stargeek
Hot Sapphic Love (poem)Hot Sapphic Love (poem)Hot Sapphic Love (poem) 06/24/2005 04:49 PM New Sappho poem found. Combining a Cologne University fragment found in the cartonnage of an Egpytian mummy with a fragment from Oxyrhyn chus has allowed the reconstruction of Sappho's fourth poem. The Oxyrhynchus papyri have been much in the news lately, what with the discovery of the earliest fragment of Revelations to give the number of the beast as 616 and the publication of several lines from Sophocles' lost tragedy The Progeny (scroll down). Infra-red imaging techniques may not be sexy, but Sappho sure is. After all, Plato said she was worthy of being considered not only as a poet but as a muse. Sappho herself is a palimpsest< /a> or a sort of cypher. We know next to nothing about her -- including whether she was lesbian or not. One thing's for sure: she almost certainly wasn't a schoo lmistress. This is a GrokNews Entry: (what is grok?)Hot Sapphic Love (poem)Grok Headline matches for Hot Sapphic Love (poem)Lost Sappho love poem published after
|
 The
Idea: Author
Laura Kipnis argues that monogamy is unnatural and unhealthy, and
possibly complicit in our emotional detachment from political life and
our ecosystem as well.Laura Kipnis, despite the title of of her 200-page "polemic", is not Against Love. Rather, she's against the trappings, the rules, the rituals that our culture imposes on love relationships. She goes even further -- she sees marriage, the institution, as every bit as repressive, suffocating and unnatural as our mind-numbing employment in modern hierarchical organizations, and draws strong parallels between the slavery of the workplace and the slavery of the matrimonial home. These two canons of civilization: our need and responsibility to devote our daytime hours to meaningless subordinate labour, and our need and responsibility to devote the rest of our hours to boring, stifling and unsatisfying monogamy, work together diabolically to keep us suppressed, and in our 'place' in society. Small wonder, she says, that one of our most enduring conventional wisdoms is that "a good marriage takes work". If this protestation against the rigours of monogamy, fidelity and marriage-slavery as the complement to wage-slavery sounds familiar, it's because it's very similar to the argument that Glenn Parton made in his essay posted first on these pages last year entitled "Love Politics". Glenn's argument is that we have become so emotionally numbed by our twin bondage to job and marriage that it has made our hearts cold and hard, uncaring of the plight of our planet and of others, and that this is a direct cause of the destruction of our world. "If I'm miserable, why should I care about anyone else?" Dare to love more than one person, he suggests, and the shackles of this self-imposed imprisonment are broken, and the inrush of emotion will shock us into awareness of, and eagerness to heal, the massive emotional and physical illness of our entire planet. Why should we, why do we subject ourselves to this one-love-partner-slavery as easily and as passively as we do to wage-slavery? This is the subject of much of Ms. Kipnis' book. Her prose is so adept and so powerful I won't attempt to paraphrase her arguments. Here are a few teasers: Is it the persistence of the
work
ethic that ties us to the compassionate couple and its workaday
regimes, or is it the ethos of compassionate coupledom that ties us to
sould-deadening work regimes...Resenting the boss? Feeling bored or
overworked or dissatisfied? Getting complaints about your attitude?
Whether it's "on the relationship" or "on the job" get yourself right
to the therapist's office, pronto. There are only two possible
diagnoses for all such modern ailments: it's going to be either
"intimacy issues" or "authority issues". You'll soon discover that the
disease doubles as the prescription at this clinic: You're just going
to have to "work harder on yourself"...
