America the Sick

Schadenfreude - n- the feeling of joy or pleasure when one sees another fail or suffer misfortune. from German - literally translates as "harm-joy"

The concept of schadenfreude is not unique to the society that coined the term, German. In fact, I'd argue that modern American society's mood is strongly grounded in this concept of seeing others fail and reveling in it. Sure, we've all had a good laugh at that woman who was stomping grapes until she fell through the platform. But I am talking about topics that aren't so absurd as this. In fact, more mundane things like - 24 hour news coverage, endless new incarnations of reality television, the explosion of personal recording devices - have bred within us a desire to witness the failures of others. For all the hubris American politicians bring to the table - endless talking points about the uniqueness and exceptionalism of this country - an outsider to this culture would probably expect more from us. Instead, we not only gossip about those that we know - our family members, friends and coworkers- but also about those we don't. And there is an abundance of source material that allows that to be the case. We can discuss, in detail, the lives of politicians, celebrities of the lasting or 5 minute fame types, and even random Joes that happen to make it to the headlines.

Sure, engaging in a little gossip here or there is fun and probably healthy, or at least, doesn't really hurt anyone, but when every news broadcast is a form of escapism in which the viewer is thanking God their neighborhood isn't going to shit like Ferguson, or their child hasn't killed their classmates, or their wife hasn't driven into a lake with their two young children strapped into their carseats, you have to wonder what is really going on. Furthermore, the validity of all of these news stories is confirmed for many viewers when degrees-for-hire (tv psychologists, sociologists, medical doctors, economic analysts, et al) nod their heads in time with the tsk-tsking of the news anchors. A panel of experts is ready to speculate on the character and motives of any perpetrator of any crime, and if you notice, what seems to always come across is how not-ordinary these "criminals" are in the end. They're diseased, they're troubled, they had a seedy past that no one really was aware of until now, they listened to Black Sabbath backwards, they did WEIRD things that the rest of us just don't do. And yet, when you hear a coworker go on and on about Casey Anthony's guilt, you can't help but wonder if we're all as fucked up as those that we watch crash and burn.

None of us are immune to the power of the "vicarious" - how we can impartially view terrible conditions away from our own lives without any real reflection or consideration as to what constant harping on such distractions might say about our own culture and our own lives. What sort of items are we missing out on that are being buried under hours of footage of OJ Simpson driving a Ford Bronco on the California freeway system? And is there an ulterior motive of instilling fear into the general population by constantly reporting the worst of the worst instead of anything positive? Does this fear let us, the viewers, be OK with more surveillance? More restrictions on our own lives in the name of safety? Less real choice?

When I was a sophomore in college, I was eating oatmeal and watching the news on a lovely Tuesday morning when a plane crashed into one of the two World Trade Center towers. As the news anchors were reporting on this terrible event, another jet crashed into the other tower ON. LIVE. TV. Everyone in my apartment was speechless. We had never seen anything so tragic as this on television ever. Maybe if I had grown up in the 1960s, the footage of Civil Rights clashes and the Vietnam War might have prepared me for this, but even those events were not shocking in the same way. We knew about those struggles. This event was a surprise for most Americans.

Since then, I've really hated watching the news - not because I fear I will see other iconic buildings struck by tragedy, but because since then, the news has become a cesspool of hate and fear.  honestly don't think that America has ever recovered from that day. We're almost 15 years out from 9/11/01. What has changed is a lot. If America lost its innocence in Vietnam, it lost its hold on itself after 9/11. Our worldview was irreparably shattered by that day and the aftermath. Instead of being able to pick up the pieces and move on, as many affected have been able to, the collective consciousness (represented by the media) of this country has doubled down on tragedy. Furthermore, the political course of action since that day has carried through 4 presidential terms and marks an outdated, heavy-handed response to the problems that led to that fateful day in September. There has been no reflection on America's faults in order to learn and change, instead, whether led by a semi-literate goofball or a Harvard-educated professional, we're still coming to the table with Cold War era tactics of throwing our weigh around and expecting to get results. The world hasn't worked that way in some times. Having the most money, the most guns, the most technology didn't work in Vietnam, nor did it work in Iraq, and seems to be entirely hopeless in Afghanistan as well, but we're still sticking to it. I guess you really can't change a horse in mid-stream. Or so it seems. Our culture and our selves need to change or we're headed for an even bigger disaster than 9/11 -the collapse of this entire system.

