Posted on 12/27/2017 9:35:54 PM PST by Oshkalaboomboom
Back when I decided to major in English in college, I had a hard and fast rule: no courses featuring Western literature from the 20th century. From a very young age, I was put off by how much European and American "modern" literature, art and music seemed to glorify ugliness, cruelty or meaninglessness. I was unmoved and unimpressed by expressions that neither provided inspiration nor (in many cases) required any talent. My thought at the time was that life was too short to fill one's life with pointless darkness.
Those early impressions have only been reinforced in the years since. I've tended to steer clear of what I disliked back then, in favor of history, non-Western literature, science fiction or fantasy. But I am reading a best-selling fiction novel at the moment. And while I wouldn't describe it as post-modern or nihilist, it has made another theme of contemporary literature stand out for me. Specifically, I'm astonished at the extent to which the drama in these stories could be completely averted by the tiniest bit of honesty, kindness, compassion or basic common sense.
I'm not referring to huge, cataclysmic events, by the way, but to the small, everyday interactions which individually don't mean much, but which, over time, add up to a great deal. And which, by virtue of their simplicity and mundanity, would require precious little effort to do correctly at the time they happen.
Yes, I realize that people do act like that, but I can't enjoy it when I'm reading it. I find myself shaking my head, thinking, "Dear God, why would you say such a hurtful thing?" or "Please don't do that" or "For heaven's sake, just tell him the truth."
It struck me that it is perfectly in keeping with the spirit of the Christmas season to recognize the enormous impact of small things.
At Christmas Eve Mass this past Sunday, the priest spoke of the ironic circumstances of Jesus Christ's arrival on earth: to come as a baby, born to the poorest of parents, in a backwater town of an occupied territory at the outskirts of the Roman Empire. No one -- least of all the evil one whom Christ came to defeat -- would expect God himself to arrive in such an ignoble and powerless state. But, the homilist continued, God did not manifest in this way as some wily deception, but because this incarnation as a helpless human infant was the essence of God's love: utterly dependent upon human response.
Writers often comment how remarkable it is that Christ -- and through him, Christianity -- transformed the world in spite of the implausible circumstances of his brief, impoverished life (not to mention his ignominious death by execution). But it makes more sense to conclude that he chose his manner of life on earth because this is precisely what would achieve the objectives he sought.
When human beings consider "power," we tend to mean the ability to force people to do what we would like them to or think they should. By that calculus, the more force one can apply to the largest number of people, the more power one has, and the more successful one will be. We therefore think of earthly kings, vast bureaucracies or dictators as "powerful." It is almost incomprehensible, therefore, that the Almighty -- who could, one presumes, have arrived in a blaze of glory and simply ordered everyone on earth to do as he commanded -- did nothing of the sort.
Christ forced no one to do anything. Instead, his "power," as it were, was displayed in his routine, daily interactions with those nearest to him. He never traveled more than a few miles from his home. Perhaps a few thousand people ever heard him speak. And his life was brief, even by the standards of his day. But those whom he touched were inspired to reach out to others in a similar fashion (and often at great personal expense, including loss of their own lives). Thus did the thoughts and words of one seemingly powerless man spread around the world.
There lies the common takeaway in both the tragedy of the contemporary novel and the triumph of Jesus Christ. For good or for ill, true "power" lies in the smallest of things. The choices we make in the most mundane matters of our day-to-day existence have greater significance than we know (something that often only becomes clear when we choose poorly). If we choose to act with kindness, honesty and (please God) just a little self-restraint, we can avoid much unnecessary sorrow, and we may be able to effect good beyond our wildest imagining.
May we all make such choices in 2018
She eschewed all of 20th century American and Brit lit, but favored SCI-FI and non-Western claptrap?
No Ferber, no Sinclair Lewis, no Robert Graves, no du Maurier...and on and on and on!
And Joseph was a carpenter, which means that Jesus did NOT grow up in abject poverty!
Dorothy Sayers had Lord Peter Wimsey say that detective fiction was the most moral fiction there was. Reason, truth, and justice triumph.
I wouldn’t diss ALL 20th century fiction, but I get her point of view. The “junk” was often better, with respect to universal truths than the highly esteeemed stuff. For every Flannery O’Connor there was some nihilist, several nehilists. But even lefty fantasy writers like LeGuin asked good questions.
Amd the theological reflection is good.
LeGuin, IMO, stinks on ice, her tranny sci-fi is tawdry beyond belief and is utter garbage!
Orwell, Huxley, Finney, and Ellison put her to shame and in spades!
The author of this article is a moron!
I hardly touched upon a list of great American and Brit fiction writers of the 20th century, all of whom she eschews/ed.
She majored in English, but then went on to be a lawyer and now teaches "entrepenuership" and business law. Yes, I looked her up.
She can't even get the facts straight re Jesus! Her Priest must also be a damned dolt.
Christie
Not to mention, we know essentially nothing of Jesus’ life between his young childhood and the start of his ministry. He could very well have traveled; at the great temple in Puri, India there is indeed a story that he spent some time there.
And that list is definitely incomplete without Patrick F. McManus!
