keith wilde wrote:
[about HG]
Dear Keith,
There is really little diaelectic tension between us, and
the details we have discussed are quite secondary to the
question of ideology and Christianity that you raise.
There were 4 volume sets of the Outline of History, but, there
were also the 2 volume sets, and the single volume one that
a so common as to be in $.50 "throwaway" areas of used bookstores :)
[that price is meant to have no relationship to its value, for
as "most economists know the price of everything and the value
of nothing. :)" ]
Now. I shared a 20 page description by Monahan with a colleage
which, Wally Klinck kindly forwarded to me, and as I introduced it to
him, I said:
Regarding, "Christianity" -- while I believe Douglas was
a devote Christian, I, personally, just substitute "personal
spirit" when I see that word.
If I am to be labeled, I am "Unitarian/Universalist."
But, I don't think a label matters as much as "how any of
us gain a 'sense of purpose'" in our lives.
My reading of Monahan was that Douglas wished to unshackle
the "worker" to permit a "higher purpose."
And, we also know that many people believe that "idle hands
are the devil's workshop" and believe that "work" keeps people
out of trouble.
***
So, when you raise ideology or philosophy, we basically are
asking what comprises "the good life" (not the 'life of Riley' --
but rather the life "well spent").
There is one book on my shelves that I turn to for an answer
to that question, and it is "Personality and the Good" by
two philosopher/theologians at Boston University -- Bertocci
and Millard.
While Maslow and Allport (heavily cited in this book) approached
this question as physchologists, Bertocci & Millard (ISBN
111787902X) tackled this question in 1963, with the subtitle
of "Psychological and Ethical Perspectives."
I have never ever seen any book before or since (except perhaps
the Bible) that deals so widely on this.
[There is one, more recent book, that is more of a primer, but
related, and that is Seligman's _Authentic Happiness: Using
the New Positive Psychology to Realize your Potentential
for Lasting Fulfillment_. ISBN 0-74342-2297-0 and which
is on many new book store shelves at this very moment. I
have only thumbed the book, really, and there is a certain
hedonism sound to the word happiness, but, he clearly gets
well past that.]
What intrigued me about Bertocci & Mallard was their abilities to
inspect multiple religious and distill from that a set
of virtues and practices that cut across many religions.
They tackle, for example, the trait (or virtue) of "kindness"
and "generosity."
They ask the "operative question" -- why do these behaviors
"work" and how do they lead to the "good life" -- 'well practiced?'
***
Now.
Certainly Wells was a "man of the world." Yes, at a small university
in northern New York, my great grandfather read and agreed with
both Darwin and T.H. Huxley -- circa 1890, and there was another
moral philosopher at the university (the Gaines family) who
were abhorred with the ideas of Darwin.
And, when I discovered Wells in the public library at about
age 10 and read everything I could, not only under "science
fiction" but also "political science" I formed a deep love for
this person.
Wells, to my mind, was at a remarkable period. England was
moving from the Victorian Age to the Edwardian Age. Women's
sufferage was 'afoot' and Wells was a champion of the cause
(say via Ambrose Bierce).
While Verne, Swift, Moore and others had written early science
fiction and/or utopian novels, Wells had the benefit of the
scholarship that brought his studies to London, and to be
in Huxley's classroom !
And, how had he gained his learning, prior to that? His
mother a "downstairs maid" and his father who ran a China
shop and mostly played croquette was an unlikely family to
produce such a boy.
However, biographers note that his mother often took "the boy"
with her to her employer's house, and, that Wells was exposed
to those personal libraries.
If someone told me this, and I hadn't good proof, I'd simply
say rubbage -- no one with that background could go on and
write what he wrote !
***
But, we have the fact that he wrote some of the most startling
short stories of the 1890's. (and much, much more beyond)
He synthesized and combined the "device of science fiction" with
the politics (and ideologies) of the day. If science fiction
does not a.) only slightly stretch the aspects of the physical
world (else it is fantasy), or, b.) does not imbue the story
with "lessons" to (or for) humanity, to my mind it is "bad"
science fiction.
[sidebar: if a reader wishes just one book to read about
Wells, it is not by Norman and Jeanne MacKenzie, nor Gordon N. Ray,
(all folk who almost devoted their entire lives to Wells'
legacy but:
Smith, David C. Smith. HG Wells: Desperately Mortal. New
Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1986.
Smith, a professor at a Maine College, best captures, to my
mind what Wells was "about." And, the phrase "desperately
mortal" captures the essence of Wells.
Again, this is no disparagement of Wells, but rather, to
understand Wells one must place him into the context of his
own life.]
I have carried on a bit.
Let me simply summarize:
1. The Christian aspects of Douglas, I believe, can
be replaced with the concept of "human spirit
and purpose" without damaging his point of view
2. Wells lived an extraodinary life, and wrote many
extraodinary pieces of literature
3. Yes, Wells saw continuity across the "disciplines"
and, as evinced by Science of Life, or Outline
of History, or Work, Wealth and Happiness, Wells
knew "no boundaries" -- indeed -- he saw no
boundaries. And, perhaps, his "shabby" beginnings
were the very causes that kept him from pigeon-
holing ANYTHING.
4. Finally, society must figure out how to get off the
"treadmill of work" -- enough -- to regain
spirit, harmony, cooperation, and a better sense
about a "sustainable life" (throughout not just
this century, but, for the millions of centuries
before us).
The American model simply does not transfer into
the future. Two household workers (even if at
the level of double-professional careers) is not
an answer to how we need to raise children, nor
is it an answer to how we need consume resources,
nor is it spiritual -- rather -- it is crassly
materialistic.
Regards,
Curtiss
***
--
W. Curtiss Priest, Director, CITS
Research Affiliate, Culture & Media, MIT
Center for Information, Technology & Society
466 Pleasant St., Melrose, MA 02176
781-662-4044 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://Cybertrails.org
==^================================================================
This email was sent to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?a84IaC.bcVIgP.YXJjaGl2
Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
==^================================================================
