Monday, December 3, 2018

Friendship and peace

I'm a bit of a rare bird on NewGathering - I'm conservative.  But we're friends (I think and hope).

Politically, and as the church measures these things, this is a liberal place.  I suppose, on the liberal spectrum, NewGathering is not *that* liberal on the whole, but to dyed-in-the-wool, traditionalist conservatives (like my parents, whom I am pretty sure have never read this nor any other blog), some of the opinions on offer here would make their hair stand on end - a reaction that would be emblematic of the social fissures that run through our country.

I'm aware that the rest of you, though more liberal than me, aren't monochromatic in your progressivism.  Each of us has our own sets of views.  And that is what makes this such a readable forum.  It would be comparatively rare, and probably pretty boring, if we were all perfectly aligned on a given topic.

But what I wish to highlight here is not the fact that we're all different, but that, by and large, those differences haven't led to the division and dysfunctionality in which social media seems to specialize.

That we all get along (usually), or even more than get along, is not something to take for granted.  I recently saw this exchange between Bari Weiss of the New York Times and Eve Peyser of Vice.  These two women did not know one another personally, but had encountered one another's tweets in the Twitterverse.  Their cyber-relationship went the way that so many go: the more they read each other's tweets and commented on, replied to and sniped at one another's contributions, the more they started to loathe one another.

What makes their story even more interesting is that, in a number of respects, they're similar.  Both are Jewish women and media professionals who work in social media in New York.  Politically, both are liberal.  It seems likely enough that, had they known each other the way that adults used to know one another - had they shared a newsroom or taken the same yoga class or their kids been in the same pre-school or some such - they would have found areas of compatibility and common interest, and would have had a friendly relationship.  And in fact, once they actually met face to face, that is what transpired.  But social media is so corrosive of human relations that it had overridden all those possible areas of positive connection so long as the relationship was electronic-only.

That the two women met at all is worth commenting on.  They met at a conference they both happened to be attending.  It would be cute, and perhaps film-script-worthy, had they encountered one another by chance without knowing who the other was; but it didn't happen that way.  They met because Peyser suggested that they meet one another.  Does that sort of reaching-out strike you as extraordinary?  I think it is.  Or if "extraordinary" is too strong, I think it's pretty unusual.

Initially, Weiss didn't exactly see Peyser's outreach as a good-faith overture:
I thought there was a solid chance you were going to try to James O’Keefe me, which is why I suggested swimming — quite hard to wear a wire in a bathing suit
Lest you think that Weiss was being paranoid, she had just had another real-life encounter with some other denizens of Twitter which did not bolster her faith in the goodwill of the human race:
The night before I had had a horrible experience with two other people at the conference who confronted me in a bar about my views in a particularly vicious way that was intended to humiliate me.  I was shaken up by it.  You had actually heard about it from the guy involved, who was bragging to you about bullying me, thinking he had come upon someone like-minded. 
I recommend reading the entire exchange here.  The tone of the two women is not what one would get from a couple of old, lifelong friends: there is a sort of cautious friendliness in their addressing one another that seems to acknowledge that the friendship that is sprouting between them is still young and perhaps vulnerable, and so both seem to be working hard to tend to the relationship.  It strikes me as honest and authentic.

This story of an incipient friendship appeals to me during the beginning of this Advent time.  Although Peyser and Weiss may not be inclined to use the theological language, I see Peyser's outstretched hand of friendship, and Weiss's grasping it, as a real life, practical example of metanoia - the sort of conversion, perhaps tinged with penitence, to which the church calls us during this season.  These women weren't complete strangers, but rather two people who had become antipathetic to one another.  The contour of this story isn't one of strangers becoming friends, but rather of the healing of a feud through personal encounter.

The appointed reading for today's Morning Prayer is one of the stock Advent readings.  These words were written down some two and a half or so millenia ago, but they have never not been contemporary, and the divisive reality of social media may lend them a fresh currency and urgency:

In days to come,
The mountain of the LORD’s house
shall be established as the highest mountain
and raised above the hills.
All nations shall stream toward it.
Many peoples shall come and say:
“Come, let us go up to the LORD’s mountain,
to the house of the God of Jacob,
That he may instruct us in his ways,
and we may walk in his paths.”
For from Zion shall go forth instruction,
and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
He shall judge between the nations,
and set terms for many peoples.
They shall beat their swords into plowshares
and their spears into pruning hooks;
One nation shall not raise the sword against another,
nor shall they train for war again.
House of Jacob, come,
let us walk in the light of the LORD!
      (Isaiah 2:2-5)

On some days, it seems easier to believe in the Virgin Birth or the Second Coming than that He will bring peace.  That makes me grateful for NewGathering: I'm grateful for all your contributions, and especially grateful that, on most days, this is a place of peace.  Let us continue to cultivate peace here.

