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all art and science.” Not only are mature self-actualising individuals less afraid of the external environment, they are also less afraid of themselves. They accept themselves and their natures philosophically, and give them far less consideration than neurotic people.
• People who are more mature and highly (self) developed have the ability to be objective, issue-centred or problem-centred, which involves a certain amount of personal detachment from the problem. Such an attitude, however, can be interpreted as coldness, aloofness, snobbishness, even hostility.
• They have an unusual ability to concentrate, which can cut them off from more mundane matters and lead to so-called absent-mindedness. Since they have fewer ‘problems’ of their own, they tend to be working to solve the problems of society; they have a mission in life. They are more concerned with ends rather than means.
• “They have for human beings in general a deep feeling of identification, sympathy and affection, in spite of the occasional anger, impatience and disgust . . . they have a genuine desire to help the human race.”
• According to Frank Goble, summarising Maslow’s work in his book The Third Force, the very best of humanity are sufficiently philosophical to be patient, and accept slow orderly change. They are apt to be both theoretical and practical.
• They want to see virtue rewarded and cruelty, exploitation and evil penalised. They take pleasure in rewarding, praising and recognising the talents of others.
• They have plenty of self-respect, they do not need love from everyone, and they are willing to make enemies if necessary.
• They also enjoy calm, peace, quiet and relaxation.
• They like to be efficient and effective, and dislike inefficiency. They manage to love the world as it is, while seeing its defects and working to improve them.
• Their excellent perception of reality enables them to see both the good and bad in each situation, and they enjoy solving problems and bringing order out of chaos.
• They are seldom mean or petty or inconsiderate of others, and are able to ignore their faults.
• They enjoy their work and strive to be more efficient, better, neater, simpler and faster.