matching tracksuits

fun in threes, sometimes fours

boston

Editing Success

Today has been a long but productive day — unlike yesterday. I went to work only to find that they didn’t have a free computer for me. Finally, V (the new VP of production) told me I could use R’s because she was in a meeting, but I quickly determined that I’d be wasting my time there. Using someone else’s computer like that is akin to cooking in a stranger’s kitchen. And I knew I’d never get anything accomplished if I stayed there, so I did indeed just come home. I’ve overcome the “distraction factor” of being at home, so I do actually accomplish things while working here.

Today I worked on Neusner’s first two chapters, and Whit’s latest. I still feel a little uncomfortable having someone write the biggest chunk of the work (a total of twenty-eight chapters) who is just beginning work on his Ph.D., while Neusner has written over five hundred books and taught for many years. But that’s really not my concern, and I’m glad I don’t have to worry about it. I worry about it nonetheless, but it’s not my responsibility to worry about it. Anyway, Neusner’s first chapters are quite good — a little more academic than Whit’s work, but I don’t know if it’s inaccessible to undergrad students. Granted, a lot of it will have to be simplified, but it’s the wording/phrasing that will be changed (breaking sentences into two or three separate sentences) and not the actual content, I think.

I’ve begun reading my third Berger book, Invitation to Sociology. He has a chapter subtitled “Alienation and Biography.” In it he discusses how we view our biography depends on our perspective and what’s important to us at that given moment in our lives. Since, as Henri Bergson pointed out, even memory is a matter of interpretation, then it’s clear that even for ourselves we don’t have a definitive, normative biography. Things that seemed important as we did them (like talking to Deanna on the YOU trip) are later subsumed under the category of “irrelevant.” “As we remember the past, we reconstruct it in accordance with our present ideas of what is important and what is not” (56).

In this light, what we call “maturity” is radically different: “Maturity is the state of mind that has settled down, come to terms with the status quo, given up the wilder dreams of adventure and fulfillment” (55). What I see as “maturity” (i.e., having given up on my dream of being a musician) I would have seen as a pathetic lack of confidence as a “youngster.”

I have to decide what I want to do with my life; I have to make a decision regarding teaching — do I teach at the high school or university level? I don’t think I would mind the high school level if I could teach writing, but I don’t really care to teach literature at all. But I can be highly creative and sneak in bits of philosophy, sociology, and such. I re-read my letters from class IV and the overwhelming sense I got, even from them, was that they felt I should continue being a teacher because I’m good at it; I agree. So what to do?

Work Stuff, Grad Stuff

I was reading from Pomerleau’s Western Philosophies of Religion a section on the debates between Copleston and Russell and the second set between Ayer and Copleston. They’re at (to use Pomerleau’s term) “loggerheads” at on many issues simply because they have conflicting, mutually exclusive rational explanations of the world around them. In a sense the debates were useless in that they didn’t provide a clearly victorious position. At the same time, they showed the weaknesses of each position and they illustrated (at least the first one) how dogmatic even a non-believe can be. We non-believers often like to think that dogmatism shows itself most often among “irrational believers” but quite often, the opposite is true.

One of the issues at stake in the Copleston/Russell debate was the argument from contingency. I find it interesting that people are still trying to prove God’s existence, or for that matter, trying to disprove it. I hope I avoid that issue personally, in my musings here. I realize that I can point out all the “logical” problems of Christian theology, but that even a mountainous pile of such problems will not constitute a “dis-proof” of Christianity. And I’m not even sure I want to do such a thing. It’s a matter of faith, and convincing a Christian that Christianity is illogical would be like stealing something from her. It provides some meaning in her life, and as long as her holding these ideas doesn’t result in anyone else’s harm, then what right have I to try to get her to change her mind?

And yet I do this with Chhavi all the time — especially regarding music. It seems kind of a silly thing to do, really. And yet I’m constantly criticizing her music. Well, not constantly, but enough. Or rather, too much.

Oh — an interesting thing happened on the number seventy-seven bus to work Wednesday. Marlon, the new graphics designer with a long, straggly goatee (it must be four inches long, maybe longer), mostly-shaved head, and a long wisp of thin, brittle hair in the back, Rob, and I were talking. We were sitting in the back of the bus, Marlon and I on the driver’s side, Rob directly across us — we were sitting in the seats that face each other and not the front of the bus. At some point the conversation moved to a topic that either excluded Rob or about which Rob had nothing to say. I believe we were talking about rent. Rob began singing to himself, with quite a bit of animation, as if he were performing in fact. It was very disconcerting, and I really felt like I was with a child who, not getting enough attention, was doing something to remedy that. I don’t know whether it was such (i.e., Rob didn’t like the fact that he felt excluded by the conversation) or whether it was simply a bizarre coincidence. It seemed a little too odd to be mere coincidence, though, for Rob’s never done anything like that. Of course how much time have we spent together outside the office? Certainly not enough for such a strange thing to be the basis of the assumptions I’m making. Perhaps he does this all the time. Curious, though, that he picked that moment to do it for the first time around me.

Another thing that lends credence to my interpretation of the situation was the fact that when I asked Rob what he was singing, he looked at me for a moment and said quickly, “Oh, you wouldn’t know it,” and just kept going. As if to exclude me by that act.

Boston from Above

Concord Fall

Digital Learning Interactive