Take the modern consumer. Clearly, routing desire into consumption would be necessary to sustain a consumer society -- a citizenry who fucked in lieu of shopping would soon bring the entire economy grinding to a standstill. Or better still, take the modern depressive. What a boon to both the modern pharmaceutical and the social-harmony industries that such a social type would be. These are merely hypotheticals of course, since it's not as if we live in a society of consumers and depressives, or as if the best strategy for the latter weren't widely held to be strategically indulging in the former -- "retail therapy"...Love's proper denouement, matrimony, is also of course the social form regulated by the state, which refashions itself as a benevolent pharmacist, doling out the addictive substance in licensed doses...What about re-envisioning [marriage] or... insisting that social resources and privileges not be allocated on the basis of marital status? No. let's demand regulation! Not that it's easy to re-envision anything when these intersections of love and acquiescence are the very backbone of the modern self, when every iota of self-worth and identity hinge on them...Domestic coupledom is the boot camp for compliant citizenship, a training ground for gluey resignation and immobility... Ms. Kipnis suggests the same lack of innovation that permeates the workplace in the 21st century also permeates domestic institutions: Different social norms could
entail something entirely different: yearly renewable contracts for
example. And if we weren't so emotionally yoked to the social forms
we've inherited that trying to envision different ways of having a
love
life seems intellectually impossible and even absurd, who knows what
other options might present themselves?...It behooves [our] society to
convince its citizenry that wanting change means personal failure,
starting over is shameful, and wanting more satisfaction than you have
is illegitimate...As love has increasingly become the center of all
emotional expression in the modern imagination -- the quantity without
which life seems forlorn -- anxiety about obtaining it in sufficient
quantities and for sufficient duration has increased to the point that
that anxiety suffuses the population, and most of our cultural
forms...Uncoupling [then] can only be experienced as ego-crushing
crisis and inadequacy...[and] the grief of failed love is exacerbated
by inevitable feelings of personal failure...
Much of the latter part of the book is focused on the psychological
gymnastics of all three (or more) parties in the polygon of adultery,
from the rationalization that hiding the affair is to protect the
feelings of the cuckold, to the feelings of self-hatred and
self-flagellation of the 'sinner(s)'. She also discusses the awkward
mechanics of the ultimate break-up of either the marriage or the
affair
(or both), and the degree to which children of the relationship become
hostages, or excuses for deception, or excuses for the boredom that
gave rise to the deception. Of course the book also talks about famous
infidelities in high political circles, and the twisted hypocrisy of
conservatives' opposition to same-sex marriage, as well as the
equal-opportunity-for-misery desire of lesbians and gays to gain
access
to the sad and repressive regulation of 'official' marriage rather
than
'settling for' merely the legal and resource rights that come with
equivalent-to-married status. And there's also a discussion of the
pragmatic phenomenon of "serial monogamy" -- the fall-back that
there's
nothing wrong with marriage per
se, it's just that we were all married to the wrong person. All of this is complicated (even more) by the emergence of the Two-Income Trap, which imposes a financial prison on top of the emotional one in marriage. We have to stay together because we can't afford to live apart. I am convinced that this one factor is overwhelmingly responsible for keeping the rate of divorce from reaching astronomical levels. It is also probably helpful in keeping birth rates in the West below replacement levels -- Not only can we not afford children, we certainly don't want any (or any more) with the spouse we're economically shackled to. And having one with the secret love is just too messy. In my recent article predicting a baby boom, perhaps I underestimated the sheer perverseness of a socioeconomic system that not only makes parenthood financially reckless, it also suppresses fertility rates by its expressed moral repugnance for having a child by someone other than your boring spouse. A lot of people, some of their own free will, and many more who have been pushed, have recently broken free of wage slavery and are now working, mostly for much less income, for themselves. That's probably a good thing in many ways -- it reduces the supply of the remaining wage slaves, which might actually, in time, allow them to bargain from a position of at least a bit of power. It increases self-sufficiency. It reduces excessive consumption. What if there were a similar revolution against marriage slavery? What if a whole generation just refused to define themselves (in more ways than one) as married, or to live with the constraints of monogamy, and instead opted for a polyamory life-style? Paternity 'rights' and responsibilities would both probably suffer, as the new family unit would be a woman (or possibly, and more logically, a group of women, in self-selected community) and their children. They would have the power, and could strike whatever contract they chose with males who wanted the responsibilities and privileges of fatherhood. The nuclear family and the 'single-family dwelling' would disappear. Conjugal relations would not attach to parental responsibility, and could be negotiated between any two people as individuals on a one-shot