Jan 15, 2011
A Gift To Be Simple
1-17-11
The shootings in Tucson should direct us to think about heroes and villains. There is an obsession in America to fill in every space on the template of every event. Of course there were heroes that morning, but the people so called in that horrible scene firmly have rejected the honorific. Also to be rejected is the compulsion of some people instantaneously to invent villains. The shooter was villain enough.
Whether we call them heroic, or wise and courageous, two figures impressed us: an older lady and a young man. Patricia Maisch grabbed the second ammunition magazine. Twenty-year-old Daniel Hernandez rushed toward the gunfire, and rendered aid to Rep Giffords in ways that likely kept her from dying. One prevented more killings; the other saved the wounded.
We all have seeds of heroism in us; and, God help us, possibly cowardly tendencies as well. The moment of crisis cannot be scripted. On the other hand, wisdom and bravery are acquired traits. They can be cultivated, and are more worthy of honor than “mere” heroism… especially in a country where athletes and movie stars routinely are called heroes. The term has become cheap.
I am reminded of William James’s observations during the 1906 San Francisco earthquake. He noticed that, in the chaos, a new social order instantly was established. Upper-class bankers, for instance, readily performed menial tasks as they saw the need; conversely, many manual laborers instinctively assumed superior tasks – directing traffic, managing people, assuming responsibilities. None of those acts was merely heroic, they were more: wise, courageous, displaying character. Human nature in the crucible.
I could not escape the thought that the “memorial service” on Wednesday was a stark contrast to the Character Amidst Carnage we all saw Saturday morning. It was a pep rally, with whoops and whistles and chants; not a service. There was more adulation for a celebrity, than grief for the dead, wounded, and survivors.
A pagan ritual with feathers and importuning to Father Sky replaced – not even accompanied – prayers that would have been coherent to 95 per cent of the people, and to their God. Shouts and cheers from the bleachers at inopportune moments were more redolent of rock concerts; and, if he had wanted, the First Celebrity could have stilled the multitudes and returned to the reverent duty at hand.
What we sorely need is fewer theatrics at such events, if, indeed, such events are necessary at all (after all, victims’ churches and families held their own observances). TV spectacles in huge stadiums. Logos created for this service’s hand-outs. T-shirts manufactured for the “memorial service.” Politically correct, and politically hostile, statements to the press. Presidents of universities and of countries asking for “moments of silence.” Silence? Is the word, or the act of, PRAYER radioactive?
That is what we need more of: prayer. Excuse me — Shut up and pray. Simply pray. Where are simple prayers, simple faith, simple services, simple responses, these days?
…’tis a Gift to be simple, after all.
The University of Arizona Orchestra closed the rally with a performance of Simple Gifts, from Aaron Copland’s Appalachian Spring. Specifically, it was an arrangement of the orchestral score by Copland to Martha Graham’s ballet of that name. As such, it was discordant, both musically and in suitability. The secular music is of two lifelong supporters of Communism and the Communist Party; both virulent secularists; Copland a homosexual crusader — the performance, perhaps fine in some contexts, I simply consider out of place at a “memorial service.” Better, if the words and music pleased, to perform a… simple… version of the original work that not many Americans know.
Simple Things did not have its origin with Copland, nor its fate in countless TV commercials. Simple Things is a hymn of the devout Shaker community, written by Elder Joseph Brackett in 1848. The sect’s Christian faith, like their music and their famous furniture, was simple… and the Shakers themselves may be nearly as extinct as admirable Simplicity in America today.
Complicated, choreographed extravaganzas, with everything figured out for us and arranged in every politically correct detail – and spiritual substance left ‘way behind – is not the type of prize to be sought in a Christian Republic like America once was. ‘Tis a Gift to be simple.
Click: A Gift To Be Simple
A beautiful performance of this American hymn by Alison Kraus and violoncellist Yo-Yo Ma… simple, just the two of them.
I didn’t watch the memorial. I can’t even remember what I was doing instead! I don’t know what that says about the event, or me, for that matter. I did find myself wondering, later in the evening, about the kind of pressure every President is under in moments like this. No matter the President, and no matter the crisis, it seems that whatever the First Celebrity does, he’s going to get it wrong in someone’s eyes. I went back and looked at some of what went on there, and was really reminded of a Black Church gathering, one in which a beleaguered community is uplifted by its preacher for its willingness to act in the face of fear and intimidation, and united in a shared sense of energy and courage, preparedness to go on. There was plenty of grief at the private memorials. I wonder if the rest of the people in Tuscon had any right to pretend to share it. I know I didn’t.