Nietzsche's concept of "ressentiment" fits perfectly in with what we're experiencing as a culture. His idea here is that the weak-willed, the inactive, the petty, what have yous, are unable to move beyond themselves. "Things done to them" become their only focus. We've seen this historically in places like France after their embarrassing loss in the Franco-Prussian War, in Serbia after the annexation of "their" land by the Austro-Hungarian empire, in fascist Italy, Japan and Germany during the 1930s, in Rwanda after the Belgians left the Hutus in charge after years of repression. All of those situations ended poorly for everyone involved. Ressentiment keeps us tied to the past, never moving forward. Listen to the rhetoric supported by many American politicians as well as media outlets - are the problems in this country ever collective? Are people homeless or unemployed because there are real systemic issues that need to be changed or are they that way because they're not trying hard enough? Or because immigrants took their jobs? Or because they're so fixated on the "other" being the problem that they haven't been willing to move on and try something different within themselves? Imagine an America that went back to actual (Nietzschean? Pirsig-ian?) values of individualism and self-determination. To making something of yourself without hoping to get something out of it beyond satisfaction? To succeed on one's merits instead of playing political games and kissing ass? That could happen if 1. there was equity, not equality for all (which might mean that some get MORE now to make MORE of themselves in the long run), 2. people actually took time to reflect on how their own thoughts, attitudes and actions might be at fault.


Two quotes to consider:
“To be incapable of taking one's enemies, one's accidents, even one's misdeeds seriously for very long—that is the sign of strong, full natures in whom there is an excess of the power to form, to mold, to recuperate and to forget. Such a man shakes off with a single shrug many vermin that eat deep into others; here alone genuine 'love of one's enemies' is possible—supposing it to be possible at all on earth. How much reverence has a noble man for his enemies!—and such reverence is a bridge to love.—For he desires his enemy for himself, as his mark of distinction; he can endure no other enemy than one in whom there is nothing to despise and very much to honor! In contrast to this, picture 'the enemy' as the man of ressentiment conceives him—and here precisely is his deed, his creation: he has conceived 'the evil enemy,' 'the Evil One,' and this in fact is his basic concept, from which he then evolves, as an afterthought and pendant, a 'good one'—himself!” ― Friedrich Nietzsche, On the Genealogy of Morals/Ecce Homo

“Peace of mind produces right values, right values produce right thoughts. Right thoughts produce right actions and right actions produce work which will be a material reflection for others to see of the serenity at the center of it all.” 
― Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values

A Higher (Moral) Standard...

As you know, I am a teacher. A public high school teacher, to be exact. As teachers and coaches, we are said to be held to a, "higher standard." What kind of standard? Legal? Moral? And if so, according to whose moral standard? In the past few years, due to various scandals and media frenzies over teacher behavior, schools have started to implement "HIB" training for all staff. HIB stands for harassment, intimidation and bullying. The main thrust of these types of trainings should be to help teachers identify HIB incidents in their classrooms, locker rooms and in the hallways to help maintain both physical and emotional safety for students and staff, but the presenters often make sure that teachers leave paranoid enough about everything in their lives to never even consider acting inappropriately in any way, shape or form (think about the worst kinds of sex ed classes where students are just shown pictures of diseased body parts and told to stay away from sex #noteffective). Why? Because these trainings are designed for more than the purpose of ensuring that students are safe in their learning and playing environments. These informational sessions are also inculcating teachers into self-censorship. The alternate interpretation of, "higher standard," can really be, "if you do anything wrong, you will be judged more harshly and personally for doing so," but that doesn't have as nice of a ring to it, so they went with the former. There is a level of anxiety provoked by HIB trainings and morality scares that keeps teacherss on their toes, looking out over their shoulder to see who is watching, and to potentially even report their coworkers to an authority figure. It also encourages teachers to report students to a "higher" authority for multifarious infractions instead of ever dealing with issues on their own. Obviously there are serious offenses that should be handled on a centralized basis, however, many of the teachers I know that actually have a good handle on discipline work through issues on their own. [aside: In the school in which I work, office detentions seem to do little to deter students from doing wrong. The same students end up on the detention roster over and over, as with the in-school suspension room. Repeat offenders end up in the "penalty box" month after month.]