Based on the offering that was made after Jesus was born for Mary's uncleanliness....they were.
22And when the days for their purification according to the law of Moses were completed, they brought Him up to Jerusalem to present Him to the Lord 23(as it is written in the Law of the Lord, “EVERY firstborn MALE THAT OPENS THE WOMB SHALL BE CALLED HOLY TO THE LORD”), 24and to offer a sacrifice according to what was said in the Law of the Lord, “A PAIR OF TURTLEDOVES OR TWO YOUNG PIGEONS.” Luke 2:22-24 NASB
See Leviticus 12:8 for the reference.
6‘When the days of her purification are completed, for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring to the priest at the doorway of the tent of meeting a one year old lamb for a burnt offering and a young pigeon or a turtledove for a sin offering. 7‘Then he shall offer it before the LORD and make atonement for her, and she shall be cleansed from the flow of her blood. This is the law for her who bears a child, whether a male or a female. 8‘But if she cannot afford a lamb, then she shall take two turtledoves or two young pigeons, the one for a burnt offering and the other for a sin offering; and the priest shall make atonement for her, and she will be clean.’” Lev 12:6-8 NASB
Now that this crazy Pope and other lefties, are claiming that Jesus was a "refugee" ( flight to Egypt...which did NOT happen until he was at least 3 ! ), the crazy stories, using Jesus for modern political reasons, is vile! Which is just one of the things, in this article, that set my teeth on edge!
WHO ?
HOGWASH!
You're arguing with the texts.
Leviticus makes it clear "if she cannot AFFORD a lamb, then she shall take two turtledoves or two young pigeons,..."
That isn't an indicator they were well off.
Mormons suggest He came to America sometime after His resurrection and ascension.
If this is allowed their teachings have to be allowed.
This illustrates the danger of allowing other texts/traditions to be placed on the same level of authority as Scripture.
The King James version is THE best one.
And also re Joseph's social status.
They didn't live in poverty, this whole misusing of Jesus, for political 21rst. century reasons, is ridiculous and stupid!
This article is utter drivel; not to mention claptrap!
8And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons; the one for the burnt offering, and the other for a sin offering: and the priest shall make an atonement for her, and she shall be clean. Leviticus 12:8 KJV
Same result.
A planet where one changes sex at a whim?
I found her writing lacking and her "imagination" puerile; especially when compared with Bradbury, Heinlein, Finney, Orwell, Verne, Huxley, Asimov, H.G. Wells, Ellison, Clarke, Dick,and so many more!
But each to his or her own....:-)
I met up with him again in 1973 when I was in a chaplaincy training program near where he lived. Interesting guy. EXCELLENT teacher.
He used the school's observatory to host some science fiction writers. He preset the star systems they mentioned in their books. Cute idea.
He said Le Guin was a PITA. Just FYI.
For 6 months I spent half my time on a GYN floor. I had more than enough time to think about, ah, sex. Among the many I remember was this absolutely stunning young lady. I mean, really. The kind where you have to take a deep breath before you can have a normal, much less a pastoral, conversation. She wasn't just pretty, she was beautiful.
She was in for breast augmentation.
That's just one example. A Lot of issues on the gyn floor were not simply “mechanical” but touched on a patient’s struggles with ... how to say it ... her “validity” as a woman.
...
I wore “clericals” which de-emphasized my individuality and, so to speak, neutralized my sex. I've noticed that it's not so easy to tell a 60 year old Zen monk from a 60 year old Zen nun. All the usual ‘signals’ are muted by the shaved head and the voluminous robes.
...
As a clergyD00d I found two things. (1) women talk to ministers more than men do. (2) SOME women will make a play for you; they view you as a challenge.
...
So, it's not so much the “sex (more or less) at will” feature that got my attention. It was the idea of a people who did not ascertain sex immediately upon meeting someone. It was the idea of people who were usually “gender-neutral.”
As they say, after we know the baby is well, the next question is, “Boy or girl?” What would social dynamics be like if that were not the case?
This, from the POV of a chaplain or pastor (or other counselor), amounts to an admonition not to forget how important gender is to someone’s life experience and weltanschauung.
SO, I thought Le Guin’s premise was ... fun and even useful.
...
In one of her sillier novels she said that love is like bread, you have to make it everyday. Again speaking as a (former) pastor, I wish couples would think about that.
...
I'm a conservative Catholic. Le Guin would probably disapprove of me. But I still think she amusingly asks some good questions.
The "sex change at will" was made OBVIOUS and not only was it inappropriate for the grade it had been assigned to, but I found it to be absolute garbage, poorly written, and a ridiculous choice, given how many other great Sci-Fi books available to read instead!
And now we have the insane craze of "I WAS BORN A %$% IN A #%# BODY crap; with the children part of it Munchausen By Proxy child abuse!
So please stop trying to "sell" me on this; it does the complete opposite!
Of course you are welcome to your opinion, but so am I!
If you want to discuss this.Sci-Fi and FANTASY books further, then FRmail me. Otherwise, this discussion is over.
May I say you misunderstand me and my intentions?
I’m not trying to sell you on Le Guin. I’m trying to explain wny I think her work, some of it, has helped me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.