36 comments:

  1. Two quotes from the piece. To me what rings most true are the last two sentences in the paragraph from Bari Weiss.

    Bari Weiss:
    I’ve been thinking about our little détente a bunch in the wake of the midterms. I am struck by how some on the left are talking about the people — especially white women — who voted Republican. Their message seems to be, “We need a re-education camp for white women who are clearly motivated solely or primarily by racism.” It’s about shaming people. And shame, at least in my experience, doesn’t make people change their minds. It just makes them dig in.

    Eve Peyser:
    The longer I write about politics, the more open I am to being friends with people of all ideologies. My favorite part of my job is having the opportunity to interview people I don’t see eye-to-eye with, and trying to understand how and why their worldview is the way it is.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "And shame, at least in my experience, doesn’t make people change their minds. It just makes them dig in."
      I think that is certainly true.

      Delete
    2. I don't know. Shame and guilt always worked for me

      Delete
  2. I have no issues with what you post, Jim. I enjoy your homilies. You're a faithful and obedient Catholic and holy deacon. Even a Bad Catholic like me assumes you know more than I do, and in religious matters, I will always accede to your knowledge. Politics not so much.

    However, as you extend the hand of friendship, you let us know that some of us are so weird that, if you brought us home to meet your folks, we would raise their hair. As a kumbaya moment, the post fell a bit flat for me.

    But speaking of bringing people home:

    Also in today's reading was the guy who asked Christ to heal his servant. He said he was unworthy to bring Jesus home, but was sure his servant would be healed if Jesus just said the word. Then Jesus hinted around about salvation being extended far and wide, presumably not just to the Jews (or, perhaps we can extrapolate, the Good Catholics whose hair is easily raised).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Jean - sorry about the failed kumbaya moment :-). I like "Kumbaya", so I'm all in favor of those moments! And I agree that the healing of the centurion's servant was the real Kumbaya moment.

      And after your omniscience from 2016 on Trump being elected, I am ready to bow to you on all matters political.

      Delete
    2. An interesting thing about Kumbaya is that nobody knows exactly where it came from. The Wikipedia article is actually the most lucid thing I've read on it.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kumbaya

      Delete
    3. I'm not sure Raber has nor or ever will forgive me for predicting that. It wasn't anything that made me happy. But apparently he felt that just saying there were enough dumbasses in America to get that guy elected somehow jinxed it.

      Sometimes those of us with weird ideas are actually right ...

      Delete
    4. Singing Kumbaya has rather negative connotations now: "To engage in a show of unity and harmony with one's opponents or enemies; frequently used in a disparaging or sarcastic sense."

      Often it is used to denote a situation where real problems are overlooked in favor of doing something useless or to appeal to a sense of unity that doesn't exist.

      More here: https://www.lonelyplanet.com/thorntree/forums/speaking-in-tongues/topics/a-kumbaya-moment

      But it's a pretty song.

      Delete
    5. Pretty song. But we could substitute "Michael, Row the Boat Ashore." My No. 2 son is named Michael.

      FWIW, at a teen-age retreat years ago, "Waltzing Matilda," which I had to teach them, topped both Kumbaya and Michael in teenage appreciation.

      It's not about togetherness, though. Something about the swagman and the landlord not getting along.

      Delete
    6. Someday when I'm bored I'll do a post on youth rally songs of yore.

      Delete
    7. We sang a song about the Titanic at camp. "Husbands and wives, little children lost their lives / It was sa-aa-d when that great ship went down."

      Delete
  3. Thanks. I passed up two urban feminist intellectuals because ufi, but their back-and-forth is worth thinking about. Coincidentally, the same issue of the Times Web page included Maureen Dowd's quotes from the presidential mash notes she got from GHWB, another example of getting along famously (Bush probably got along with almost everybody) while disagreeing.

    You know what gets my goat? (Read that sentence in your Andy Rooney voice.) Assumptions made about a person's position on other things based on that person's stance on a single issue. I know there are people who buy the whole bag when someone says what's in the bag -- like Republicans who are now for protectionism, which they never were before. But most of us muddle through life thinking there can be kinds of gun control in which no government inspectors in jackboots come to take your shotgun away, or think that being gay confers no new rights even though gay people are entitled to all the old ones.

    I don't think life can be lived well on line. I'm not sure Peyser and Weiss get that yet. This is the only place I write, and that's just because I love y'all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tom, now that you've suggested it, I'm find it quite easy to read your posts and comments in Andy Rooney's voice :-). He was another exasperated and ink-stained retiree, right? Or was he always behind a microphone.