basis, with no responsibility other than the responsibility to prevent unwanted pregnancy and disease. This would probably be bad for the oldest profession, as the supply/demand ratio for quick couplings would soar. Jealousy and the consequent domestic violence that is the scourge of our nuclear spouse-as-property society would, slowly (old habits die hard), disappear. I think the vast majority of men, driven by million-year-old biological imperatives, once they reached a certain age, would choose to attach themselves to one of the matriarchal communities (if so invited), and would do their share to provide for its well-being, in return for the company and sense of purpose that would bring. We are told it takes a village, a community, to raise a child. Perhaps the community is necessary, and sufficient, for far more: To break us all free from both the emotionally numbing subjugation of wage-slavery and the misery and boredom of marriage-slavery. The community would then become truly self-sufficient in every respect, and we would be happier and freer than we can, or dare, imagine. Cartoon: By Peter Steiner from The New Yorker, in the Cartoon Bank |
 ‘Twas the night before Christmas, when all through the house Not a creature was stirring, not even a mouse (though Anita’s convinced there are mouses around and in every room of our house they abound so Dave’s hammered up boards near the slightest of sound and he’s left to believe there are none to be found). The reruns of “Santa Clause”, “Frosty” and “Scrooge” Were blaring away on our TV screen huge, And Chelsea was barking away in her sleep With visions of chasing alpacas and sheep; Anita was laughing in midst of her dreams (She was Santa with eight naked sleigh-men, in teams). While Dave was still wrapping her presents at two With the leftover paper, in orange and blue (‘Cause the red, white and green wrap goes fastest, it’s true And the ribbon’s all gone, so what else can you do?) When all of a sudden there rose such a clatter He ran to the door to see what was the matter When what to his wondrous eyes should appear But a man, with a wolf, and coyotes and deer! Dave thought for a moment he’d tuned in “Due South” (But there wasn’t a Mountie, or sidekick with mouth) Just a strange little man with these creatures so wild In the dark of the night of the birth of the Child. The creatures all sparkled (the full moon aglow Reflected the white of the new-fallen snow) “Seeking room at the inn?” Dave cried out to them all “Not at all” said the man, “We have no time to stall: We are sending a message to those who can see That the secret of life is in sensing the glee In the moment, in nature, when everything’s still Just a moment like this, here and now, on this hill, And you just stand and look, smell, taste, touch, pause and hear; It’s the same for a man, and a wolf, and a deer. Though the end of the planet is possibly near When you’re one with the world there is nothing to fear: You are part of the dance of the ages above And all that it takes to partake is the love Of yourself and your wife and your kids and your dog And the moon and the stars, and the rain and the fog, And the land and the air and the sea and the sun, And the sense of the truth that combines them as One. So get out of yourself and of being apart You are part of the science and part of the art That connects all of us in the head and the heart. You have put so much work in your trial to survive You’ve forgotten the feeling of being alive, So let go of yourself, and your sorrow and grief And shower the ones that you love with belief That life is too short to regret and delay: You must live for the moment and live day to day Like my friends the coyotes, the wolves and the deer— They sense in their hearts that their death is too near But the joy of the moment transcends all the fear— They can see! They can feel! They can smell! They can hear! They’re alive in a way you’ve forgotten to be And they’re happy, connected, united, and free. So when you awake Christmas morn don’t be coy: Spread the word, spread the warmth, spread the love, spread the joy! Say: I love you and Thank you, you’re one of a kind, Say You’re wonderful, special and No, I don’t mind. And then in a glimmer of moonlight they’d gone And David returned to the house with a yawn And slept with the thoughts of the words that they’d spoke But would he remember those words, when he woke…? (no post tomorrow -- Merry Christmas everyone -- back Boxing Day) |
I almost called Anil last night to find an all-night Internet access place. Sure sure - Bryant Park, Union Sq. Battery Park all have free Wifi - but they don't have power.
So I'm currently ensconced at a Starbucks at 66th & 3rd - enjoying the summer hotties, the international place that NYC is - and prepping for tonight's micro-content dinner.
It's at the Grand Sichuan on 9th Ave. between 50-51 at 6:30.
My friend Kenny asked: "What the hell is Micro-content?" and I started to tell him the history of what Jakob Nielson called it, how I define it and some examples of how it's used (I pointed Kenny to Jason Kottke's site.)
We were contacted by the Wikipedia folks yesterday to work on the OpenMedia project. JD's been kicking ass - getting that going.
The FOAF confab programme was finally announced (notice the EU spelling.....) Plaxo is sending somebody and there are a couple of other entities saying they're using FOAF en masse. Can't wait to find out what's up wit dat.
And I'm working on an OpenListings proposal that is gonna rock the house.
Hopefully some peeps can make it tonight. The food is supposedly really spicey hot. Good.
We need that to match the ideas being proselytized.
youyesyou.com/welove/index.html
track this
site | 7 links
(1) the
things we do for loveThe following phrases have been identified by the grok system as matching this entry:
