Small Advantages of the Private Intellectual
Casual, unscientific observations about events in American
daily life reveal a shrinking of civility.
Vulgarity flourishes. Self-fulfilling
irony lends credibility to unfettered
expressions of hatred. Relentless negativity is normal, and iconoclasm is
unchecked.
People who thirst for power, who want to manipulate and
dominate others, know how valuable Adolf
Hitler's comment on "the big lie" (see Mein Kampf) is for 2016. They lie with glee. Those of us who want to preserve our partially
free lives and much of our sanity are driven to embrace Machiavelli's
suggestion that a person who vows to be good all the time comes to ruin among people
who choose not to be good. We are driven
to acknowledge the peculiar wisdom
of Aimé Césaire's proposal in Discourse on Colonialism (1955) that
Hitler deserves to be studied because "he makes it possible to see things
on a large scale and to grasp the fact that capitalist society, at its present
stage, is incapable of establishing a concept of the rights of all men, just as
it has proved incapable of establishing a system of individual ethics."
The prevailing climate does not bode well for people who
insist on being public
intellectuals. One might predict they
will be killed literally and figuratively as fascist democracy
materializes. To be sure, the United
States of America has no monopoly on bad behavior as a new world order dawns,
as actuality triumphs over reality. We should see things on a large scale. All nation-states contribute to the progress
of global tragedies. The handful of
United Nations officials who might risk their lives to tell "a truth"
can supply confirmation.
Now it is good
to read (or discover for the first time) Sissela Bok's Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life (1978), Samantha Power's "A Problem from Hell": America and
the Age of Genocide (2002), and Habits
of the Heart: Individualism and Commitment in American Life (1985) by
Robert N. Bellah and others. In the near
past, public intellectuals garnered a modicum of respect. Thinkers as diverse as Derrick Bell, Noam
Chomsky, Mari Evans, Rachel Carson, Toni
Cade Bambara, Ishmael Reed, Angela
Davis, Vincent Harding, Edward Said, Amiri Baraka, and John Hope Franklin could
urge us to be still and to seek clarity in critical thinking. A public intellectual who was a rare
politician wrote The Audacity of Hope: Thoughts on Reclaiming the American
Dream (2006) and reached the mountain top of American politics. Gone are those days.
We swirl like leaves in a hurricane. Chomsky is taken to task for what is alleged
to be "simple sloppiness" in his "selective use of history"
in Who Rules the World? (2016). In his review of this book, Kenneth Roth,
executive director of Human Rights Watch (access https://www.hrw.org) does have
the decency to say that "imperfect
as the book is, we should understand it as a plea to end American
hypocrisy" (NYRB, June 9, 2016,
page 8). In this context, nothing is
said of Chomsky's lasting contributions to linguistic theory. Likewise, political condemnations of Cornel
West, scapegoat #1 in neo-liberal imaginations, avoid the decency of saying West
provided a noble contribution to contemporary thought in writing The American Evasion of Philosophy: A
Genealogy of Pragmatism (1989) before acclaim and fame led him into a lurid
wilderness . Like William Blake's
invisible worm, fame has targeted Ta-Nehisi Coates and other young thinkers who
steadfastly refuse to worship false gods.
We are
witnessing a death of integrity, and we
are asked to find colorblind salvation in the poetry of Emily Dickinson, Walt
Whitman, Bob Kaufman and Audre Lorde; in the fictions of Stephen King, Toni
Morrison, Joyce Carol Oates, and John Grisham; in the prophetic essays of Ayn Rand and James Baldwin;
or in the transparent texts of Benjamin Franklin ($100) and Thomas
Jefferson (5¢ ). It is not "correct"
for our jaded ears to discriminate among John Coltrane, Frank Sinatra , Nina Simone, John
Cage, Beyonce Knowles, Adele, Elton John, Curtis Mayfield, Esther Phillips and Roberta
Flack as sonic thinkers. Our
smoke-filled eyes should not discern the difference between a toilet stool and
a genuine work of art. We are encouraged by a devolving world to be a docile congregation in the dumpsters
of reality televangelism.
Anti-intellectualism ascends. The
American majority has spoken.
So what? So nothing. Our option is to now praise the private
intellectual, the woman or the man or the person of rainbow gender who refuses
to be a commodity or a spectacle. The
private intellectual is not immune, however, to corruption, to the horrors that destroy many
insecure public intellectuals. Sooner or
later, the worm will invade privacy.
There is no hiding place.
As an embattled group,
private intellectuals think and write quietly,
communicating nationally and internationally with others who scorn the trolls
of ephemeral fame. Disciplined by choice, they insist that integrity has
value and that poverty does have a few virtues ; they create works for a
dubious future. They try to avoid
whorish, niggardly egotism. Perhaps time
will either redeem them or condemn them
to permanent invisibility and silence. Only a future can make that decision.
Whatever the case, private intellectuals are most often models for not wasting one's life in vanity. They teach us something about the small
advantages to be found in nanoseconds of creative happiness.
Jerry W. Ward, Jr. June 4, 2016
No comments:
Post a Comment