Lisa McCarty | The True | Photography
Left to Right: Autumn, View from the Emerson-Thoreau Amble (2018) | Autumn, View
from Walden Woods (2018) | Concord Grape Vine, Ralph Waldo Emerson House (2018)
Artist’s Note
The images featured in this issue are from my series Transcendental Concord
(Radius Books, 2018). The series is a visual interpretation of
transcendentalism: a literary, philosophical, and social movement that developed
from a community in Concord, Massachusetts. Through this project—which involved
equal parts photographing, walking, and reading—I sought to pay homage to the
transcendentalists and make images that reflect their philosophy. Over the
course of a year, I explored the landscape that inspired them as well as where
they lived and wrote.
While on these pilgrimages, I photographed specific places in Concord referenced
in transcendentalist writings. I photographed simply, wandering on foot with a
film camera. I photographed deliberately, with reverence toward the natural
world, observing variations large and small in the environment. And I
photographed experimentally, incorporating long exposures as well as camera
movement from photographing while walking. Although I never expected to see
exactly what the transcendentalists saw, I hoped to feel something of what they
felt, searching the landscape for traces of history and a sense of
interconnection.Left to Right: Autumn, View from the Emerson-Thoreau Amble (2018) | Autumn, View
from Walden Woods (2018) | Concord Grape Vine, Ralph Waldo Emerson House (2018)
Artist’s Note
The images featured in this issue are from my series Transcendental Concord
(Radius Books, 2018). The series is a visual interpretation of
transcendentalism: a literary, philosophical, and social movement that developed
from a community in Concord, Massachusetts. Through this project—which involved
equal parts photographing, walking, and reading—I sought to pay homage to the
transcendentalists and make images that reflect their philosophy. Over the
course of a year, I explored the landscape that inspired them as well as where
they lived and wrote.
While on these pilgrimages, I photographed specific places in Concord referenced
in transcendentalist writings. I photographed simply, wandering on foot with a
film camera. I photographed deliberately, with reverence toward the natural
world, observing variations large and small in the environment. And I
photographed experimentally, incorporating long exposures as well as camera
movement from photographing while walking. Although I never expected to see
exactly what the transcendentalists saw, I hoped to feel something of what they
felt, searching the landscape for traces of history and a sense of
interconnection.Samantha George | The Necessary | Artwork
Reaching for the Stars, micron pen on illustration board, 10" x 8", 2021American
Dream, photograph, 10" x 8", 2021 Artist’s Note
For so many people, America represents a place of new beginnings and new
opportunities. That’s why in 2007, my family traveled over 8,000 miles to
America from our hometown of Kerala, India. Like so many immigrants, we came to
America in the search of better education, better job opportunities, and a
better life for me and my brother. My parents had to work tirelessly to build
themselves a home. Yet through this struggle, we've built ourselves not only a
home but a life: a life that, in all likelihood, we could not have replicated or
enjoyed back in India.
In my artwork, I sought to capture this search for the American Dream that many
immigrants and minority communities hope for but often struggle to achieve.
Still, their determination to provide a better life for themselves, for their
families, and for future generations is unflinching, even in the face of
tribulation. Whether from India like my family, whether from Afghanistan like
thousands of our newest neighbors, or whether from across the Mexican border,
those who seek to call America "home" should be welcomed with hands as open as
theirs that—like the photo—are reaching out.Reaching for the Stars, micron pen on illustration board, 10" x 8", 2021American
Dream, photograph, 10" x 8", 2021 Artist’s Note
For so many people, America represents a place of new beginnings and new
opportunities. That’s why in 2007, my family traveled over 8,000 miles to
America from our hometown of Kerala, India. Like so many immigrants, we came to
America in the search of better education, better job opportunities, and a
better life for me and my brother. My parents had to work tirelessly to build
themselves a home. Yet through this struggle, we've built ourselves not only a
home but a life: a life that, in all likelihood, we could not have replicated or
enjoyed back in India.
In my artwork, I sought to capture this search for the American Dream that many
immigrants and minority communities hope for but often struggle to achieve.
Still, their determination to provide a better life for themselves, for their
families, and for future generations is unflinching, even in the face of
tribulation. Whether from India like my family, whether from Afghanistan like
thousands of our newest neighbors, or whether from across the Mexican border,
those who seek to call America "home" should be welcomed with hands as open as
theirs that—like the photo—are reaching out.Lucy Villeneuve | The Human | Artwork
Lemonade, acrylic on canvas, 20" x 24" (2021)Currently, acrylic on canvas, 20" x
24" (2021)Sunday, acrylic on canvas, 20" x 24" (2021)Marshmallow, acrylic on
canvas, 20" x 24" (2021)Yurt, acrylic on canvas, 16" x 20" (2021) Artist’s Note
I have spent so much of my life planning and organizing chaos as an attempt to
feel in control. Thus, my studies in Buddhism, and specifically the Taoist art
of wu wei have felt like a rewiring. Infusing wu wei into my practice, I am
along for the ride while also driving. The lines, shapes, and colors have a
conversation, a song, a dance that I look for and honor—it’s a slippery
in-betweenness just outside my grasp. As I attempt to balance the scale between
intention and nonsense, I meet myself wherever I am on my canvas. My pieces,
too, come with me: into my bedroom as I sleep, next to the kitchen table as I
eat. Like a dissolving effort that moves forward, the colors become “of course”
and the lines wax “okay” in a quiet, ecstatic optimism.
Pastels are irresistible to me. They are the only element I choose outright. The
soft blues, pinks, yellows, oranges, and greens undeniably bring me joy. They
call to me in whispers from the shelves of art supply store, capturing me with
ease. I don’t question the attraction. I pull the lines from behind my eyes,
back out the top of my head, and down to my hands, the space between them
dictating their existence. Above all, when I am making my pieces, I think of my
mother’s hands. They were often attempting to grasp at something that existed
only in her voice, twisting and flicking about in a search of understanding.Lemonade, acrylic on canvas, 20" x 24" (2021)Currently, acrylic on canvas, 20" x
24" (2021)Sunday, acrylic on canvas, 20" x 24" (2021)Marshmallow, acrylic on
canvas, 20" x 24" (2021)Yurt, acrylic on canvas, 16" x 20" (2021) Artist’s Note
I have spent so much of my life planning and organizing chaos as an attempt to
feel in control. Thus, my studies in Buddhism, and specifically the Taoist art
of wu wei have felt like a rewiring. Infusing wu wei into my practice, I am
along for the ride while also driving. The lines, shapes, and colors have a
conversation, a song, a dance that I look for and honor—it’s a slippery
in-betweenness just outside my grasp. As I attempt to balance the scale between
intention and nonsense, I meet myself wherever I am on my canvas. My pieces,
too, come with me: into my bedroom as I sleep, next to the kitchen table as I
eat. Like a dissolving effort that moves forward, the colors become “of course”
and the lines wax “okay” in a quiet, ecstatic optimism.
Pastels are irresistible to me. They are the only element I choose outright. The
soft blues, pinks, yellows, oranges, and greens undeniably bring me joy. They
call to me in whispers from the shelves of art supply store, capturing me with
ease. I don’t question the attraction. I pull the lines from behind my eyes,
back out the top of my head, and down to my hands, the space between them
dictating their existence. Above all, when I am making my pieces, I think of my
mother’s hands. They were often attempting to grasp at something that existed
only in her voice, twisting and flicking about in a search of understanding.Daniel Bennett | The Human | Essay
The path to the summit of Scotts Bluff National Monument is Nebraska at its
best. Morning walks among sweeping panoramas in the serenity of the prairie are
treasured rituals for many of us who live nearby. So in 2015, when 25,000 tons
of sandstone broke away from the side of Scotts Bluff National Monument,
pulverizing the path below and closing it for over a year, hundreds of walkers
and I were left a bit out of sorts. We were forced to find new morning routines,
reminded that even our monuments are just here for a moment.
From the history I’ve stitched together from elders, friends, and roadside
historical markers, I sense that this area has always been shaped by transience.
Passers through—in search of game or work in sugar beet fields or simply on
their way to somewhere else—came, left their mark, and moved on. Among those
travelers, however, some stayed or returned.
I myself first arrived in 2013 for my first job as a community planner, made
this place home for five years, and left for new opportunities. When given the
option to work remotely in 2020, I returned after just 18 months away and found
things had already changed. Friends had moved, some of my favorite businesses
closed, my work and position in the community were different. It felt like
coming home and finding some other family’s pictures on my wall.
Anyone who has tried to make their home in a place that doesn’t feel “home”
anymore understands. In Wendell Berry’s novel Hannah Coulter, Berry addresses
precisely this sense of displacement. An iconic American environmentalist, poet,
and novelist, he has written prolifically about rural life; Berry’s novels
center in the fictional town of Port William, an analogue for his actual place
of residence in Port Royal, Kentucky. In Hannah Coulter, the titular character
is a twice-widowed elderly woman reflecting on her years in Port William. Toward
the end of the book, she considers the changes in the town and her own sense of
the community’s “completeness”:
> The old Port William that I came into in 1941 I think of now as a sort of
picture puzzle. It was not an altogether satisfactory picture. It always
required some forgiveness, for things that of course could be forgiven. But the
picture was more or less complete and more or less put together and the pieces
were more or less replaceable. After the war ended in 1945, slowly at first but
ever faster, the lost pieces were not replaced. Sometimes, as when we buried the
old Feltners or Mr. Milo Settle, the new grave contained a necessary and forever
finished part of the old life.
In my work, I come across many residents who view “home” similarly as a sort of
puzzle with missing pieces. Ask elders in just about any small town what they
think could be better in their community, and there’s a chance you’ll get a list
of everything that used to be there. It's easy to pass off longing for “the good
old days” as backward-thinking and unimaginative, but perhaps this lament is
worth considering, even honoring. We seek out the lost pieces of home—friends,
landmarks we love, traditions, institutions—not only because they constitute an
essential part of what we think of as home, but also because they constitute an
essential part of how we think of ourselves. Adapting to a new picture without
all of its puzzle pieces is not only adapting to a new environment, but also a
foreign way of being.
The towns and people of Nebraska most inspiring to me don’t dwell on missing
puzzle pieces. “Home” for them is an active, creative process that draws on
their gifts in new ways. They approach their projects with curiosity. Old and
new friends dim and brighten to form new constellations of support and meaning.
A friend from church engages our community this way. Despite losing his wife,
despite his children moving away, despite retiring from his official job titles
that compelled community presence, he still shows up. He fixes fencing on a
friend’s rangeland south of town, he mentors youth, he presents to grief
recovery groups, he helped lead our congregation’s giving campaign, he’s started
framing pictures for others with old barn wood, he always makes room for new
friends. His actions are ordinary but the innerwork that preceded them is
heroic. Untethering ourselves from a familiar picture of “home” to venture into
a new way of being takes great courage. Setting our foundation on the deepest
meaning for our life, rather than on familiar titles, takes great faith.
Whether Port William of 1941 or Scottsbluff of 2018, we all carry with us
pictures of how “home” should be. When pieces of these pictures inevitably go
missing, we are all susceptible to embarking on heartfelt but futile searches to
replace what is irreplaceable. Perhaps more accurately, we cling to old ways of
being and delay the real innerwork of self-transformation. But if I were to take
a lesson from my friend, and from Berry, it would be that at some point we must
let the passers through pass on and let the rockslides fall. Home may be found
again in the courage to face this estranged terrain at last with an open heart,
in faith that belonging is our birthright, which through our gifts we are called
to reclaim. The path to the summit of Scotts Bluff National Monument is Nebraska at its
best. Morning walks among sweeping panoramas in the serenity of the prairie are
treasured rituals for many of us who live nearby. So in 2015, when 25,000 tons
of sandstone broke away from the side of Scotts Bluff National Monument,
pulverizing the path below and closing it for over a year, hundreds of walkers
and I were left a bit out of sorts. We were forced to find new morning routines,
reminded that even our monuments are just here for a moment.
From the history I’ve stitched together from elders, friends, and roadside
historical markers, I sense that this area has always been shaped by transience.
Passers through—in search of game or work in sugar beet fields or simply on
their way to somewhere else—came, left their mark, and moved on. Among those
travelers, however, some stayed or returned.
I myself first arrived in 2013 for my first job as a community planner, made
this place home for five years, and left for new opportunities. When given the
option to work remotely in 2020, I returned after just 18 months away and found
things had already changed. Friends had moved, some of my favorite businesses
closed, my work and position in the community were different. It felt like
coming home and finding some other family’s pictures on my wall.
Anyone who has tried to make their home in a place that doesn’t feel “home”
anymore understands. In Wendell Berry’s novel Hannah Coulter, Berry addresses
precisely this sense of displacement. An iconic American environmentalist, poet,
and novelist, he has written prolifically about rural life; Berry’s novels
center in the fictional town of Port William, an analogue for his actual place
of residence in Port Royal, Kentucky. In Hannah Coulter, the titular character
is a twice-widowed elderly woman reflecting on her years in Port William. Toward
the end of the book, she considers the changes in the town and her own sense of
the community’s “completenessAhmed Hmeedat | The Plain | Artwork
#1, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#2, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#3,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#4, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#5,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#6, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#7,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#8, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#9,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#10, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#11,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#12, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#13,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#14, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)
Artist’s Note
“Searching for the Blue” is a series of portraits conceived during the COVID-19
pandemic. However, its origins can be traced back to my final days in
Alexandria, Virginia. The night before I was to return to my native Palestine, I
looked carefully at my belongings. Much to my chagrin, I came to the realization
that I would not be able to bring my full set of art supplies. Thus, I decided
to give them away to my friends. As I held the last tubes of paint in my hand, I
recognized that my love of blue exceeded my sense of generosity. Suddenly, the
dictum of German-American architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe popped into my
head: “less is more.” At that moment, I made a compromise with myself; the
ultramarine blue, the titanium white, and the ivory black acrylics would make
the journey back home with me. I wasn’t sure how this limited color palette
would inform my artistic practice, but I was optimistic that I could create
something.