P.S. You and I both live simply! For me, it’s a spiritual directive. It is for you too, right? And I could do a lot better, that’s for sure. I wish it were everyone’s style, but wow, is it ever not. 😉
The music for today is beautiful. I love it. I’ve never fallen for Copeland’s style, but I have no objection to his politics or his sexuality. Communists and gay people contribute to their communities, love their families, are are beautiful in God’s eyes, right? Just like everyone else!
I suppose one thing that hit me — I should say something that first hit me — was the comment (and the shared expectation) that the President’s “duty” is to be a National Conciliator. It is not! It’s not in the Constitution, not in the Oath, not in his or her party’s platform. I believe someone can be a great president and a lousy eulogist. I think it is nonsense — a national flaw, not strength — to “look to the president” at such moments. We should look into ourselves. That sums up my point.
It is not at all the president’s “duty,” it is rather the president’s opportunity, or option, or privilege. Seeing it is a duty implies that auditors have a duty to revere it, not just hear it… all of which adds up to being more about the event and the president, and less about the victims.
To your PS: I wish it were simple to be simple in 2011, but it’s not as simple as all that. But, like Plato’s quest for the Ideal, we should try, and the “try” is worth it in itself.
On the other point, I suppose I fell short of clarity about my opinion. You say you have no objections to what were Copland’s politics or sexuality. I do, in these regards — in the 1930s (especially) the causes to which he subscribed, and the CPUSA itself (and he was a supporter) were subversive, literally anti-American; not the cliche, but working to subvert the government. In the name of this or that, but subversive in hundreds of ways that many who later “saw the light” (Copland not one of them) profoundly regretted in terms of their former support. I cannot suspend my objections to such things simply because the government was not overthrown. I think. About his sexuality, my personal view is shaped by my reading of the Bible. I don’t think it should be proscibed or anything, but my view doesn’t go as far as the Seinfeld Theorem.
And yes, these people — all people — are beautiful in God’s eyes. Even Jared Loughner, which I can have a hard time with, but once again my reading of the Bible tells me that is so. In fact, more than occasionally, I am astonished that God loves me. But thank God He is God.
(Re Loughner, what I mean, of course, is that if Loughner was not one of the persons to whom Jesus virtually said, “I do this so the vilest of sinners might have redemption…” then who stands more in need, or has that sweet invitation, more than Loughner?)
I’m definitely more comfortable objecting to people’s specific activities — e.g. attempts to overthrow the government — than I am to objecting to their thoughts, or the things that properly should remain private, such as a sexual preference. I’m always disappointed when people seek to overthrow a government when their political system allows for the hard work of grassroots organizing to see the light of day. Put another way, I can completely understand attempting to overthrow a dictatorship (like Baby Doc’s) or an unfathomably cruel system of oppression like apartheid. But when you actually have a vote, the right to speak, and meet, and organize, well, I have no sympathy for the decision to use force.
The more I know of Loughner, the harder it is for me to see him as “vile.” One is only “vile” when one can be held accountable for one’s actions. (See: Richard Fuld, Hank Paulson, Geithner, Bernanke, and etc.) Loughner is mentally ill. A very, very sick young man. I think it’s really important to take mental illness seriously, because with all the guns around, we need to understand mental illness, especially one that comes with paranoia, so that we can figure out how to protect ourselves.
“I am astonished God loves me.” I’m not! You’re very easy to love. You’re a wonderful person! But I know exactly what you mean. I hear all the things that pass through my head and heart as I struggle to learn and grow in His love. I get a little astonished too.
What is the Seinfeld Theorem?
I agree (I know I am not agreeing to what you exactly say here) — I am in agreement with anyone who says that people with treasonous or destructive or abberant thoughts, best should keep those thoughts to themselves. If we can hate the sin but love the sinner, I, at least, ought to be able to reject the thoughts but not the thinker.
Regarding my use of the phrase “vile sinner.” I quoted the English hymnodist Isaac Watts, his phrase having entered the language — “And while the lamp holds out to burn/ The vilest sinner may return.” I suppose my locution derived from a view that vile acts, vile sins, must be committed by someone in a similar (at least) etymological category.
Speaking (very) personally about protests and overthrow, I am coming to wonder whether opposition and free discussion have become scarce commodities in so-called democracies, where elites hold tremendous power, and exercise it subtly and malevolently. Rallies and town halls and, yes, Congress on Your Corner events… I wonder whether they are the rebirth of a democratic ethos, or mere pressure valves, deluding people that their opinions matter. I wonder.
And, ha!, the Seinfeld Theorem (thank you) is from the episode where Jerry and George intone “… not that there’s anything wrong with it!”