      Delete
    2. Ya know, what doesn't bother me anymore? Comparisons with Andy Rooney. Although, I found Julius LaRosa wonderfully humble.

      Delete
    3. How about Steve Allen in a press hat? Too early for Jim?

      Delete
    4. Ufi? Wow. Even I'm not that mean.

      Andy Rooney, a man who made being incensed over trivialities like the size of women's purses and people carrying water bottles into a nice-paying career. Talk about ufi ...

      Delete
    5. Jean,You know Urban Feminist Intellectuals -- UFIs. Rooney made a pretty good living pretending to be a non-intellectual. Now we have non-intellectuals running the country, and they aren't pretending.

      Stanley, Steve Allen before TV is way too early for Jim. I'm wondering when he is going to ask who Julius LaRosa is and what he had to do with Rooney.

      Delete
    6. I stand corrected. Ufi means something else in my world.

      Delete
    7. Yeah, I only remember Steve Allen from pushing retiree life insurance or some such on daytime TV commercials. I'll bite on Julius LaRose. I guess I could just google him, but Tom's explanations are always so much more readable.

      Delete
    8. Useless effing information. Type of things you find in memos from admin explaining the rationale.for changing cafeteria contractors, or in those pages and pages of "this is not a bill" statements from the insurance company.

      Delete
    9. Jean,are you talking about my useless umi information? The reference, for the youngsters, was to a young singer who appeared on one of Arthur Godfrey's many TV ventures, all of which featured Godfrey chuckling and occasionally playing a ukulele. He had an "And his Friends" program on which a number of singers appeared each week, and one week he fired Julius LaRosa for lack of "humility" right after LaRosa finished his song and while they were on the air. A sort of weird scandal in early TVland.

      Fast forward many years, and LaRosa is a disc jockey in New York who occasionally sings somewhere unfamous. One of the producers at the Bucks County Playhouse -- a summer theater on the banks of the Delaware River -- gets the brainstorm that LaRosa, who no one knows can act, would make a great Hajj in "Kismet," the Forrest & Wright mashup of Borodin. Why the folks at the Playhouse had this idea remains forever a mystery. But:

      LaRosa was great.

      Not only was my review a money review ("Mediterranean moxie") but so was everyone else's up and down the river all the way to Philadelphia. So then a guy who runs a restaurant with dinner shows books LaRosa to sing for a week. As the week draws near, the guy calls LaRosa, who says, "Look I know I am no draw. If you want to get out of the contract..." And the producer says, "No, we are all booked up for the week. I'm calling to ask if you can do a second week."

      Meanwhile, I learned that at the last rehearsal for Kismet LaRosa tore a muscle and was playing in pain on that opening night when he was so good. And the actor I learned it from said he was a sweetheart with the cast who made everybody feel good. So that was Mr. Lacks Humility.

      I thought of all that because Godfrey gave Rooney his first break and Rooney never stopped talking about what a great guy Godfrey was. I had it on my mind to mention so was LaRosa.

      Delete
    10. I remember my parents being outraged about LaRosa's firing on air. Their references to Godfrey were always predicated with "that son of a bitch."

      As far as singing Italians went, I always preferred Louis Prima. When Dad lived in Indianapolis, he said Prima played both white and black clubs. He said the shows were better at the black clubs.

      Sorry, ufi. I seem to ramble more on the meds ...

      Delete
    11. See? I think you should spin up Tom-o-pedia.

      Here is Julius LaRosa singing "Three Coins in a Fountain". Dude could sing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tK7l_dgI0Mk

      I know Kismet. Not a show for the singing faint-of-heart; musically, it's operetta-like. Great score, great musical concept. Musical Broadway in the Fifties was pretty interesting. I guess The King and I and Guys and Dolls are what have lived on, but it also had shows like Kismet, Flower Drum Song and Li'l Abner with outstanding scores but whose books would struggle to pass the cultural sniff test these days. I think Rogers and Hammerstein foresaw that sort of thing; I believe they'd made it a provision of their trusts or wills or whatever that any future productions of their shows could revise the books as necessary, but the music and lyrics had to stay intact.

      Delete
    12. This video, about five minutes long, includes the radiocast segment in which Godfrey fires LaRosa, along with some commentary by other parties, including Andy Rooney. Godfrey comes across as a real pr*ck. Seems like it hurt both LaRosa's and Godfrey's careers.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6s75wpdiri8

      Delete
    13. I guess My Fair Lady and The Music Man, stage editions, were from the Fifties, too - probably they were the biggest blockbusters of that era? They still have some life in them.

      Delete
    14. I was five at the time, so Julius Larosa's firing didn't register on my historical time line. But he always seemed like a nice guy who genuinely liked his audience. Tom, thanks for the Bucks County Playhouse story. Good to know he was still exercising his talent and was as nice a guy as he seemed.

      Delete
    15. Jim, You guess right. West Side Story is from 1957, too. It didn't win the Tony Award for Best Musical. My Fair Lady did.

      Considering the star power of the original MFL cast, it is amazing how well it stands up with lesser talent in the leads. Julie Andrews won the Tony, but she wasn't famous enough to play the role in the movie, so Audrey Hepburn got that. Julie got Mary Poppins as a consolation prize. And won an Academy Award.

      Delete
    16. Dagnabbit, I should have known that about West Side Story - in my little pantheon, it's the Most Important Stage Musical Ever, from any number of points of view. But for some reason I had it lodged in my brain that it was from the very early '60's.

      My Fair Lady - I think its greatness is attributable to the book, i.e. it's Pygmalion with Lerner and Loew tunes. I don't actually care for Rex Harrison doing the song-speak thing. But that's just me.

      As for Audrey Hepburn as Eliza - or for that matter, Natalie Wood as Maria - um. The one looked great, and the other could act, but neither was trusted to sing, so by my lights, they both were miscast. Let singers have the singing roles.

      And then there was the guy who played Tony in the Broadway original cast of West Side Story, an actor by the name of Larry Kert who never achieved the same greatness again; his Wikipedia entry implies it's because he was open about being gay. Here is the relevant passage:

      "In 1955, while dancing in the chorus in the Sammy Davis, Jr. show Mr. Wonderful, Kert was recommended by his fellow dancer and friend Chita Rivera, who eventually won the role of Anita in West Side Story, to audition as a dancer for Gangway during the earliest Broadway pre-production of the Arthur Laurents-Leonard Bernstein-Stephen Sondheim musical later titled West Side Story, an adaptation of Romeo and Juliet set on the west side of mid-town Manhattan in the 1950s. Kert was the 18th out of 150 hopefuls to audition, but was the first one to be cut. A few months later, while he was working for Esquire in an advertising show, Stephen Sondheim approached him after seeing him perform and set up an audition for the part of Tony. Kert was reluctant to accept the offer, but a few weeks later, he was informed that he had the role.

      "According to Arthur Laurents, who wrote the book for West Side Story, Kert was "a California extrovert, laughing, bubbling, deadly funny, and openly gay."[2] Director-choreographer Jerome Robbins frequently clashed with Kert, publicly chastising him for being a "faggot", despite the fact that Robbins himself, fellow dancer Tommy Abbott, and most of the creative team were gay. Kert did not repeat his role in the 1961 film version of the show because at 30 years old he looked unbelievable as a teenager. The role went to former child actor Richard Beymer, whose vocals were dubbed by Jimmy Bryant. Kert was upset at being passed over for the role, because he had hoped that it would jump-start his film career."

      Delete
  4. Thanks for this post, Jim.
    I think the meanings of "liberal" and "conservative" have changed over the years. I used to consider myself conservative. I don't really think I have changed that much. Maybe some. But I don't think the ones who say they are the "real conservatives" now would claim me. And worse than that, sometimes I am tempted not to claim them. I need to channel the two women in your post and do the hard work of trying harder to see others as God sees them, and not divide them into neat little categories.
    I love that Isaiah reading; part of the same chapter was in today's Mass readings. The homilist talked of how in some ways the prophecy is fulfilled, now Jerusalem is a holy city to three faiths (but the peace part is elusive).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "I think the meanings of "liberal" and "conservative" have changed over the years."

      Katherine - Perry Bacon from Five Thirty Eight agrees with you.

      https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-republican-party-has-changed-dramatically-since-george-h-w-bush-ran-it/

      Delete
  5. Jim, if all conservatives were like you, I wouldn't ever have a problem and political discourse would be civil everywhere. On the "left" side, it's the abortion rights people who are over the top. I have friends who are even Trumpers. One guy is now retired and runs a local open land organization. He loves nature. We went on many a canoe expedition together. It's a big mistake to pigeonhole anyone. But, these days, it seems we all live or die based on one issue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yeah, my mother was a one-issue, pro-choice voter, which my brother said was her way of telling us that she wished that she'd have retroactively aborted us if she'd had the chance. She certainly made it clear that having children was her biggest mistake in life. Listening to her did more to change my mind about abortion-on-demand than any impassioned pro-lifer.

      Delete
  6. I am not a youngster like Jim. But I have no idea who Julius LaRosa was. I guess my mom didn't watch the same tV shows. I will google him.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Yeah, I wasn't aware of him either. Though we did watch Arthur Godfrey sometimes, more for his guests than him being very entertaining himself.

    ReplyDelete