On March 5th, 2020, the Palestinian authority declared a national state of
emergency due to the rapid spread of COVID-19. During lockdown, I transitioned
to working remotely from home. Searching for something to do with my extra time,
I sought out the suitcase that housed the remainder of my art supplies from the
States. As I quietly contemplated the three colors, a flash of inspiration came
to me: a series of portraits. Seeking the spirit of collaboration during a time
of isolation, I decided to work with photographers who shared copyright-free
images of their photos on various websites. In my portraits based on these
works, I strove to capture an impression—not a likeness—using systematic
brushstrokes, the bluish tones acting as a common ground between people of all
backgrounds. This is especially important to me as a Palestinian. I believe that
the search for connections with other cultures and people is a fundamental
element of our shared humanity, which, in turn, allows us to bridge
divides. Working with limited resources made me realize that anyone can use
anything and everything at their disposal to create art, to express themselves.
Despite one’s circumstances or lack of materials, the impulse to create always
seems to shine through.#1, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#2, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#3,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#4, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#5,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#6, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#7,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#8, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#9,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2021)#10, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#11,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#12, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#13,
acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)#14, acrylic on paper, 13" x 20" (2020)
Artist’s Note
“Searching for the Blue” is a series of portraits conceived during the COVID-19
pandemic. However, its origins can be traced back to my final days in
Alexandria, Virginia. The night before I was to return to my native Palestine, I
looked carefully at my belongings. Much to my chagrin, I came to the realization
that I would not be able to bring my full set of art supplies. Thus, I decided
to give them away to my friends. As I held the last tubes of paint in my hand, I
recognized that my love of blue exceeded my sense of generosity. Suddenly, the
dictum of German-American architect Ludwig Mies van der Rohe popped into my
head: “less is more.” At that moment, I made a compromise with myself; the
ultramarine blue, the titanium white, and the ivory black acrylics would make
the journey back home with me. I wasn’t sure how this limited color palette
would inform my artistic practice, but I was optimistic that I could create
something.
On March 5th, 2020, the Palestinian authority declared a national state of
emergency due to the rapid spread of COVID-19. During lockdown, I transitioned
to working remotely from home. Searching for something to do with my extra time,
I sought out the suitcase that housed the remainder of my art supplies from the
States. As I quietly contemplated the three colors, a flash of inspiration came
to me: a series of portraits. Seeking the spirit of collaboration during a time
of isolation, I decided tSean Murray | The Human | Short Story
The setting was old Tbilisi, a strange destination, fable-like. The rough brown
bricks of the ancient baths, the second-story verandas, enclosed in the
vernacular architectural style. The dry cliff faces and banks rising in random
juts around the city. Scrub vegetation. In truth, except for the myth-feeling,
it didn’t have much to recommend it.
Nevertheless, tourists came from the clandestine North in search of stimulating
heat, the weird half-desert, half-mountain conditions that revved you up if you
let them. If you drank the strong local chacha, the hundred-proof brandy, and
ate raw green figs. Pomegranates. It was, allegedly, a sensual city.
Fruit was not the topic, however. Nor liquor. The topic was philosophy, of a
kind, the argument of the day between old friends: Mo Kaplan and Chrissy
Halsted.
“Listen, let’s discuss this.” Mo speaking. “There’s myth and then there’s
enlightenment,” he said. “But the end is the same for both modes: to banish the
unknown. Myth assigns it to categories of either local or universal mystery.
Enlightenment makes it the object of science. Thus, myth is rigid with
classifications, while enlightenment admits no hypotheses unless they can be
tested. Both are weighed down by the tendency toward dogma. Face it. They
operate under the same human headings of error and limitation.”
Mo (Morris) was much the senior of the two, genially bald and dressed sensibly
in the cotton pants and soft-soled shoes of American old age. His knees turned
in slightly when he walked. He carried a canvas tote bag full of notebooks and
pens, lip balm, sunscreen, an incomprehensible bus schedule. His one
eccentricity was to turn up the collar of his polo shirt. Identifiable as a
professor at fifty paces.
Chrissy was harder to pin down. Her age indeterminate. She had the authority of
long experience about her, but this had to do with her movements: precise,
definitive. She was an empiricist. Her straight and delicate nose invited
admiration. Her smooth, tan skin expressed a great firmness of character, and
there was virtue as well in her blond hair, pulled into a youthful ponytail, as
she’d worn it in high school, playing basketball, volleyball. Only the skin
around her eyes (and the aforementioned sure movement) betrayed her age. There,
in the crenellated corners and the brownish under-eyes, she looked over forty.
“And so what,” Chrissy asked. “Is there a function to this insight? Is salvation
in play here?”
“Salvation from what?” Mo asked. He acted skeptical, but secretly he was deeply
stirred. He didn’t see his friend often enough, he forgot the stakes she always
played for. Salvation! My God, what a question!
“You said it yourself: from the unknown."
In truth, they were amateurs in this, or at least outsiders. Mo was a poet of
some standing in the American Academy of Arts and Letters, and a professor of
literature. Chrissy was an expert in human and animal behavior, a psychology
PhD, an occasional dog trainer.
They were drinking their breakfast coffee in the hotel before attending the
seminar they’d come to the city for -- a literature retreat, a kind of vacation
for writers. They would each give a lecture. He on Seamus Heaney, she on the
writer and animal trainer Vicki Hearne’s philosophy of cognition.
“Or maybe,” Mo ventured, improvising, excited by the next steps of his thinking,
“salvation lies in the synthesis. It is a dialectic after all. Hegelian, maybe.
Myth is the thesis, enlightenment the antithesis, Salvation the synthesis.” Mo
had a much-thumbed copy of the book in his tote bag, The Dialectic of
Enlightenment. He was adumbrating Adorno and Horkheimer’s argument. Or trying
to.
“Interesting,” Chrissy admitted. “But you started out trying to convince me that
my Enlightenment values were bunk. That strict observation was put to bed by
Heisenberg, and we were back into some non-Newtonian mythos.”
“True.” Mo had large, dark, hard-thinking eyes, a twentieth-century Jewish
physiognomy. He put an age-mottled hand to his bald, brown head, a gesture of
acquiescence. “Well,” he said, “theory is for suckers anyway. It’s mostly chaos
out there.”
Chrissy nodded. “Amen to that,” she said. “Ask any mutt in the street. He’ll
tell you.”
●Chrissy was bonded to Mo in large part by admiration. A deep envy even. She
wished for his temperament. Sometimes she tried to muster it, the warmth, the
generosity, the optimistic views. But it was useless. She was like cement: it
was hard to come away from her without skinned knees.
Or. Was that really true? Was she so rough? More likely this was just her inner
experience, the barbed self she couldn’t show anybody. On the outside, she
conformed to the usual ideas of polite interaction. She tried to listen and not
be dismissive. When she had angry thoughts, she kept them down, knowing they’d
be nothing but destructive. She came across as nice.
So why the spiritual defenses? As far as she could tell, they’d always been
there. In all respects, Chrissy was a head case, she knew. She’d always counted
her steps across intersections and bridges, and she had to take deep breaths all
the time in order to stabilize her uncomfortable heart. Her nervous, repetitive
mind. Tuned senses.
Hard as it may have been to believe, dogs were what kept these eccentricities of
hers in check. Dogs don’t conform to human projections. Animals generally, in
fact. We get all the stories wrong.
The answer, which Chrissy realized as a girl, before it became an academic topic
for her, was to eliminate language. Dogs didn’t use it. They built their cosmos
instead out of their bodies and the world. Their medium of communication was
space. Much more reliable, and with more immediate feedback—the feedback of
teeth. Chrissy was once asked if a particular German Shepherd was dangerous; she
said, yes, dogs are dangerous. Just like cars and airplanes and staphylococcus.
It’s like Mo said. Chaos out there.
Chrissy mused on these things in her hotel room that night, after the seminar,
jet-lagged, failing to sleep. The air conditioner cycling.
What she realized was that there were indeed, concretely, two versions of
herself. One was the professional Chrissy, the PhD, the world lecturer and
expert. The adept who flew business class to Washington and Geneva for meetings
with NIH and the World Health Organization. Who edited landmark psychology
textbooks, gave TED talks, testified before Congress.
But this was a brittle and superficial role. Not genuine. This Chrissy operated
as a processing unit, an automaton, nearly, a fluent alien or robot that was
pleased to use Chrissy’s faculties for its own purposes. This Chrissy was a
candy shell around the gooey nougat of another, more primal Chrissy.
That Chrissy, the first and apparently permanent one, was nothing but a
sensitive girl from the sticks, rooted to the landscape of central South Dakota.
That Chrissy was a groping, naïve child roughed up by the indelicate universe,
told she was too tall and gangly, too dreamy, impractical, but also too
masculine. Never mind that these were incoherent tropes. They were formative.
As a result, Chrissy’s existence was under strain. The two versions of her
worked against each other. Professional Chrissy made all the right moves and
hummed along in her uninterruptable way. But the primary Chrissy, South Dakota
Chrissy, buzzed with alarm: who was this juggernaut? It was no version of
herself she could recognize. She couldn’t advise presidential candidates and
Olympic medalists. She couldn’t charge appearance fees and live in Westchester.
That was what other people did.
Other people like Mo. Mo, who had been the U.S. Poet Laureate and won a Pulitzer
and yet experienced no dissonance or rift in his identity. And not because he
was to the manor born. He’d had the usual Jewish middle-class experience. A life
among grocers and dry-cleaners and the occasional well-to-do dentist. Owners of
light manufacturing ventures. Textile lives.
Instead of roping them off, these chaotic people, he’d thrown his arms around
them, made them his great subject. He wrote them into full being. Much as they
had written him. And despite finding the high places of American society, he
never left them. Mo was one-hundred percent integrated.
●Interesting, for Chrissy at least, that the city of Tbilisi had a dog problem.
Feral, docile, garbagey animals trotted and lollygagged all over the center of
town. They all had the same bored, imperturbable look. City dogs. There was
nothing they hadn’t seen. Most had yellow tags in their ears, indicating they’d
been captured, spayed or neutered, then released, part of the city’s program to
bring their numbers down.
For some reason Chrissy began to think of them in the terms of her debate with
Mo the previous day, the one over myth and enlightenment. The goal of
enlightenment is to establish mastery. And you established mastery by advancing
on the unknown—gradually, successively reducing its acreage.
But this framework raised epistemological concerns. What was it to know? What
counted? For dogs, after all, there was no such thing as the unknown. The
existence of the unknown required speculation, forecasting. Dogs didn’t
ruminate. Everything existed for them in the present, fully factual. They could
be confused, or just wrong. Did that mean they didn’t know? No. It meant they
knew one thing until they got new information, and then they knew something
else, and that was all there was. Sense data, the end. They were wholly
enlightened at all times.
This quirky, useless argument amused her. She sat at her café table and swizzled
the wine in her glass, waited for Mo to come back from the bathroom. They’d had
a long day of enduring seminar presentations. The young people were obsessed
with memoir. One grad student had been a hooker in Vegas, using heroin. She
thought this made for a kind of automatic literature. She described her tattoos.
When Mo did come back he seemed to move a little gingerly. Chrissy didn’t ask
what was wrong, and Mo didn’t want to give her the grizzly details. He told her
it was nothing. Something he ate.
What he didn’t say was that he’d been troubled by nerves recently. For instance,
the flight to Tbilisi from Munich had been as bouncy as he’d been on in a while,
and it had knocked his spirit around. As a young man he’d been terrified of
flying. He was sure every rattle and mechanical whine indicated catastrophe,
every wiggle in the plane’s steel frame would wrench it apart in mid-air,
leaving him to plunge tens of thousands of feet down to a crushing, unimaginable
end. Even then, Mo had looked at death with real seriousness. He didn’t indulge
the fiction that certain great, striding men were beyond mortal concerns. Might,
intellectual or physical, wouldn’t save you. You had to be humble before big
forces. This went for the force of human comprehension as much as the force of
death and accounted for Mo’s earnestness in his talks with Chrissy, he thought.
He wanted so badly to get it right! In life and in ideas! Remember the young man
riding on airplanes with his guts in a crunch!
Eventually though, age did perform some useful operations on him. The anxieties
of his youth dissipated a bit. His writing improved and he experienced a
day-to-day satisfaction that had to do with the long view he was now able to
take: history would choose him or not for its inscrutable purposes, as it did
every man, every woman. There was no agency in life.
And what a relief that was! In your blindness, while you waited for your
destiny, you were free to putz around! Life was a comedy! Anything was possible.
Ok, sure, when this line of thinking went soft, it justified an annoying
relativism, even nihilism. No authority, no standards. An ugly free-for-all in
both the material and spiritual arenas. But Mo didn’t advance it as a mode of
analysis. He’d never been big on the utility of the various -isms on offer.
Rather, he found it to be a kind of emotional key to the lock of good judgement
and moral equilibrium. It let him breathe and got rid of his fear of flying.
Until this damned flight from Munich. He’d been in a window seat and had seen
the rough, high clouds slamming into the plane. Bunched and roiled, demonic
vapors, particulates lifted by convection currents over the serrated Caucuses
below. It was then that he felt the old perturbation in his stomach, and the old
extension of useless vigilance over every stimulus. The kid behind him
hiccupped, and Mo’s intestines cramped.
Worse than this, though, was a seemingly profound and dispiriting realization.
Can it be, he thought. Can it truly be that our demons own us for so long? Mo
Kaplan, seventy-four years old, and still not clear of the shadows?
Mo blew out a long breath. “What were we talking about?” he asked.
“Tattoos.”
“Right. You should get one. It could say, enlightenment.”
Chrissy snorted. “Yeah,” she said. “On my ass.”
This was good for a laugh. They were at an outdoor table, but in the shade—the
air was hot but not altogether unpleasant. There was a breeze that smelled of
construction dust and something vaguely grapey. An easiness prevailed,
generally, and in particular between these two American friends.
Then without prelude, a chaos of dogs in the street. A half dozen mutts snapping
and spinning, they heaved out from an unobservable alley. They didn’t seem to be
fighting. They barked—at nothing, or each other—but made no effort to
communicate.
People stopped their conversations and turned. Chrissy turned. This was highly
unusual behavior.
Just as suddenly, from up the street, came another three, four of them, racing,
full of purpose. These took the lead and the whole pack, nearly a dozen, tore
off, digging up the sidewalk weeds with their nails. An eerie silence in their
wake.
●Mo kept at it with the theory. He admitted it. He was one of those suckers.
“Listen, the more I think about it, I realize I was wrong. Banishment of the
unknown isn’t the end. It’s just the mode. The end is domination of nature. Myth
has the shamans to make it rain. Enlightenment devises cloud-seeding.”
“Which works.”
“What does?”
“Cloud-seeding.”
“Does it? Well, fine. The point is that the domination of nature allays fear.
The bear can’t eat us if we eat him first. It’s fear. It’s always fear.”
Chrissy took this in, and Mo worked it over silently in his mind as well. She
was thinking of rejection, interpersonal fuck-ups. Love-pains.
He was thinking of physical distress. They each expressed their suffering in
long breaths.
At that moment, as if in judgement, or explication, the earth lurched. Chrissy
had never experienced a quake before, but the instinct for self-preservation
made her leap up anyway, and vault the now-twisted railing around the
restaurant’s patio. She got out in the open street.
Mo, being older, couldn’t move so decisively. He had to try to pick his way over
the rail. But brick and glass rained from above and struck him. He was buried
and died in front of her.
●That night people wandered the streets. There was very little going inside to
sleep. How could anybody do it?
Still, there were quiet alleys, and Chrissy sought these out. They smelled of
blown ash. They were unevenly lit. Crones hobbled about in the dust and their
presence burdened her.
They were shell-backed beetles, rolling dung. Such creatures! Did they have
hearts, souls, the human systems?
Eventually Chrissy came into a small, deserted square, an ornate fountain, dry,
at the center. At the base of the fountain, outside its chipped marble rim, lay
a black dog in blissful or at least indifferent repose, its side rising and
falling in a lazy sine of breath.
Chrissy stared momentarily. Had that been what riled those mutts up earlier,
after all, that animal-type pre-perception of doom? There’d been a pack of them,
which was unusual in itself—mostly you saw these strays keeping their own
counsel, finding solitary patches of shade. Like this one in front of her now,
peaceful, content after that terrible release of the earth’s interior tension.
She could probably walk up to him—city dogs didn’t startle. But they also didn’t
much care for human interference. He’d probably move away.
Instead, watching him as she walked, she went around to the far side of the
fountain and sat. And there wept for the unattainable end of everything. The setting was old Tbilisi, a strange destination, fable-like. The rough brown
bricks of the ancient baths, the second-story verandas, enclosed in the
vernacular architectural style. The dry cliff faces and banks rising in random
juts around the city. Scrub vegetation. In truth, except for the myth-feeling,
it didn’t have much to recommend it.
Nevertheless, tourists came from the clandestine North in search of stimulating
heat, the weird half-desert, half-mountain conditions that revved you up if you
let them. If you drank the strong local chacha, the hundred-proof brandy, and
ate raw green figs. Pomegranates. It was, allegedly, a sensual city.
Fruit was not the topic, however. Nor liquor. The topic was philosophy, of a
kind, the argument of the day between old friends: Mo Kaplan and Chrissy
Halsted.
“Listen, let’s discuss this.” Mo speaking. “There’s myth and then there’s
enlightenment,” he said. “But the end is the same for both modes: to banish the
unknown. Myth assigns it to categories of either local or universal mystery.
Enlightenment makes it the object of science. Thus, myth is rigid with
classifications, while enlightenment admits no hypotheses unless they can be
tested. Both are weighed down by the tendency toward dogma. Face it. They
operate under the same human headings of error and limitation.”
Mo (Morris) was much the senior of the two, genially bald and dressed sensibly
in the cotton pants and soft-soled shoes of American old age. His knees turned
in slightly when he walked. He carried a canvas tote bag full of notebooks and
pens, lip balm, sunscreen, an incomprehensible bus schedule. His one
eccentricity was to turn up the collar of his polo shirt. Identifiable as a
professor at fifty paces.
Chrissy was harder to pin down. Her age indeterminate. She had the authority of
long experience about her, but this had to do with her movements: precise,
definitive. She was an empiricist. Her straight and delicate nose invited
admiration. Her smooth, tanMeghan K. McGinley | The Human | Poetry
Poet’s Note
I first realized that I was a multiracial person in kindergarten. When my mother
came to eat lunch with me one day at school, her presence bewildered some of the
other children. Many asked me afterwards if I was adopted. One even followed up
the question with a matter-of-fact declaration: “You look nothing like your
mom.” How does this blonde-haired, light-eyed, fair-skinned child belong to this
Black woman? She was frequently mistaken for the nanny, given countless double
takes and stare downs. As I grew older, I began to search for a tangible sense
of identity. When I heard a story about my mother’s great-grandfather from
Haiti, my young mind fashioned herself a Frenchman. It was not until much later
that I understood the terrible irony of this “adoption.”
My undergraduate work in French led me to the poem “Un coup de dés jamais
n'abolira le hasard” (“A Throw of the Dice Will Never Abolish Chance”) by the
French symbolist poet Stéphane Mallarmé. Its strange spacing, varied typefaces,
and resistance to meaning drew me in like nothing I had ever read before. As I
struggled to articulate the “searching” theme for this issue of Symposeum,
Mallarmé’s poem called to me again, its black and white imagery more vivid than
ever before. The idea that my mother never imagined me as I am—in this pale
yellow body—collided with the shipwrecks in Mallarmé’s verse.
Inspired by the Belgian artist Marcel Broodthaers—who reimaged Un coup de dés in
a purely visual manner, blacking out its words as if they were censored—I
reconceived Mallarmé’s piece as an erasure poem. Instead of Broodthaers’ black
bars, I created white rectangles with black outlines, working digitally on a PDF
of Basil Cleveland’s English translation of the poem. The poem’s quadrants,
drawn from Cleveland's formatting, cradle my archipelagoes of empty space, the
remaining text like shards of silence. Who I am and where I belong within the
Black community as a white-passing person are questions without concrete
answers, the title of the poem “Jamais” (“Never”) signifying this dilemma.
However, in this never-ending search, I find comfort in the fact that I am not
less than because I exist in between.
Poet’s Note
I first realized that I was a multiracial person in kindergarten. When my mother
came to eat lunch with me one day at school, her presence bewildered some of the
other children. Many asked me afterwards if I was adopted. One even followed up
the question with a matter-of-fact declaration: “You look nothing like your
mom.” How does this blonde-haired, light-eyed, fair-skinned child belong to this
Black woman? She was frequently mistaken for the nanny, given countless double
takes and stare downs. As I grew older, I began to search for a tangible sense
of identity. When I heard a story about my mother’s great-grandfather from
Haiti, my young mind fashioned herself a Frenchman. It was not until much later
that I understood the terrible irony of this “adoption.”
My undergraduate work in French led me to the poem “Un coup de dés jamais
n'abolira le hasard” (“A Throw of the Dice Will Never Abolish Chance”) by the
French symbolist poet Stéphane Mallarmé. Its strange spacing, varied typefaces,
and resistance to meaning drew me in like nothing I had ever read before. As I
struggled to articulate the “searching” theme for this issue of Symposeum,
Mallarmé’s poem called to me again, its black and white imagery more vivid than
ever before. The idea that my mother never imagined me as I am—in this pale
yellow body—collided with the shipwrecks in Mallarmé’s verse.
Inspired by the Belgian artist Marcel Broodthaers—who reimaged Un coup de dés in
a purely visual manner, blacking out its words as if they were censored—I
reconceived Mallarmé’s piece as an erasure poem. Instead of Broodthaers’ black
bars, I created white rectangles with black outlines, working digitally on a PDF
of Basil Cleveland’s English translation of the poem. The poem’s quadrants,
drawn from Cleveland's formatting, cradle my archipelagoes of empty space, the
remaining text like shards of silence. Who I am and where I belong within the
Black community as a white-passing person are questions witBoyd Varty | The Plain | Essay
As a boy I spent every day in the South African bushveld apprenticing under
some of the greatest Shangaan animal trackers in the world. I was taught to
attune to a hidden world of stories and information etched faintly in the earth
as scuff marks and gait patterns. Tracking an animal was like learning a new
dialect that opened my understanding of a foreign land. Even the language of
birds gained meaning as I learned, in the face of tremendous unknowns, to find
and follow the faint trail of a lion.
Life, I eventually realized, works in the same way, at least if you are going to
lead a meaningful life. We must attune ourselves to meaning. It is something we
must track. It moves like a wild animal whose faint footprints and scent we must
follow. I have spent my adulthood trying to stay on the track of my own life,
and trying to help others do the same. Along the way, I have learned important
lessons about tracking meaning.
Photos C/O Boyd VartyFINDING THE FIRST TRACKS
Tracks are hard to find, with the first tracks being the most difficult of all.
We live in what the Celtic mystic John O’Donohue calls a neon culture. The
modern societies of the world seem to be losing the foundational structures that
fill our lives with meaning. We have forgotten how to belong. We have forgotten
how to be deeply connected as a community. We have become robotic, almost
hybrid, as we collectively forget our relationship with nature.
We live in a society with a schooling system that has a “you should know, you
have to get it right” mindset. So often we stand on the edge of a search because
we feel that only when we know exactly what’s right for us will we make the
changes and begin the journey.
A tracker, however, knows that more often than not we must begin searching
without any clear sense of where we are going or what we will find. The search
is more about attuning our awareness than needing to know. We start the search
at peace without knowing what we are searching for.
It may take you some time to awaken your inner tracker. But even if you grew up
in an urban metropolis your tracker stays with you, deeply embedded in your
biology courtesy of hundreds of thousands of years of evolution. You were born a
tracker.
My own search began like it often does at the confluence of vagaries and
certainties. I was unsure about what called me and yet certain of what I did not
want. You may know this place of inner turmoil. My family had run a world-famous
game reserve in South Africa called Londolozi for four generations and I was set
to, in line with family traditions, take over the running of it. Running a
photographic safari lodge was an exciting prospect on paper, however it left me
feeling lukewarm at best. At worst, it was like I was letting down not just the
family but the whole ecosystem of life on the reserve.
I had also been plunged into my search by two traumatic encounters. In
Johannesburg I had been a victim of a dangerous armed robbery. Shortly after
that, I nearly lost my leg in the jaws of a crocodile while swimming in shallow
water in the river at the reserve. Both experiences had left me in a strange no
man's land. I was frozen inside. The world suddenly seemed violent and cruel,
yet at the same time a spark had been lit. I had looked the fragility of life in
the eye and it stared back at me with a challenge to live deeply.
I was stumbling away from the path ordained for me to find my own track. I
needed to heal. In some deeply intuitive part of myself, I knew that healing
could only come in the search. I have come to learn that there is nothing more
healing than finding your gifts and sharing them.
The first tracks, however, are the hardest to find.
In a vast wilderness a tracker does not need to know where the lion is; all they
need to do is to dial down the infinite possibilities of where it could have
gone to a single first track, then the next track, then the next.
In my own search, empowerment meant simply taking a small step each day toward
what felt like my track. I didn’t know where that track would lead me. As Joseph
Campbell said, “If you can see your whole path in front of you, then it’s not
your path”.
Rather, as with lions, all I needed was a first track and then a next. A daily
moment of presence toward my track over many days took me closer to finding what
I was searching for. People who make true changes in their lives are those who
make daily consistent steps toward what calls them.
DEVELOPING TRACK AWARENESS
On one occasion in my late teens I had followed the tracks of a leopard high in
the Drakensberg Mountains when I happened across some hikers who had been
obliviously trudging down the same trail, stepping on fresh leopard tracks as
they went. I didn't understand it at the time, but later in my life I would
remember that moment and an important idea would come with that memory: there is
information on the path but we must attune to it.
In your search you will need to develop your track awareness. There is a place
inside you deeper than rational thoughts. There is a wild self inside you that
knows, even when you don’t, how to be fully alive. This place in you is of
nature itself and knows in the same way that a lion knows how to be a lion and
trees know when to bloom. Deeper than your rational mind you must find the
tracks of this wild self.
A tracker teaches themself to attune to certain search images and information.
My track awareness was such that I was seeing the trail of a leopard other
hikers were walking through, carelessly and unwittingly.
You don’t need to be an animal tracker to search for a more meaningful life. You
must, however, develop track awareness in life, an awareness of the deep, wild
self inside you that knows, even when you don’t. Nobody can do this for you. It
is you who must pay attention: to feelings of expanded energy, to people who
excite you, to activities that make you feel alive. By following your curiosity,
you can develop awareness for the “track” of your life.
In my own life I found myself literally sitting forward in my seat anytime a
great storyteller started speaking. I was drawn by an innate excitement to
mystics and healers and found my nervous system resting into a deep state of
calm anytime I was in nature. Everything was speaking to me.
Developing this kind of track awareness takes disciplined attention, but
following these types of new metrics that you develop for yourself will take you
away from the “I should” path to something way more wild and essential. As we
develop track awareness we see that while we don’t know what we are looking for,
there are clear signs and metrics toward our own nature that speak as peace,
joy, health, and vitality. Tracks!
THE INSTRUMENT OF THE BODY
As a boy I would watch as the Shangaan trackers use their own bodies to attune
to the animal they were tracking. They would move at the speed the animal was
moving, stop where it stopped, imitate how it shaped itself to listen or crouch.
In this way the tracker could use his body to feel the mood of the animal.
Our body is the product of hundreds of thousands of years of wildness. We must
learn to use it in our search. The body has information for us on the search.
Just starting to notice what or who makes you sit forward in your seat with
excitement can show you a path. What causes your shoulders to slouch in
dejection may show you another path altogether. What is your body unconsciously
drawn to? Learn to listen to the ancient wisdom in your body.
THE FOLLOWING STATE
On the trail of a lion, the tracker enters the following state. His eyes catch
the faint geometry of paw pads. He spots grains of sand on grass where tawny
beasts have stepped. While he follows these signs, he listens for alarm calls
ahead. He vectors the line of the animal through the woodland using trees ahead
as waypoints. He spots tracks. He orients himself, listens, and anticipates
where the animal may have moved, all the time making micro-adjustments to his
path to stay in tune with the direction the tracks points. He is doing this all
at once without trying. He is in the following state.
The tracker has let go of the finding of the animal and is totally absorbed in
the process. He is fully attuned to the path of the animal. He is present. At
this point the beauty and artful attention of tracking is felt to be the purpose
itself.
In your search you may experience the following state as the culmination of the
above points. You suddenly touch a state of constant creative response. You let
go of needing to know. You feel attuned to your own track as feeling and
sensation. Your body is alive with somatic instinctual knowledge and you are
taking small, daily steps toward this new path on internal, self-defined
metrics. The track of your unique life!
The following state is not inherently more meaningful than what came before.
Rather, it is the intention and attention with which you track that allows
meaning to flow into what you do. You feel in step with some higher wisdom
manifest in your own life.
LOSING THE TRACK
Quite suddenly, the track is gone. The flow of the following state unexpectedly
disappears. You doubt yourself. All trackers know losing the track is part of
tracking. When the Shangaan trackers would lose the track, they would remain
relaxed and enter a curious state of discovery. A tracker might go back to the
last clear track. You might ask yourself: when was the last time I was totally
on track?
I remember once following the tracks of a huge pride of twenty lions across an
open flood plain. We flew along the tracks. So many lions leaving pug marks made
for a lion superhighway. I was brimming with confidence when suddenly the path
of twenty lions vanished under the track of a large herd of elephants that had
moved through the area.
It is important to know that losing the track is a part of tracking. When you
have left the safe confines of the life you knew in search of something new, you
may find yourself suddenly lost in the land between your past self and your
future self.
Trackers continue to move forward, trying new trails and game paths up ahead.
Any place they do not find the track is not wasted; it helps refine where the
track will be rediscovered. Losing the track is a part of tracking.
THE DAILY ART OF THE SEARCH
As a tracker, I have learned that I feel the most myself when fully engaged in
the process of following an animal. My eyes sharpen to tracks and my senses come
alive. I feel the wilderness telling me a story as tracks cut through beautiful,
wild terrain. It feels intimate when I find where this wild creature slept and
then drank from a small waterhole. All day I follow, until at dusk I leave the
tracks to the night. There is no failure that I have not found the animal. I
have been fully awake in the art of the search.
This insight became true for me on my own journey when I began to attune deeply
to my own transformative process and followed the wisdom of the wild self. As I
learned its tracks, my life filled up with challenging engagements. Each day
that I lived inside my own search, something strange happened. I became deeply
attuned to a daily discovery of my path. As if by some magic, people started to
come to me to discuss their own search. Instead of animal tracks, it was their
intuition that led them.
Soon I was running retreats and working with people all over the world as a
guide in the wilderness of personal meaning. In some strange way, my dedication
to living as a tracker had allowed a path to emerge. I was arriving somewhere
unplanned.
Now, I am also lucky to know that this is not the path. I haven’t found what I’m
looking for. I have found a way of being that demands continuous daily
attention. A way of searching that, like tracking, does not define the search by
what you ultimately find. The real joy lies in the artful, daily dedication to
the search itself.
Searching for “meaning” or “the track” of your own life takes the same courage
that it takes to follow a lion in thick terrain. You will have to leave the
safety of the world you know behind. You have to turn your attention on, like a
lightswitch. You must feel an old, primal simmering in your nervous system, and
fall onto the trail of something wild. As a boy I spent every day in the South African bushveld apprenticing under
some of the greatest Shangaan animal trackers in the world. I was taught to
attune to a hidden world of stories and information etched faintly in the earth
as scuff marks and gait patterns. Tracking an animal was like learning a new
dialect that opened my understanding of a foreign land. Even the language of
birds gained meaning as I learned, in the face of tremendous unknowns, to find
and follow the faint trail of a lion.
Life, I eventually realized, works in the same way, at least if you are going to
lead a meaningful life. We must attune ourselves to meaning. It is something we
must track. It moves like a wild animal whose faint footprints and scent we must
follow. I have spent my adulthood trying to stay on the track of my own life,
and trying to help others do the same. Along the way, I have learned important
lessons about tracking meaning.
Photos C/O Boyd VartyFINDING THE FIRST TRACKS
Tracks are hard to find, with the first tracks being the most difficult of all.
We live in what the Celtic mystic John O’Donohue calls a neon culture. The
modern societies of the world seem to be losing the foundational structures that
fill our lives with meaning. We have forgotten how to belong. We have forgotten
how to be deeply connected as a community. We have become robotic, almost
hybrid, as we collectively forget our relationship with nature.
We live in a society with a schooling system that has a “you should know, you
have to get it right” mindset. So often we stand on the edge of a search because
we feel that only when we know exactly what’s right for us will we make the
changes and begin the journey.
A tracker, however, knows that more often than not we must begin searching
without any clear sense of where we are going or what we will find. The search
is more about attuning our awareness than needing to know. We start the search
at peace without knowing what we are searching for.
It mayBrooke Bourgeois | The Plain | Cartoon
Artist’s Note
Brooke is a cartoonist and illustrator who primarily finds inspiration at the
intersection of unlikely themes. She is constantly ‘searching’ for jokes that
are specifically suited to visual anchors, and this often involves re-imagining
historical periods, fairy tale characters, and even cartoon tropes. In the
collection of cartoons she has provided for this issue, she explores this meta
theme of searching in her practice while each individual cartoon employs
searching on a micro level somehow: searching the internet, searching for love,
searching for a way out of desert island, searching for purpose. Artist’s Note
Brooke is a cartoonist and illustrator who primarily finds inspiration at the
intersection of unlikely themes. She is constantly ‘searching’ for jokes that
are specifically suited to visual anchors, and this often involves re-imagining
historical periods, fairy tale characters, and even cartoon tropes. In the
collection of cartoons she has provided for this issue, she explores this meta
theme of searching in her practice while each individual cartoon employs
searching on a micro level somehow: searching the internet, searching for love,
searching for a way out of desert island, searching for purpose.Jesse Graves | The Necessary | Poetry
Haven't I shared all my memories already?
Sweated into ink the anchored years
When the sun drove us like a team
of plough-horses through the summer sky?
No, I’ve kept a few things back, fears now
half-forgotten, loves remembered always
but never acted upon, never sent out
into the world to meet their fates.
None of that matters now to anyone but me,
and to me only because it pointed a direction,
gave some oblique shape to the edge
of the trailing, unmapped, interior terrain.
Poet’s Note
Searching seems to me the essential calling of poets. What we do is more
purposeful than simply looking, or observing, or recording our sensory
perceptions, though those activities all contribute to the enterprise. The poem
“Terrain” engages many of my favorite associations with language, with its
equation of writing with labor and the exploration of unknown territory. The
opening image feels somewhat mythical to me, with the sun driving my memories
and me like horses through the sky, which seemed like a good approach to
overarching concerns about how we write and what we are called to write about. I
employed a technique here that I have not attempted often, to ask questions and
then try to answer them in a direct way. The interior terrain is inexhaustible,
and it draws us forward in pursuit of the poem; nothing could give a writer more
hope than that.Haven't I shared all my memories already?
Sweated into ink the anchored years
When the sun drove us like a team
of plough-horses through the summer sky?
No, I’ve kept a few things back, fears now
half-forgotten, loves remembered always
but never acted upon, never sent out
into the world to meet their fates.
None of that matters now to anyone but me,
and to me only because it pointed a direction,
gave some oblique shape to the edge
of the trailing, unmapped, interior terrain.
Poet’s Note
Searching seems to me the essential calling of poets. What we do is more
purposeful than simply looking, or observing, or recording our sensory
perceptions, though those activities all contribute to the enterprise. The poem
“Terrain” engages many of my favorite associations with language, with its
equation of writing with labor and the exploration of unknown territory. The
opening image feels somewhat mythical to me, with the sun driving my memories
and me like horses through the sky, which seemed like a good approach to
overarching concerns about how we write and what we are called to write about. I
employed a technique here that I have not attempted often, to ask questions and
then try to answer them in a direct way. The interior terrain is inexhaustible,
and it draws us forward in pursuit of the poem; nothing could give a writer more
hope than that.Lauren Spohn | The True | Essay
On the dusty morning of July 11, 2021, two hundred miles south of Albuquerque,
Sir Richard Branson squeezed into a blue and gold jumpsuit and shot into space.
He was the first person in history to ride fifteen kilometers short of the
Kármán Line—the international boundary between the atmosphere and the void—on a
rocket built with his own money.
“To all you kids down there, I was once a child with a dream, looking up to the
stars,” Branson said [https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-57797297] to
the camera inside the Virgin Galactic spaceplane. “Now I’m an adult in a
spaceship, with lots of other wonderful adults, looking down to our beautiful,
beautiful earth. To the next generation of dreamers, if we can do this, just
imagine what you can do! Heyyyy!”
Branson unbuckled his straps and wafted out of his seat. “Come out, mister!”
yelled one of the wonderful adults in the background. Three minutes later,
Branson and crew glided into southern New Mexico and doused their blue and gold
jumpsuits in expensive champagne. Standing on the press-release stage like a
rock god, Branson announced that from now on, anyone could have the same
life-changing experience for only $400,000.
And so, with one small step for mankind and one giant leap for one man, the Age
of Space Tourism began.
●Branson is not the only billionaire hurtling into space these days. Amazon
mastermind Jeff Bezos followed
[https://apnews.com/article/jeff-bezos-space-e0afeaa813ff0bdf23c37fe16fd34265]
Branson a week after the Virgin Galactic stunt, launching from Van Horn, Texas,
to upstage the British music mogul by twenty-one kilometers. Never one to let
other genius-billionaire-playboy-philanthropists steal the spotlight, SpaceX
founder and CEO Elon Musk sent
[https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/18/21142137/spacex-tourism-orbit-earth-private-citizens-dragon-space-flight]
four tourists into orbit 366 miles above the Earth for three days in September.
The Inspiration4 mission, the first all-civilian spaceflight in history, was
financed by billionaire Jared Isaacman, who founded a payment processing company
after he dropped out of high school.
Thanks to the glitzy billionaire space race, the demand for star tours has
soared alongside the price tag. Space tourism companies like Space Perspective
[https://www.spaceperspective.com/] and Space Adventures
[https://spaceadventures.com/] have already sold out flights for 2024. Tickets
for the Space Perspective experience run at a modest $125,000 “per Explorer.”
“The demand is very, very high,” Bezos said
[https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/20/blue-origin-jeff-bezos-launch-watch-video-stream-live-updates.html]
at a Blue Origin presentation following the historic New Shepard launch, after
the company had sold
[https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/20/jeff-bezos-blue-origin-space-tourist-sales-approaching-100-million.html]
nearly $100 million worth of future flights. “This is a tiny little step of what
Blue Origin is going to do.”
With all the money and the press pouring into space tourism, it seems reasonable
to ask: why do so many people want to jet above Earth’s atmosphere at a few
hundred-thousand dollars a minute? COVID-19 has been bad, but it’s not an
Interstellar-level disaster. The universe’s first known luxury space hotel
[https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/aurora-station-luxury-space-hotel/index.html]
is still at least six years away. You can’t even play golf on the moon
[https://astronomy.com/news/2021/02/alan-shepard-smacked-golf-balls-on-the-moon--and-now-we-know-where-they-landed#:~:text=In%20the%20annals%20of%20golf,most%20famous%20swings%20ever%20taken.&text=So%2C%20before%20his%20trip%20to,of%20a%20regular%20golf%20club.]
yet. What are space tourists paying small fortunes to experience?
Judging from the hype videos, website slogans, YouTube ads, and press releases,
nothing short of a really awesome view.
The real question is, is it worth the price?
Unsurprisingly, space tourism companies seem to think so. “To go beyond the
reaches of the earth, into space and to look back down at it,” said
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q0G9D8nMeJk] Joe Rohde, a forty-year Disney
Imagineer and Experience Architect at Virgin Galactic, “It’s a spectacularly
neat opportunity with huge potential for transformational change in a person.”
The rhetoric from other space tourism companies flies just as high as Rohde’s.
“See the world as it was made to be seen” (Space Adventures
[https://spaceadventures.com/spaceflight-experiences/]). “To gaze upon Earth
from space—to take in the astounding views and vivid colors—is an unforgettable
spectacle that astronauts call life-altering” (Space Perspective
[https://www.spaceperspective.com/]). “Purchase a window seat on a life-changing
spaceflight” (Blue Origin [https://www.spaceperspective.com/]).
For all the suspicion we may have of corporate PR-speak, the experience has
mostly lived up to the hype. “It was so amazing,” said
[https://apnews.com/article/jeff-bezos-space-e0afeaa813ff0bdf23c37fe16fd34265]
Oliver Daemen, the eighteen-year-old Dutch teen who ate Skittles in zero gravity
with Bezos in the New Shepard, “Let’s hope that many, many more people can do
this.” “My journey to space changed me in unexpected ways,” wrote
[https://people.com/human-interest/hayley-arceneaux-reflects-on-inspiration4-space-mission/]
Hayley Arceneaux, the twenty-nine-year-old Inspiration4 crewmember who works as
a physician assistant at St. Jude’s Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis,
Tennessee. “When I saw Earth from the glass cupola for the first time, I was
overwhelmed with gratitude—gratitude for being alive to see it, but also for
getting to see something that so few people have seen from that perspective,”
she continued. “To be in that small group is something I never felt I deserved,
but it was an opportunity that I was able to seize, and I hope many others will
too.”
Space tourism may well deserve the critiques it’s already drawn, from scientists
warning about its effects on climate change
[https://www.space.com/environmental-impact-space-tourism-flights#:~:text=Scientists%20worry%20that%20growing%20numbers,and%20contribute%20to%20climate%20change.&text=Some%20scientists%20consider%20that%20disconcerting,space%20several%20times%20a%20day.]
to social critics calling it a frivolous pastime
[https://theconversation.com/billionaire-space-race-the-ultimate-symbol-of-capitalisms-flawed-obsession-with-growth-164511]
for the ultra-rich. There’s certainly a wisp of dramatic irony to Daemen and
Arceneaux’s hopes that “many” more people will experience the wonders of
spaceflight. Daemen’s father paid an undisclosed price for the joyride after the
original winner of Bezos’s charity auction gave up his $28-million-dollar seat.
Arceneaux, a bone cancer survivor, was selected for Inspiration4 after Isaacman
underwrote the mission and donated a seat to St. Jude’s, all for roughly
[https://www.space.com/spacex-inspiration4-new-era-private-spaceflight] $200
million. The future where anyone can shoot to the stars for the price of an
airline ticket is still far, far away.
But when it comes to hyping the view from space as “life-changing”—a sight worth
paying limb and risking life to see—the space tourist companies are actually
onto something. And judging from the history of human spaceflight, that
“something” is much older and more wonderful than even Sir Richard Branson’s
childhood dreams.
●Humans first saw the Earth from outer space on April 12, 1961, when Russian
cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin completed one orbit around the planet in the Vostok 1.
But the view of Earth from space only became a thing—a discrete subject to
discuss in conversation, newspapers, or YouTube ads—seven years later. It was
Christmas Eve, 1968, four days into the Apollo 8 lunar orbital mission, seven
months before Neil Armstrong took his giant leap. On one of the final loops
around the moon, American astronaut Bill Anders snapped a photo of Earth peeking
around the lunar surface. He called it “Earthrise.”
[https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_1249.html]
The photo was a sensation. American wilderness photographer Galen Rowell
described [https://www.abc.net.au/science/moon/earthrise.htm] it as
"the most influential environmental photograph ever taken." Another writer
[https://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/14/science/space/14mission.html?pagewanted=all]
called it the beginning of the ecological movement. Smithsonian Magazine
[https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/who-took-legendary-earthrise-photo-apollo-8-180967505/&sa=D&source=docs&ust=1636206902292000&usg=AOvVaw1TxbwJzaCWB38VjntahZM5]
calls it one of the most iconic photos of the century.
The image of the blue marble hanging in the void laid bare how fragile “starship
Earth” really is. Why was everyone so eager to nuke it into stardust? The past
decade had seen Southeast Asia scorched by napalm, Los Angeles charred by race
riots, a president and a civil rights leader assassinated. But from 239,000
miles away, with all those sins washed white and blue, how wasteful our wars,
how pointless our racial and religious divides, how silly our pretensions to
knowledge suddenly seemed! It was like John Lennon’s “Imagine” frozen in a
photograph.
"The vast loneliness is awe-inspiring,” said Jim Lovell, Command Module pilot on
the Apollo 8 mission. “It makes you realize just what you have back there on
Earth."
Two other striking photographs amplified the earthrise effect over the next
three decades. The first was “The Blue Marble,” taken 18,000 miles from Earth’s
surface by the Apollo 17 crew in 1972, the first image to show the Earth’s south
polar ice cap. The second was snapped by the deep space probe Voyager 1 in 1990,
thirteen years into its Saturn-bound mission, four billion miles from home. In
marked contrast to the rich swirling blues of “Earthrise” and “The Blue Marble,”
this photograph [https://www.planetary.org/worlds/pale-blue-dot] shows Earth as
a dust mite. Smaller than a pixel, it’s all but sucked away by the gaping black
vacuum that swallows 99.99% of the image. Astronomer and author Carl Sagan, who
originally requested that Voyager 1 take the photograph, captured the picture’s
poignant effect in his 1994 bestseller, The Pale Blue Dot:
> There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than
this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility
to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue
dot, the only home we've ever known.
Astronauts after Apollo 8 have had similar reactions to seeing our world wrapped
in the wide womb of uncreated night. “You develop an instant global
consciousness, a people orientation, an intense dissatisfaction with the state
of the world, and a compulsion to do something about it,” explained
[https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/11/8/418/htm] Edgar Mitchell, Lunar Module Pilot
for the 1971 Apollo 14 mission. “Looking at the universe out there from my
vantage point, I began to realize that we don’t know crap about anything, we
really don’t…” another Apollo crew member reported after he spent several days
orbiting the moon. Following a six-month stay at the International Space Station
in 2011, American astronaut and former F-16 pilot Ron Garan
[https://www.businessinsider.com/overview-effect-nasa-apollo8-perspective-awareness-space-2015-8]
described the Earth in Sagan-like terms as a “stunning, fragile oasis.” Seen
from far enough away, it seems, the world reverts to Eden.
As for life-changing, many astronauts have radically corrected course after they
landed back on Earth—some more radically than others.
Mitchell went on to found an Institute of Noetic Sciences to study the
revelation he received in space about the unity of the universe.
Garan started writing books and giving TED Talks
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kjqHhrtwHzo] about “the orbital perspective,”
which he claims [https://www.rongaran.com/rons-latest-books/] will “guide and
inspire our efforts to build a better world.”
Perhaps the most extreme, James Erwin of Apollo 15 left the space capsule
convinced that humans descended from extraterrestrials. For over a decade, he
led expeditions to Mount Ararat in eastern Turkey in search of Noah’s Ark.
Not every astronaut leaves space with a new religion. But the life-altering
reaction to seeing Earth from outside the atmosphere is common enough to have
both a name and a Wikipedia page: “the overview effect.” Writer Frank White
coined the term in his 1987 book of the same name, which re-released in its
third edition in 2014. “I was flying cross-country, from the east coast to the
west coast, in the 1970s,” White explained in a recent documentary short
[https://vimeo.com/55073825] about the overview effect, “and I was looking out
the window, and as I was looking down at the planet, the thought came to me,
‘Anyone living in a space shuttle, or living on the moon, would always have an
overview.’” White continued, “They would see things that we know, but we don’t
experience, which is that the earth is one system, we’re all part of that
system, and that there is a certain unity and coherence to it all.”
The language resonates with the select, but growing, number of space travelers
who have experienced the view White only imagines. From Gagarin’s observation
[https://www.reallifestories.org/stories/1619/], famously contorted by Soviet
propagandists, that an astronaut “cannot be suspended in space and not have God
in his mind and his heart,” to Arceneaux’s telling People Magazine that the view
of Earth made her feel “overwhelmed with gratitude,” the history of human
spaceflight makes it hard to deny the overview effect. Something
out-of-this-world really does seem to be out of this world.
Ancient and modern philosophers like Longinus
[https://www.gutenberg.org/files/17957/17957-h/17957-h.htm], Edmund Burke
[https://www.google.com/books/edition/A_Philosophical_Enquiry_Into_the_Origin/WSkGAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover]
, and Immanuel Kant
[https://www.google.com/books/edition/Kant_s_Critique_of_Judgement/-jvXAAAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover]
would call it the sublime. Contemporary social psychologists Jonathan Haidt
[https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Happiness_Hypothesis/gHEv9yzj_a4C?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover]
and Dachner Keltner [https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29715721/] would call it
awe—that powerful, seldom-broached “third dimension” on the axis of human
experience where we perceive divinity, sacredness, and moral connectedness. By
any name, that feeling of being swept up into something utterly mysterious,
confronted with the fearfully infinite, and thrust face-to-face with something
deep and true and totally beyond the reach of everyday existence, is real.
It’s hiding behind waterfalls, swirling in hurricanes, dancing in symphonies.
And, judging by the evidence
[https://www.businessinsider.com/overview-effect-nasa-apollo8-perspective-awareness-space-2015-8]
of the overview effect, it seems to be floating a mere sixty miles above the
Earth.
“[M]y research on the moral emotions has led me to conclude that the human mind
simply does perceive divinity and sacredness, whether or not God exists,” wrote
[https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Happiness_Hypothesis/gHEv9yzj_a4C?hl=en&gbpv=1&printsec=frontcover]
Haidt in his 2006 Happiness Hypothesis, “by our actions and our thoughts, we
move up and down on a vertical dimension,” and we are “impoverished human
beings” if we let our world “collapse into two dimensions.” The cosmonauts,
astronauts, and tourists who have rocketed higher up this vertical dimension
than any humans in history seem to agree. Their language reveals an aesthetic
and moral response to the view from outer space—in Gagarin’s case, first seeing
the Earth as a precious blue marble, then feeling the moral weight of protecting
that marble, and finally writing three-hundred-page memoirs
[https://books.google.com/books/about/Orbital_Perspective.html?id=j6H_sgEACAAJ&source=kp_book_description]
to help people see “a way forward without divisions of race, nations or
religions.” From the evidence on Earth, Spaceland seems to be the world beyond
second-dimensional strife over ego, fame, and fortune.
We all stand to gain if Virgin Galactic, Blue Origin, SpaceX, and other space
tourism companies can reduce the cost of spaceflight so that more than the
ultrarich can experience this launch-to-Damascus. If millions, even thousands,
of diplomats, politicians, CEOs, doctors, lawyers, software engineers, teachers,
law enforcement officers, factory workers, grocery clerks, nannies, parents, and
siblings went about daily life inspired by the overview effect, we might see
real improvements in global issues like poverty, inequality, and climate change.
We might make real progress toward peace.
Does this mean that space tourism will save the world? Not quite. For all the
wonder of spaceflight, and its potential to open a new frontier for experiencing
the sublime, there are several reasons to doubt that the billionaire space
pioneers can, in the words [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9E9bscLGTAA] of
billionaire space pioneer Tony Stark, “privatize world peace.” Altogether, these
reasons should be the cause of great rational optimism for us as-yet
Earth-dwellers.
●First, we should be wary that corporate motives will discolor the space-tour
experience of the overview effect. Competition might push companies to optimize
their adventure experience, as well as drive down the price of admission, but
market dynamics might also chafe against the spirit of the sublime.
The overview effect is all about encountering the wonder of a universe too big
to grasp, and a planet too precious to lose over egotistic squabbles. But space
tourism, for all its highflying PR, descended into egotistic squabbling
[https://www.theverge.com/2021/7/9/22570287/space-tourism-virgin-galactic-branson-blue-origin-bezos]
even before Sir Richard Branson squeezed into his electric blue spaceflight
suit: Jeff Bezos announces the New Shepard will launch on July 20, the
fifty-second anniversary of the Apollo 11 moon landing; Branson announces he’ll
launch nine days earlier. Two days before Branson takes off, Blue Origin tweets
[https://twitter.com/blueorigin/status/1413521627116032001?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1413521627116032001%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.theverge.com%2F2021%2F7%2F9%2F22570287%2Fspace-tourism-virgin-galactic-branson-blue-origin-bezos]
that Bezos’s rocket is bigger than Branson’s. It’s hard to find the
Earth-is-too-precious-to-lose-let’s-stop-fighting spirit in a
middle-school-playground-level Twitter exchange. These are the pioneers forging
a new way to the sublime?
It seems wrong to turn the experience of Haidt’s vertical axis, so basic to
being human, and the overview effect, so precious to astronauts since Gargarin,
into a battleground for billionaire egos and corporate ownership. Will all space
tourist companies fall into the same trap? (Musk, for his part, seems content to
launch his space capsule 366 miles above the squabbling en route to Mars.)
Beyond the corporate politics, the structure of the space tourism industry may,
somewhat paradoxically, keep tourists from actually experiencing the overview
effect. The view-of-Earth-from-space was born in a moment of serendipity. Bill
Anders wasn’t planning to take a photo of the earthrise when Apollo 8 slipped
around the lunar surface. He wasn’t in space to gaze poetically at the Earth,
experience “a life-changing adventure,” and return to his wife and kids with a
new orbital perspective. He was a fighter-pilot-turned-astronaut simply doing
his job. Part of the reason “Earthrise” was so profound is that it was
unexpected.
We’d think, consequently, that the novelty would wear off for astronauts
following Apollo 8. But even astronauts who have been warned about the overview
effect ahead of their first mission report [https://vimeo.com/55073825] feeling
amazed. Why? Until this summer, the view of Earth from space was almost
exclusively reserved for professional astronauts. Spaceflight was risky, and the
men and women who did it devoted their lives to aviation and aerospace. They
blasted above the Kármán Line on taxpayer dollars to conduct scientific
experiments. Even if other astronauts had experienced it before, the overview
effect was something special--something that both the astronauts and their home
nations appreciated in proportion to their risk and sacrifice.
But a minutes-long jaunt to the edge of space in a pay-as-you-go rocket is a
categorically different experience from a week-long mission to the moon in a
capsule funded by American citizens trying to beat the Soviets in the Cold War
Space Race, run by a computer with less processing power than an iPhone. The
serendipitous view of the earthrise from the Apollo 8 command module was a
miracle. The hyped-up view of Earth from the VSS Unity backseat, or the New
Shepard capsule, is the A/B-tested product you paid for. Tomorrow’s space
tourists will rocket up the atmosphere in a vehicle designed (in Branson’s case)
by a Disney Imagineer, to experience the Earth as profit-maximizing marketers
want them to see it. Where is the “Earthrise” serendipity, the danger, the sense
of earned privilege, the perspective-shattering surprise? Will we appreciate the
view the same way without these things? Will we look out the passenger window
and see anything beyond the pictures we saw in advertisements and Instagram
feeds?
Space tourism companies themselves are wary of these dangers. Why else does no
one call space tourists “space tourists”? Ordinary citizens who have gone to
space have resisted
[https://www.yorkdispatch.com/story/news/2021/05/25/space-tourism-grows-gets-call-astronaut/116525178/]
the label since the early 2000s. Space tourists today are called “clients
[https://spaceadventures.com/]”, “mission participants
[https://spaceadventures.com/experiences/spacewalk]”, “explorers
[https://www.spaceperspective.com/experience]”, and even “citizen astronauts
[http://www.virgingalactic.com/].” The labels certainly apply to the
Inspiration4 crew, who underwent months of training
[https://time.com/6083965/inspiration4-space-training/] before their three-day
mission, but what happens the day after tomorrow, when space tourists blast up
to space like they blast up Space Mountain today? Does “astronaut” apply to
anyone who can afford to buy the label? Even space tourist companies,
rhetorically at least, seem to have an aversion to making spaceflight strictly
commercial.
Beyond these worries about turning the cosmos corporate, we have reason to doubt
that space tours, taken even in the best of faith, can give us a long-term
source of sublimity. In the event that ten years from now we have a flourishing
space tourism market that lets millions of people snap earthrise selfies for
their social media accounts, the wonder of the world above the Kármán Line will
eventually wear off. What happens when we have hotels in space, waystations on
the Moon, and colonies on Mars? Exactly what happened to the view of the Earth
from the airplane, a mere 35,000 feet above the planet. The novelty will get
old.
In the early twentieth century, seas of clouds inspired French aviator Antoine
de Saint-Exupéry to write The Little Prince; oceans of sky stirred Kenyan
aviatrix Beryl Markham to write prose that made Hemingway jealous. The view from
a commercial jet window, after all, is what first inspired Frank White to write
about the overview effect. Now, most airline passengers pull the sunshade over
their window, so they can hack away at their email without squinting. Why should
the view of Earth from a few hundred thousand feet higher be exempt from the
same hedonic adaptation?
Branson, for his part, already seems to have gotten over his life-changing view
of the “beautiful, beautiful earth.” A month after the VSS Unity stunt, he
offloaded
[https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonathanponciano/2021/08/13/billionaire-branson-sold-300-million-in-virgin-galactic-stock-this-week-as-shares-tumbled/?sh=1e41c03d6f69]
$300 million worth of Virgin Galactic stock as shares nose-dived more than 25%.
Whether it was the bad business model, the course-deviating
[https://techcrunch.com/2021/09/02/faa-grounds-virgin-galactic-amidst-investigation-into-july-mission/]
spaceplane, or Branson’s electric blue spacesuit, it seems that capturing the
space-sublime is trickier business than imagineering thrill rides.
At least three considerations, then, should sober our excitement about space
tourism’s one-hundred-percent-subliminity-guarantee: corporate motives that cut
against the spirit of the overview effect, the risk of over-commercialization
cheapening the experience, and the likelihood that sooner or later, people will
get bored of the orbital perspective. But this is all wonderful news. Why? If
we’re doubtful that we can always find the sublime on space tours, we should be
optimistic that we can always find the sublime on Earth, without paying for
admission.
The third dimension of human experience, for Haidt, is about seeing the divine
and the sacred in what surrounds us, whether or not we believe that God exists.
If that’s true, the sublime is simultaneously the scarcest and most plentiful
resource on Earth. Life-changing perspective is everywhere if we look hard
enough to find it. Romantic poet William Blake saw
[https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43650/auguries-of-innocence] “a World in
a Grain of Sand”; writer David Foster Wallace found
[https://sites.psu.edu/kingsel/files/2016/08/DFW-How-Tracy-Austin-Broke-My-Heart-1994-1lctx91.pdf]
the sublime in Tracy Austin’s tennis serve; playwright Thornton Wilder
discovered [https://www.thorntonwilder.com/our-town] wonder in an ordinary New
Hampshire town. Most people feel something similar when they get swept up in the
crowd after the beat drops at a rock concert, or the rookie scores the winning
touchdown and the crowd rushes the field at the championship game. Others feel
it watching a sunset, hearing a speech at a funeral, holding a newborn baby, or
seeing the groom’s face when the bride starts down the aisle. Still others might
feel that strange mystic unity watching the Olympics opening ceremony,
contemplating the Rose Window of the Notre Dame Cathedral, or gathering around a
campfire on a long summer night to gaze open-mouthed at the stars.
Spaceflight is wonderful. The overview effect is a gift to this generation that
anyone lucky enough to receive should embrace with open arms. But if we
flatlanders don’t have the aesthetic appreciation and moral charity to wrestle
wonder from the recalcitrant stuff of everyday life, we won’t be able to keep
wonder pinned for long in the backseat window of a rocketship. If we can’t find
a reason to stop the petty ego battles and self-destructive infighting here on
Earth, we won’t find it out there in space. But if anything, that’s reason for
excitement. It means that the sublime is everywhere we’re willing to see it.
A retired astronaut in his fifties, who flew multiple missions to the
International Space Station during his career, summed up the limits of space
tourism in a recent interview [https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/11/8/418/htm]:
> As far as the overview effect and getting a sense that we are a common humanity,
and we all share a common home, and at the end of the day that the things that
unite human beings are commonalities between human beings that are greater than
the things that divide us . . . You know, I think the reason that I didn’t come
away with some kind of sudden, strong compelling feeling in that regard is that
I think I knew that before I left.
To reach the highest view of this beautiful, beautiful planet, we can—and maybe
one day must—keep our feet planted firmly on Starship Earth. On the dusty morning of July 11, 2021, two hundred miles south of Albuquerque,
Sir Richard Branson squeezed into a blue and gold jumpsuit and shot into space.
He was the first person in history to ride fifteen kilometers short of the
Kármán Line—the international boundary between the atmosphere and the void—on a
rocket built with his own money.
“To all you kids down there, I was once a child with a dream, looking up to the
stars,” Branson said [https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-57797297] to
the camera inside the Virgin Galactic spaceplane. “Now I’m an adult in a
spaceship, with lots of other wonderful adults, looking down to our beautiful,
beautiful earth. To the next generation of dreamers, if we can do this, just
imagine what you can do! Heyyyy!”
Branson unbuckled his straps and wafted out of his seat. “Come out, mister!”
yelled one of the wonderful adults in the background. Three minutes later,
Branson and crew glided into southern New Mexico and doused their blue and gold
jumpsuits in expensive champagne. Standing on the press-release stage like a
rock god, Branson announced that from now on, anyone could have the same
life-changing experience for only $400,000.
And so, with one small step for mankind and one giant leap for one man, the Age
of Space Tourism began.
●Branson is not the only billionaire hurtling into space these days. Amazon
mastermind Jeff Bezos followed
[https://apnews.com/article/jeff-bezos-space-e0afeaa813ff0bdf23c37fe16fd34265]
Branson a week after the Virgin Galactic stunt, launching from Van Horn, Texas,
to upstage the British music mogul by twenty-one kilometers. Never one to let
other genius-billionaire-playboy-philanthropists steal the spotlight, SpaceX
founder and CEO Elon Musk sent
[https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/18/21142137/spacex-tourism-orbit-earth-private-citizens-dragon-space-flight]
four tourists into orbit 366 miles above the Earth for three days in September.
The Inspiration4 mission, the first all-civilian spWill McCollum | The True | Essay
Perhaps, like me, you’ve noticed a curious sort of temporality since the
pandemic began. Time is passing both unbearably slowly and frighteningly
quickly. The slow dragging days add up before they come to pass. History seems
to outpace itself, leaving absences of memory in its wake. We’re moving into the
future without the chance to catch our breaths, and without the time or frame of
mind to organize our recollections and observations in the passing present into
a coherent story that can bring us safely to a future worth living in at all.
In the nineties, there was much think-piecing and hand-wringing about the
imminent end of history. Famously, historian Francis Fukiyama confidently
proclaimed in 1992 that we had reached the end of history, with Western liberal
democracy having shown itself globally ascendant and historically necessary with
the fall of the Soviet Union. At that time, Western liberal democracy was a
metanarrative that helped us to frame historical events in a cohesive and
forward-looking framework.
Twenty years after September 11, 2001, the apparent decline of Western liberal
democracy and its more recent spawn, neoliberalism, leave us wondering about the
viability of such stories, as well as their perceived truth value: if liberal
“progress” isn’t assured, as the last several decades seem to suggest, then what
are we to do? What Big Story should we be telling?
●Narratives are essential for my day job. I recently returned home to
Birmingham, Alabama, after spending five weeks in a small tent outside the town
of Munising in the piney woods of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. I spent the
summer working on an archaeology project excavating logging camps that were
operated in the early twentieth century. On projects like that, studying the
relatively recent past, you’re not really expecting to find buried treasure.
Rather, it’s a lot of tobacco tins and nails and bits of broken glass and bottle
caps. The point of the project was to identify how poor (mostly Scandinavian)
immigrant loggers lived their daily lives by meticulously uncovering and
analyzing their trash. What did they eat? What did they buy? Did they have time
for leisure? That’s really all archaeology is: methodically digging up trash and
learning about the people who left it behind. These workers make scant
appearances in the historical record, so archaeology is well-suited for
reconstructing their lives and trying to tell their stories the best we can.
As an archaeologist, I specialize in historical archaeology. Historical
archaeologists study the period for which we also have a written record.
Historical archaeology contrasts with prehistoric archaeology, which is the kind
of archaeology most readers are probably familiar with. Historical archaeology
offers one way to remedy a selective documentary record. What makes historical
archaeology distinct from prehistoric archaeology is that we work between the
archaeological record and the historical record. We try to fill in the gaps in
the telling of history. The themes historical archaeologists treat, and the
stories they incorporate, are often related to questions of colonialism, race,
capitalism, environmental destruction, and the like.
View from the archaeological site of Mawchu Llaqta in the Colca Valley, Peru.
Photos C/O Will McCollumThe first step in filling those historical absences is
to identify an absence in the first place. But where does one look for something
that isn’t in the written record or in the stories we tell ourselves? To me, it
seems that the best one can first do is trace the contours of the dominant
narrative so as to determine what has already been said. This allows us to
identify the limits of the historical absence.
After tracing the dominant narrative, we must determine which absences matter.
Crucially, a Big Story can train one’s attention toward the gaps that do matter
for that story’s unfolding. The dominant narrative is the history that has been
recorded and remembered, and doesn’t necessarily cohere with any one Big Story.
But without direction by a Big Story, how does one know where to look for the
historical absences that matter for the direction of that story?
Big Stories—Western liberal democracy being just one example—situate events
within the longer arc of history and its unfolding. The kinds of stories I’m
calling Big Stories are those myths that generalize so as to account for the
broad sweep of history and its ultimate direction. These stories are less
concerned with the historical particulars than with how the particulars fit into
a larger explanatory narrative. These are commonly known as metanarratives.
Other competing contemporary examples of Big Stories are Christianity (and any
other universalizing religion), Marxism, evolutionary biology (along with modern
western science in general), and fascism. Without Big Stories, you just have
scattered and unorganized bits of information, decontextualized data like broken
glass. Big Stories help in our search for absences by highlighting themes that
continue to matter in the contemporary world.
To draw from my own archaeological fieldwork experience, take for example the
case of early Spanish colonial towns in Peru. In the southern Andes of Peru, I
helped excavate an abandoned sixteenth century Spanish colonial town. The town
was one of hundreds of reducciones. These were towns to which indigenous Andeans
were resettled after Spanish conquest in 1532. All told, upwards of a million
Andeans were forcibly relocated to these Spanish colonial townships because the
Spanish believed it would make Catholic evangelization and colonial
administration more efficient.
We spent ten weeks in a village of four hundred people, 14,000 feet above sea
level in the high Andes. Sleeping on bunk beds in the village parish, without
heat and with only sporadic running water, we hiked an hour each morning to the
site. All this to dig up Inca and Spanish colonial potsherds and try to tell a
particular story of sixteenth-century indigenous subjects living under colonial
domination in Peru. Here, European colonialism is the Big Story of interest both
because it shaped the modern world, and because it left colonized and exploited
subjects largely absent in the historical record. Many scholars argue that
European colonialism is one of, if not the, foundations to modernity. Another
candidate for foundations to modernity is the development and growth of
capitalism. In fact, it’s hard to disentangle colonialism and capitalism, and
many point to early European colonial exploits in the fifteenth century as
inaugurating capitalism as such. But I’m not so interested in the nuances of the
origins of capitalism here. To the matter at hand, Marx’s critique of capitalism
offers me a Big Story for approaching my current research in Birmingham, Alabama
of all places.
View overlooking Lake Superior in the Keweenaw Peninsula, Michigan.What is
unique to Birmingham (and to the entirety of the industrialing South) is the
transition from racist chattel slavery to racist wage-labor in Alabama. In the
abandoned iron mines of Birmingham’s Red Mountain Park, the Big Story of Marxism
directs me toward issues of race and class that guide my research. I don’t mean
to suggest that some kind of proof or justification of Marxism is specifically
materially located in Birmingham, of all places. My point in this essay isn’t to
argue the merits of Marxism, anyway. What I mean is that the Big Story of
Marxism (as just one universalizing narrative) directs my attention to what
matters for the story regardless of where that matter-ing takes place. The
development of industrial capitalism as a mode of expropriating surplus labor,
alienating workers, and creating surplus value (profit) for the bosses isn’t
unique to Birmingham. The Big Story of Marxism simply allows me to focus on
historical absences that pertain to that larger story. A Marxist mode of
analysis can be applied to pretty much anywhere.
In my own case, in Birmingham, Red Mountain Park is home to abandoned iron mines
that together comprised the foundation for the city’s rapid industrial growth in
the late nineteenth century. Located between downtown Birmingham and the
neighboring town of Bessemer, it incorporates the remains of the industrial
infrastructure of the iron ore mines into its layout, with abandoned mine shafts
visible from hiking trails. However, the park doesn’t highlight the mining camps
themselves, where the workers lived, in its presentation of Birmingham’s
industrial past. The mining camps in Red Mountain Park were majority-Black, and
many of the workers had moved from agrarian plantation settings to work in the
newly industrializing setting of Birmingham at the turn of the twentieth
century. This story is one of the transition from chattel slavery to industrial
wage-labor after emancipation, and it is the broad and sweeping narrative of
Marxism that first directed my attention toward this question of labor history.
By chance, I came across the mining camp of Smythe, a majority-Black mining camp
with almost no archival representation, a place that would help me address the
questions posed by absences in the historical record and directed by my own
commitment to Marxism as a Big Story.
●One challenge in telling the stories needed to make sense of history is that
social theorists (Foucault, Deleuze, Derrida) have spilled much ink arguing that
all stories are formal constructs and, therefore, fictions. More recently, some
writers like Yuval Noah Harari have popularized these ideas in even less-nuanced
ways.
French poststructuralism came onto the scene in the second half of the twentieth
century. Building on the arguments of earlier philosophers like Herder,
Neitzsche, and Wittgenstein, the poststructuralists basically argued that,
because our understandings of the world are grounded in our own
historically-contingent and inherently values-laden language, there is no such
thing as objectivity. All judgement, they claimed, entails certain
self-referential assumptions that make a “realist” understanding of the world
impossible. Foucault, for instance, argued in The History of Sexuality that the
notion of an individual having a thing called a “sexuality” is itself a
relatively recent historical development, one which would be alien to past
civilizations. The poststructuralists thus highlighted a linguistic quirk that
does not exist in English, but does in all the Romance languages: that “history”
can refer to both a scholastic study of past events (l’histoire) and a
subjective narrative (une histoire). The impact of this revelation was to
suggest that l’histoire is actually just another of many competing histoires.
The Big Story, they argued, is just that: a story.
We continue to see the influence of poststructuralism in contemporary cultural
and political life in this country. This isn’t to suggest that an obscure group
of French poststructuralists, in some way, caused our current predicament, but
rather that the school of thought offers a descriptive and explanatory framework
for thinking through our current disdain for truth. Think disinformation, or the
total disintegration of verifiable narrative. The proliferation and pathological
consumption of online information that’s been hyper condensed into images and
bits of text only compounds the problem of finding a story that means something
at all.
Surely you can relate with the feeling that we know everything and nothing at
the same time. In light of the poststructuralist critique, and bearing in mind
the fractious proliferation of online information, how do we continue telling
stories? Even in historical archaeology, which is an empirical discipline, can
we be sure we aren’t just writing another fiction? As we study the silenced
stories of colonized indigenous people in Peru, or as we reconstruct the lives
of miners in Alabama, are we not still selectively reading history? If we are
writing fiction, is this a problem?
●In his influential Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History, the
late Haitian anthropologist Michel-Rolph Trouillot identified a basic ambiguity
in the vernacular use of the word “history.” He describes what he calls
Historicity 1 and Historicity 2.
Historicity 1 describes the sociohistorical processes that actually happened out
there in the world. On the other hand, Historicity 2 describes the stories we
tell about what happened out there in the world. These two kinds of historicity
are both distinct while also overlapping considerably.
Trouillot argues that to get at that ambiguity we ought to study the power-laden
operations that produce silences in historical narratives. Ultimately, he is
concerned with understanding how we might begin to redress historical erasures
and write histories about people left out of dominant narratives.
Saidiya Hartman, a historian of U.S. slavery, addresses the problem of how to
account for marginalized people (enslaved people, in her case) who leave no
record of their own in the archives, and about whom next to nothing is written.
For enslaved people, Hartman might at most have a name in a ledger documenting
their sale as chattel. She pointedly says, “The necessity of trying to represent
what we cannot, rather than leading to pessimism or despair, must be embraced as
the impossibility that conditions our knowledge of the past and animates our
desire for a liberated future.” So if a story is always going to be fiction, how
does one go on telling stories, especially in the case of a story without any
archival representation at all? In my own case, if Black industrial workers were
erased from the Birmingham archive, how can I tell their stories anyway?
Archaeology is one mode for probing historical absences, but are we not still
telling a fiction, just a different fiction read against the dominant narrative?
●My own dissertation research is concerned with Smythe, the aforementioned
abandoned majority-Black iron ore mining camp in my hometown of Birmingham,
Alabama. The site was occupied from roughly 1890–1915. The site was owned and
operated by the Tennessee Coal, Iron and Railroad Company (TCI), which was
incorporated by U.S. Steel in 1907.
Unsurprisingly, a corporation like U.S. Steel isn’t exactly interested in an
anthropologist snooping through their records. Except for census records, I have
had no luck in identifying any relevant documents in the Birmingham archives.
Furthermore, any administrative documents related to Smythe were laid to rest in
the U.S. Steel archives. I have emailed people in public relations several times
and have been redirected and ignored each time.
This is a perfect, if not glaring, example of a gap in the archival record.
Archaeology offers one option for recovering these lost memories.
●Memory, of course, plays an important role in this problem of recovering
stories that have been forgotten by history. In popular understanding, history
is sometimes thought of like an individual’s memory. That is, history as
collective or social memory. Trouillot takes aim at this framework, what he
calls the storage model, and argues that history, and likewise individual
memory, cannot be thought of as a cabinet with different compartments and their
corresponding representations retrievable at will. Even were this the case, and
all the representations were readily accessible, history isn’t a simple record
of the sequence of the contents of each compartment. History requires an
interpretive and narrative framework for organizing its contents.
Neither the individual’s memory nor collective memory is reliable as a
representational accounting of what happened. An individual’s memory (and
therefore identity) is malleable and unstable, and our collective recounting of
history is always selective. Neither history (collective memory) nor individual
memory is fixed, and the demands of the present always shape the contours of our
recollections, both in narrating our selves and in narrating history.
Without a concept of a future worth living in, it’s hard to know what
information in the present and its corresponding past bears recounting. That is,
in the face of an absent future, we’re also left with an absent present and
past.
A child’s shoe and the face of a doll excavated in the Hiawatha National Forest
in Michigan's Upper Peninsula.Inundated with information, it seems difficult to
zero in on what matters when we don’t have a Big Story. Stories, historical and
personal, provide texture and organization to collective and individual memory.
Stories push us to be attentive to the present and the past in terms of a future
we look hopefully toward.
One reason that Big Stories matter is that they give us direction for recovering
and retaining the information that matters for a future. They allow us to
determine which gaps in memory matter for the sake of the story. We’ll never be
able to recover all the information that has been lost to time and its
distortions and erasures. But having a Big Story as a framework allows us to
focus on what really matters.
●Obviously, not everyone can put archaeological methods to work in filling
historical gaps and other gaps in memory. Although archaeology offers an obvious
toolkit for redressing historical erasure, it is by no means the only method of
saying what heretofore has not been said.
Even if histories are fictional constructs, I argue that those constructs are
still worth telling if we are to one day live in a future worth living in.
This question of history’s absences bears importance for living in the present
as well. As gestured to above, without a Big Story directing us toward some
imagined future, we are left with absences in the present and, as the present
passes, absences in the past. The challenge we are left with is imagining a
future we want to live in, and its corresponding story, in order to make us
attentive to what matters in the present and past.
With multiple intersecting crises with apocalyptic overtones, it seems
particularly urgent that we imagine a future worth living in. By hopefully
identifying a direction to history’s unfolding, we can inhabit the density of
history in the now, and productively weed through proliferating scattered
information to identify what matters for the Big Story.
History is still being written. The question remains: What future will be
written into existence? Perhaps, like me, you’ve noticed a curious sort of temporality since the
pandemic began. Time is passing both unbearably slowly and frighteningly
quickly. The slow dragging days add up before they come to pass. History seems
to outpace itself, leaving absences of memory in its wake. We’re moving into the
future without the chance to catch our breaths, and without the time or frame of
mind to organize our recollections and observations in the passing present into
a coherent story that can bring us safely to a future worth living in at all.
In the nineties, there was much think-piecing and hand-wringing about the
imminent end of history. Famously, historian Francis Fukiyama confidently
proclaimed in 1992 that we had reached the end of history, with Western liberal
democracy having shown itself globally ascendant and historically necessary with
the fall of the Soviet Union. At that time, Western liberal democracy was a
metanarrative that helped us to frame historical events in a cohesive and
forward-looking framework.
Twenty years after September 11, 2001, the apparent decline of Western liberal
democracy and its more recent spawn, neoliberalism, leave us wondering about the
viability of such stories, as well as their perceived truth value: if liberal
“progress” isn’t assured, as the last several decades seem to suggest, then what
are we to do? What Big Story should we be telling?
●Narratives are essential for my day job. I recently returned home to
Birmingham, Alabama, after spending five weeks in a small tent outside the town
of Munising in the piney woods of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. I spent the
summer working on an archaeology project excavating logging camps that were
operated in the early twentieth century. On projects like that, studying the
relatively recent past, you’re not really expecting to find buried treasure.
Rather, it’s a lot of tobacco tins and nails and bits of broken glass and bottle
caps. The point of the project was to identify how poorMax Fieg | The True | Essay
*The artwork featured in this piece was done in collaboration with digital
artist Kendra Oliver, an educator and artist living in Pittsburgh.
On a September evening in 1846, German astronomer Johann Gottfried Galle
received a letter requesting that he point his telescope at one small patch of
the night sky. The letter detailed that by performing this observation, Galle
might solve a puzzle that vexed the scientific community for years. This puzzle
concerned the orbit of Uranus, the only planet whose orbit couldn’t be predicted
by Newton’s theory of gravity. Uranus would be expected to be in one place but
show up in another. Spurred by this mystery, Galle’s letter-writer asked
himself: is Newton’s theory not a description of our world, or is there
something else responsible for this anomaly?
Prior to writing his letter, French astronomer and mathematician Urbain Le
Verrier made a calculation he hoped would explain the orbit of Uranus and
maintain support for the theory of gravitation. Le Verrier and others suggested
that there was a dark companion responsible for the disturbance: an unknown,
massive body orbiting near Uranus providing an extra gravitational pull.
Supposing this massive body existed, Le Verrier predicted where and how heavy
Uranus’s dark companion must be to explain the data. He sent his letter to Galle
telling him where to look. On the night the letter arrived, Galle searched the
sky and discovered a royal blue planet three billion miles from Earth, known
today as Neptune, within one degree of Le Verrier’s prediction and after less
than one hour of searching.
The mystery of Uranus’s anomalous orbit posed a serious challenge for nineteenth
century science. The puzzle and consequent discovery of Neptune are exemplary of
a recurring pattern in physics: an observation is made that doesn’t agree with a
theory’s prediction, so scientists must either come up with a better theory or
find an effect (like an undiscovered planet) which might explain the observation
using a current theory.
Twenty-first century physicists and astronomers, however, find themselves in a
similar but much more dire situation. Around 50 years ago, another observation
led us to question our best and most well-tested theories. Like the disturbance
in Uranus’s orbit, this observation suggested that there is a certain missing
mass in our universe, only far darker than the dimly lit Neptune. That mass is
what physicists and astronomers call “dark matter,” an incredibly elusive and
distinctly unusual substance. As a mid-level graduate student pursuing a PhD in
particle physics, I work with collaborators at UC Irvine and around the world to
help us better understand dark matter: how to find it, where to find it, its
secrets, and what effects it might have on the world around us, or above us.
Kendra Oliver, Patterns and Predictions, digital artwork (2021) | Patterns and
predictions throughout history have shaped our reality. From the idea of “some
dark companion” that was responsible for the orbital disturbances to the
existence and understanding of dark matter, patterns and prediction drive human
knowledge. This is based on human creativity and ingenuity.As a result of more
than a century’s worth of research, physicists today have a grand theory of
particle physics which is (unimaginatively) called the Standard Model. The
theory holds that there are merely 17 indivisible particles that interact with
one another and constitute the building blocks which form everything in our
universe. The Standard Model describes how these particles interact, has been
tested against countless experiments, and we can predict the outcome of these
experiments with remarkable precision. In fact, the Standard Model is the most
predictive theory that humans have ever come up with. We know, however, that
the Standard Model is incomplete as dark matter cannot be any of these 17
particles. We know in great detail how these 17 behave, and dark matter does not
behave quite like any of them. One of these known particles, called the
neutrino, is similar to dark matter and can give some insight into how dark
matter behaves. The neutrino is a ghost-like particle that passes through matter
undisturbed. It was predicted to exist based on experiments that could not be
explained, and the scientist who theorized it lamented, “I have done a terrible
thing: I have postulated a particle that cannot be detected.”
From the Italian for “little neutral one”, the neutrino is an elusive particle
that rarely interacts with other particles. Countless neutrinos are constantly
being produced in the sun. These neutrinos travel through the vacuum of space,
and more than 100 trillion of them pass through you unnoticed each second.
Despite the neutrino’s near complete detachment from other particles and our
experiments, it was eventually discovered two decades after it was predicted and
is a crowning achievement of theoretical and experimental physics. Like the
neutrino, dark matter is passing through you unnoticed each moment. Unlike the
neutrino, however, we do not yet know how many dark matter particles are passing
through you nor where they come from, and its identity still eludes us more than
five decades after we gathered the first conclusive evidence of dark matter’s
existence.
The story of Neptune’s discovery mirrors the story of how we learned about dark
matter. By observing the motion of a body like Uranus, one can calculate the
forces causing that motion, such as the gravitational tug of an unseen companion
like Neptune. A half-century ago, astronomer Vera Rubin used this same tactic on
stars within the nearby Andromeda Galaxy, two million light years from Earth.
Starting with the stars at the edge of the galaxy, she measured their velocity
as they orbited the disk, the galaxy’s “rotation curve.” Here again the tactic
proved useful: just as one could predict the motion of Uranus around the sun
using the known planets, Rubin could predict the motion of the stars around the
galaxy using the other known stars.
Rubin painstakingly analyzed data and made a stark conclusion: all the stars at
the edge of the Andromeda Galaxy were rotating much faster than expected. So
fast, that the gravitational pull of the galaxy wasn’t enough to keep these
stars from flying apart. There had to have been something else keeping Andromeda
intact. Once more, observation suggested that there was some kind of dark
companion, a missing mass providing the needed gravitational interaction. Just
as Le Verrier predicted the mass and location of Neptune, Rubin could predict
the mass and location of her dark companion.
Rubin and her collaborators predicted that about 85% of Andromeda’s mass was
unaccounted for. Meaning, if you were to tally up all the stars, gas, and
planets in Andromeda, add up their weight, and compare this with the mass
required to keep the galaxy from flying apart, you would come up 85% short and
conclude that you are not counting most of the galaxy’s actual mass. This
conclusion wasn’t unique to Andromeda, but true of almost every known galaxy.
Rubin’s work and follow-up studies predicted the location of this missing mass:
it fills a large bubble or “halo” with the halo’s host galaxy embedded in it’s
interior. We call this 85% missing mass “dark matter” because it does not emit,
absorb, or strongly interact with light like stars, planets, and most particles
do. To this day, while we’re confident that it exists, we have little idea of
what dark matter actually is, even though it dominates our universe.
There are many ways that we study dark matter: astronomers and experimentalists
scour the sky and design intricate experiments to find the dark matter needle in
the haystack, while a theorist might develop a grand theory which unites dark
matter with the successful Standard Model. My interest in this search is
somewhere between these two in the field of dark matter phenomenology. To
explain by way of our guiding example, the story of Neptune: Newton as a
theorist developed the theory, Le Verrier as a phenomenologist used the theory
to make a prediction to test the theory, and Galle as an astronomer searched the
sky for the effects of the prediction.
A study in dark matter phenomenology usually begins down one of two roads,
either the theoretical or experimental. When a theorist develops a new model of
dark matter, it’s not always clear how this theory can be verified nor how it
will affect our experiments. A theorist might come along and suppose there is a
dark matter particle which only interacts with the elusive but well-known
neutrino, for example. How this type of dark matter could subsequently be
discovered with current experiments is highly uncertain.
Or a study might start with the experimentalists who report that they’ve
developed an exciting new experiment, or they’ve obtained an experimental result
that cannot be explained with the Standard Model. Maybe this anomalous result is
dark matter, maybe it’s something else altogether, or maybe it is something more
mundane like an error in the experiment. In each case, my collaborators and I
have the job of predicting the phenomena from a theory and determining how these
phenomena might be observed. Let me give an example of a project I worked on to
describe how this process looks in a type of search called an “indirect
detection” of dark matter.
How do you search for something you can’t see? By starting with something you
can see. The Galactic Center Gamma-Ray Excess is a longstanding anomaly, in
which there is light emanating from the center of the Milky Way which we can’t
fully explain. The stars in the Milky Way glow of course, but there is a small
excess of light above the glow we expect from conventional light sources. One
popular idea is that this excess is the result of dark matter annihilation.
Annihilation is a process where two particles crash into and destroy each other,
converting their energy into other particles like light rays in the process.
Annihilation happens with Standard Model particles all the time. In this
proposed solution to the Galactic Center Excess, two dark matter particles would
occasionally annihilate each other and give off the observed excess of light. As
a phenomenologist, my job would be to find a model where two dark matter
particles can annihilate each other, and calculate the properties of the dark
matter particle such that it would give off the observed glow, thereby
explaining the mysterious excess of light and learning more about this dark
matter model.
The goal is to gather evidence for dark matter being a certain type of particle
with a certain mass, interacting in a certain way with other particles. If
enough evidence like this is gathered, scientists become more and more sure of
what the dark matter particle actually is. Alas, no such gathering of evidence
has been assembled. We currently have disparate pieces of evidence, and wide
swaths of particles that we know dark matter isn’t.