So, I am held to a higher standard in both my "in" school and "out of" school behavior, but I should also defer to the central authority when it comes to making decisions on what is good, moral behavior (even though I am a supposed paragon of said behavior)? Confusing. And so when I start thinking about this title of the moral apex of society that has been bestowed upon me, I get a little miffed. Because I think it's hypocritical and a power move by those already in power. I am supposed to be a great teacher and live a clean life, but I am also not trusted with wielding power beyond the threshold of my classroom. If what I think would be an appropriate way of handling a situation is how I act, then am I not already fulfilling the duty of the higher standard? If, by nature, I am the higher standard over some regular Joe, than my opinion should be worth more, no? Shouldn't I be able to handle the issues within my room and in the school without deferring to a higher power? If I am held to a higher standard, is my boss held to an even higher one? What about the governor and politicians passing these laws?

What gives? It's all about obedience. It's not about safety and security or about positive role models, it's about maintaining a system for the system's sake. My compliance will help to prop up the hierarchy for another generation. The veiled attempt at making me think I will be helping children is a good one, and one that most people would not want to question. But, I'm that guy, so I am questioning it.

And while I was thinking about this entire scenario, I happened to read an excerpt in Confessions of  a Buddhist Atheist in which Stephen Batchelor explicated his research on Buddha's life. He found that there were no real details on the formative years, and in fact, conflicting information about the Buddha's personal history. However, once Buddha became a teacher and gathered a following, everything he ever did was recorded, which reminded me of Jesus' life. Just like Buddha, the details on Jesus prior to his thirties is fuzzy. What were these guys doing in their twenties? Praying? Working? YOLO-ing? Well, I came to the conclusion that it probably matters very little as to what they were doing in that time and that their lives would be interchangeable with yours or mine up until they were fed up enough with the world to let it be known. So what led to their transformative experiences and subsequent perspective shifts? For one thing, it was the questioning of their current, static social order and their disobedience to it. Both Buddha and Jesus give up their attachments to this world. They don't tell their followers to completely mimic their lives and ways, but instead provide a model for behavior and thought. There is no list of commandments nor contracts that have to be signed to live like either of them - those institutionalized aspects come later through their more zealous followers, like Jesus' disciple, Paul.

I'm not suffering from a messianic delusion here, nor am I looking for martyrdom, but I do think that if I did happen to stand up for myself and people in the same situation, I would probably be reviled and not revered, because WE LIKE BEING OPPRESSED. It's easier to stay in a shitty situation than to stand alone or to risk losing security of a job, relationships, etc.

How do we challenge the existing order in a more meaningful way than writing angry Facebook statuses and standing around the water cooler bitching about how much our boss sucks? For one, that change has to come with considering what is actually in the realm of possibility for changing. Hoping that everyone will suddenly be on board when you make a moving speech is not going to pan out in the end. The continued weaving of connections and the slow formation of communities (pro tip: start with the few people who are the choir you've been preaching to for all those years) will ultimately pay off in the end because people within that community will likely be loyal not only to the ideas you share, but to each other as well. And although it PAINS me to admit this, there is a positive side to this gradualist approach. It's just annoying that when you already see the hidden message in the Magic Eye drawing that is life, you have to wait for everyone else to get their eyes unfocused enough to see it too.

PS: The ironic thing about this analogy is that I can't actually see those pictures in the Magic Eye drawings... 

The Most Beautifully Written Piece on Humanity Ever Created

An illuminated manuscript
Made of vellum dyed purple
With real brass hinges.
Entire pages carpeted
In infinite layers of color.
Resonant only in the muted glory
Of the setting sun through stained glass.
Hues that enrobe the room in lovely, temporal tapestries
Only to fade into the dusky embrace
Of a cold, moonlight shroud.

This most beautifully crafted,
Finely detailed and designed,
Painstakingly edited
Piece that was written on humanity
Had been wrought some time ago.

Deemed "unreadable,"
Ignored,
Leafed through,
Thrown aside,
Poured over,
Shelved -
It remains the same.

Being and Nothing

One evening at dusk, as I was returning to my room along a narrow path through the pine forest, carrying a blue plastic bucket slopping with water that I had just collected from a nearby source, I was abruptly brought to a halt by the upsurge of an overpowering sense of the sheer strangeness of everything.

It was as though I had been lifted onto the crest of a great wave that rose from the ocean of life itself, allowing me for the first time to be struck by how mysterious it was that anything existed at all rather than nothing.

"How," I asked myself, can a person be unaware of this? How can anyone pass their life without responding to this? Why have I not noticed this until now?" I remember standing still, trembling and dumb, with tears in my eyes. Then I continued on my way before night fell.

This experience made me uncomfortably aware of a chasm between what I was studying and something that had happened to me in my own life that struck me as vitally important. The Buddhist texts with which I was familiar did not seem to speak about, let alone value, such experiences as the one that had just shuddered through me.- Stephen Batchelor, Confessions of a Buddhist Atheist

I have been reading voraciously for the past two weeks. i went through 2 novels, a bunch of magazines I had been putting off and then I started the book from which the above quote is excerpted. This passage gave me pause when I read it. How many times have I been overcome by the same feeling of doubt about the world? What is the point of it all? And why does this thought come to me at the most random of times? Batchelor was a Buddhist monk, studied under various famous leaders and still rejected it all in the end. Why? What was lacking from his teachings? There was enough certainty, that's for sure. All of the beliefs he rejected had an air-tight response to his doubts, yet never actually addressed his doubts. 

Think about a great "teacher" (parent, religious leader, classroom teacher, professor. etc) you had, that you looked up to because they seemed to know everything. When you asked them about something that wasn't their forte, instead of telling you they didn't know, they instead brushed off your question as inconsequential. And perhaps, if you were younger, or less experienced, you might have believed them, and beat yourself up for being "stupid" in front of their great presence, but as it turns out, this teacher was just more like you than you thought. They were fallible. They did NOT know everything there was to know. But that's OK. Unfortunately, they were just not OK with it. 

I went to a teacher workshop and the instructor was talking about this exact situation. How, we, as teachers, need to accept that we do not know everything. How the students can see that it's OK to be continually learning and shaping the mind throughout life. The teacher is not an authority, but a guide. This is something that I take pride in doing. I did not need a workshop to tell me that, though, I think it is important that others hear and embrace the uncertainty of everything, especially in regards to knowledge. When a teacher sets themselves up as an omniscient authority, s/he's not only setting themselves up for confrontation and failure, but their students as well. 

Spiritually, the beauty of Jesus and Buddha as teachers were that they were open to experiences. They personally did not adhere any rigid dogma that their followers constructed in their wake. Their experiences and guidance, not commandments, are valuable tools. Similarly, one of the reasons that I am drawn to Zen Buddhism in particular is that there is an air of mystery to teachings like the koans. These logic puzzles leave breathing space for interpretation. What they ultimately mean to you is important. 

Another meaning that I think Batchelor also gets at in this quote, is what I find to be one of the great mysteries of the modern world. Do people really stop and think about their existence and why they're here? Is there a larger group of people out there than the few I have disclosed the uneasiness of being aware of my mortality to? How many people suppress that uncanny feeling he's describing? By time one gets to adulthood, I would say there is a good chance that people are more and more unwilling to talk about these feelings because....well, they're set in their ways, one step closer to the inevitable end, thinking about it would get in the way of their "plans" and their "life." But that feeling IS life. All of the other stuff we create is wonderful, but it's what Buddhists call Maya (illusion), and it distracts us from the realities of our finitude. 

The finite space of an art form like the haiku also works to help us get in touch with something deeper than the distractions of television, consumer products, relationship drama, etc. The master Japanese poets of yore so often encapsulated deep sentiments and experiences in carefully chosen, and placed. words. The one below appeared in one of those two novels I recently read. The narrator was discussing mono no aware, the Japanese aesthetic value of the transience of all living things - how we're filled with feelings of great awe and sadness as we view the world around us. Mono no aware is essentialized by the cherry blossom festivals in Japan. The beauty of the flowers is ephemeral, yet, to be enjoyed nonetheless. 

Thinking of the morning dew, it will pass away into the dry high noon of the summer, and yet we revel in those few minutes anyway. Life is a lot like that -when we revel in being alive, we can pay no mind to the fact that we will pass beyond this world in due time.

This dewdrop world

Is a dewdrop world –

And yet — and yet 

-Kobayashi Issa