There are countless particles which have been suggested to be dark matter, and
each has been or will be investigated thoroughly. The history of the search for
dark matter involves decades of experiments, theories, and mathematics that
takes years to grasp, even at a basic level. I recall when I was a younger
student when academic papers read like a Dr. Seuss book filled with made-up
words. Consider this handful of actual theorized particles and see if you can
guess which one I just made up: gluons, glueballs, inflatons, quarks, squarks,
quirks, winos, neutrinos, neutralinos, tops, downs, charms, bottoms, simps,
wimps, and chimps. For most physicists (though most may not care to admit), our
time is frequently spent discussing and pouring over papers trying to make sense
of the findings while deciphering language like this. You never know, it could
be a decades-old study that one day gives you a clue on dark matter, or an idea
a collaborator put forth at lunch that merits further investigation. It can
sometimes be disorienting, but at a fundamental level, dark matter is a
hypothesis that begs the most familiar and child-like questions: What are we
made of? What kind of world do we live in?
Kendra Oliver, Missing Matter, digital artwork (2021) | Through observing the
swirling movement and calculating masses of galaxies the darkness can be seen.
For example, prediction indicated that 85% of Andromeda mass was
unaccounted-for, similar to all other galaxies. Scientists can identify the
location of the missing mass by a giant bubble, or “halo,” that crowns every
galaxy. It does not absorb or strongly interact with light. These relationships
are explored in this piece that tries to visualize dark matter.To convince
yourself that every galaxy, and thus the universe, is dominated by a mysterious
and virtually undetectable dark matter requires more evidence. As Carl Sagan put
it, “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” Still, the suite of
evidence for dark matter is overwhelming. More evidence is found in studies that
examine groupings of thousands of galaxies called galaxy clusters. As Vera Rubin
studied the rotation of stars around a galaxy, galaxy clusters allow us to study
the orbit of galaxies around other galaxies. We’ve discussed this same
phenomenon before, but sure enough the galaxies are found to be rotating so fast
that they should fly apart. Notably, when the amount of missing mass is
calculated, it is roughly the same 85% amount that Rubin found.
Another terrific observational technique which can be used to infer the
existence of dark matter is called “gravitational lensing.” As a ray of light
passes near a very massive body such as a star or galaxy, the ray’s path is bent
by it like a lens. By measuring how much the light deviates from its path one
can calculate how much mass is doing the bending. When these observations are
performed on certain systems, the light appears to be bent more than it should
be. You can probably guess what is responsible for the bending. Once again,
these studies imply that there is a missing mass distributed as a diffuse halo
around galaxies that outweighs regular matter by 5:1. How these analyses are
performed is a longer discussion, but all of these observations plus countless
others suggest the same missing mass. The interesting thing to note is that
virtually every piece of evidence for dark matter relies on its bulk
gravitational effects as opposed to the effect of one dark matter particle,
obfuscating the particle’s identity.
But why should you care? What does dark matter have to do with you, at the end
of the day?
One of the most significant signs of the existence of dark matter--if not the
most significant--is the existence of you. Without dark matter our universe
would be a much different place, and it’s entirely possible our universe would
not exist at all without it. The full reach of dark matter's influence on our
universe is not well understood, and its mysterious nature lures us toward a
deeper understanding of our world.
But it is not just some substance light years away that you’ll never encounter;
in fact, you are actually engulfed in dark matter right now.
Wherever you go, you are immersed in a sea of atmosphere, standing on an earth
that orbits a sun you are familiar with. You might remember from chemistry class
that the atmosphere is composed mostly of nitrogen and oxygen molecules, that
the earth is a variety of metals like iron, and that the sun is almost 100%
hydrogen. These atoms and molecules can absorb light, bump into each other, and
their mass is well determined by countless experiments. But as you live in this
atmospheric sea of regular matter, you are a speck in a much vaster ocean of
silent particles. This silent dark matter does not absorb much light, if any
light at all. The dark particle does not seem to bump into regular matter very
often, and its mass is highly indeterminate. There is somewhere between one and
more than a trillion-trillion dark matter particles all around you. Meaning,
while we are confident of the total mass of all the dark matter in the room with
you, we are so unsure of an individual particle’s mass that we can’t say whether
it is a few heavy particles or trillions of light ones.
With all the evidence we have for dark matter, a mystery like this captivates
the scientific investigator: so sure that something is there, and yet so unsure
of what it is. But our studies and experiments have not been in vain. While we
don’t yet know exactly what dark matter is, and questions abound more than
answers, we at least know by studying dark matter’s effects what it isn’t. For
example, we have no conclusive experiment that has detected even a quiet nudge
of dark matter, so we at least know that it doesn’t interact very strongly.
If dark matter interacted strongly with regular matter, then as the Earth-sun
system sweeps through the Milky Way’s dark matter bubble, I would feel a
dark-matter wind against my face, even as I sit and type in my office. I don’t
feel this, so it must not interact with me (or our experiments) very much, if at
all. But one might ask: can dark matter occasionally bump into regular matter
and give off a faint, detectable signal? This is what some experimentalists do
in the study of dark matter “direct detection.”
At the Homestake Mine in South Dakota, there’s a retired gold mine that had
previously been the largest and deepest gold mine in North America. It sports a
large quarry carved into the brown earth and some repurposed buildings left over
from the mining days. One mile beneath the surface, however, paints a different
picture, a place anything but forgotten. It was here where a $10 million dollar
detector sought to detect the anomalous bump of an undiscovered dark matter
particle. Until its recent retirement in 2016, the Large Underground Xenon
Experiment (LUX) was an effort that tried to observe the direct detection of
dark matter, whereby the detector would give off a signal that it had been
bumped by something. The detector is shielded by nearly a mile of rock to
prevent Standard Model cosmic rays and other particles of our atmosphere from
reaching the detector and giving a false-positive for dark matter.
This mile of rock is thick enough that the only thing that should be able to
reach the detector are neutrinos and the elusive dark matter. Neutrinos are not
of signal interference concern, however, because they’re known to be so weakly
interacting that the detector is not (yet) sensitive to them. Under mountains
and in mines across the world, direct detection experiments like LUX have not
reported any conclusive signal, which is not the most exciting result. And yet,
these results do rule out certain candidates of dark matter, which in turn focus
our research efforts on more promising candidates. As these null results come in
every few years, the detectors are upgraded and become more sensitive to a dark
matter particle that might interact more weakly. These direct detection
experiments are constantly being improved and eventually will become sensitive
to neutrinos, which cannot be shielded by any mountain. These detectors will
then hit the so-called “neutrino floor,” below which it will be difficult to
distinguish a regular neutrino bump from the nudge of dark matter on the
detector. While there are studies trying to figure out how to get around this
neutrino floor -- some prefer the term “neutrino fog” -- the ceiling is rapidly
coming down. Aside from a few minor signals which have not yet convinced
physicists, the dark matter particle has evaded every test of direct detection
thus far.
But even if we pursue all these experiments, even if we discover dark matter,
what is the point of it all?
Kendra Oliver, The 17, digital artwork (2021) | There are 17 known particles,
represented here as abstract forms. From the Standard Model, 17 indivisible
particles interact and constitute the building blocks of our universe and in
this image are neatly organized. The idea that these 17 particles are shared and
distributed throughout the vacuum of space and are all around us. Also, the idea
that new particles might arise based on predictions and patterns that are
observed is possible. This image outlines the predictive power of theories that
drive truths about our world but also the way that we logically and categorical
understand the world around us.The first and easiest answer I might give is that
it matters for technological applications, which is the most concrete and
potentially useful outcome of knowing more about dark matter. While it is not
immediately clear how useful dark matter might be for humans, the source of
various technologies has been famously unanticipated in the past. For example,
as NASA studied robotics and developed new materials for space flight, countless
technological applications unexpectedly came about, from innovations in
artificial limb research and cochlear implants to the improvement of solar
panels. In the 1980s, particle physicists were smashing various particles
together for experiments and a few of them invented the world wide web so they
could share data quickly. Technology has a habit of sneaking up on us and
improving our lives from places we least expect; who is to say what applications
dark matter might yield?
Dark matter has even been studied as a potential rocket fuel for deep space
missions. It is expensive to bring anything to space, let alone fuel, but if you
are constantly submerged in dark matter fuel then that is no longer a problem.
The dark matter fuel could even give off neutrinos as a byproduct when burned,
for all we know, which makes it hard to imagine humans guzzling it at a
dangerous rate reminiscent of fossil fuels here on Earth. While a dark matter
fuel is an exciting prospect, it is difficult to foresee how or if this could
ever be realized.
And yet, the realm of the possible is sometimes limited the most by our
imagination.
Beyond the technological reasons for studying dark matter, there are other
exciting possibilities that can be fun to imagine. In some models, the dark
matter can form dark atoms or dark molecules, and one can envision dark planets,
dark stars, or even dark beings. There might be an entire dark sector secluded
from our realm but living in the same space. The world we are used to shows all
these complex structures: from DNA to entire galaxies, and regular matter is
only a small fraction of the universe compared to dark matter. About fifteen
percent, remember? Isn’t it only natural to assume the same complexity extends
to our mysterious friend?
My reason for studying dark matter is based on the profound realization that
humans can understand this grand and ancient universe we live in. Only 300 years
ago, with a pen and paper, Newton realized that what kept his feet on the ground
was the same phenomenon that kept the planets in motion, and in less than a
lifetime he united the Earth with the heavens. Newton passed down a technique
for his descendants to use and make spectacularly correct predictions, like Le
Verrier did with the discovery of Neptune. Discoveries like this bolster a
belief that our theories must be describing something that must be true about
our universe.
Today we have soared far beyond what Newton and Le Verrier could have ever
dreamed. We now understand that we live in a universe that is 14 billion years
old, and on a planet that formed 4 billion years ago as a species that appeared
less than half a million years ago. We know that less than twenty particles
comprise every human that has ever lived. These particles are the building
blocks of our world, and we understand how these particles assemble themselves
into complex structures. But despite the success of the Standard Model of
particle physics, we know it is not complete.
We live in an interesting valley of time, where we are so sure of dark matter’s
existence yet have so little idea of what it is. Dark matter has quietly evolved
alongside us over the past fourteen billion years; without it, our galaxies
would not have the gravitational glue needed to stay intact and intelligent life
may never have formed. And so, we have rediscovered ourselves as particles that
have been guided by an unknown dark matter: a dark companion which has guided
the particles in us to search and eventually ask, “What is dark matter?” If a
question like this doesn’t compel us to search in every dark corner of the
universe for an answer, then what question does?
P.S. The answer to the Seussical particle challenge I posed is “chimps.”*The artwork featured in this piece was done in collaboration with digital
artist Kendra Oliver, an educator and artist living in Pittsburgh.
On a September evening in 1846, German astronomer Johann Gottfried Galle
received a letter requesting that he point his telescope at one small patch of
the night sky. The letter detailed that by performing this observation, Galle
might solve a puzzle that vexed the scientific community for years. This puzzle
concerned the orbit of Uranus, the only planet whose orbit couldn’t be predicted
by Newton’s theory of gravity. Uranus would be expected to be in one place but
show up in another. Spurred by this mystery, Galle’s letter-writer asked
himself: is Newton’s theory not a description of our world, or is there
something else responsible for this anomaly?
Prior to writing his letter, French astronomer and mathematician Urbain Le
Verrier made a calculation he hoped would explain the orbit of Uranus and
maintain support for the theory of gravitation. Le Verrier and others suggested
that there was a dark companion responsible for the disturbance: an unknown,
massive body orbiting near Uranus providing an extra gravitational pull.
Supposing this massive body existed, Le Verrier predicted where and how heavy
Uranus’s dark companion must be to explain the data. He sent his letter to Galle
telling him where to look. On the night the letter arrived, Galle searched the
sky and discovered a royal blue planet three billion miles from Earth, known
today as Neptune, within one degree of Le Verrier’s prediction and after less
than one hour of searching.
The mystery of Uranus’s anomalous orbit posed a serious challenge for nineteenth
century science. The puzzle and consequent discovery of Neptune are exemplary of
a recurring pattern in physics: an observation is made that doesn’t agree with a
theory’s prediction, so scientists must either come up with a better theory or
find an effect (like an undiscovered planet) which might explain the obsFoster Swartz | The Human | Comedy
*The following piece contains passages that may be best suited for a mature
audience.
This play is based on a true story. Its lessons are manifold: Don’t ride in
elevators. Be nice to gay people. See to it that your lady finishes, too.
I can only thank my lucky stars that I was there to see it all.
It is my sincere hope that you, the Reader, come away from this play a new man,
especially if you happen to be an old woman. Furthermore, it is my sincere
command that you, the Reader, reflect on the following themes as you read:
1. The rapid decay of communication skills not regularly exercised
2. The superficiality of the purported evolution of interactions between
heterosexual males
3. The part played by God in an age which has largely forgotten Him
4. The criteria duly considered in the evaluation of whether the proverbial life
is proverbially good
Think on these things, and let me know what you discover. My editor says we need
the answers by tomorrow. Good luck!
●EXODUS 13:21
GERALD enters an elevator, wherein the ATTENDANT awaits him.
ATTENDANTWhat for?
GERALDWhat?
ATTENDANTWhat for?
GERALDI...I have a meeting.
ATTENDANTWhat floor?
GERALDOh! I thought you were saying something else, ha-ha.
The ATTENDANT presses the button for the top floor.
ATTENDANTWalk down if you need t'.
The elevator ascends. GERALD, confused and perturbed, tries to form the words to
confront the ATTENDANT. He cannot; he elects cordiality instead.
GERALDThis is the first elevator ride I've taken in a year.
The ATTENDANT does not respond.
GERALD (CONT'D)Feels like I've forgotten how to talk to people after so long,
y'know? Ha-ha.
The ATTENDANT does not respond.
GERALD (CONT'D)You, too, huh?
The elevator bell dings, and the ride comes to a stop. CYNTHIA enters. She
begins texting, as GERALD searches for just the right thing to say to her.
GERALD (CONT'D)So am I the only one here who has COVID?
Not acknowledging GERALD, CYNTHIA reaches into her purse and withdraws a mask.
She puts it on and continues texting. The ride continues until the next ding,
whereupon DAN enters.
DANDan.
DAN has a forehead tattoo which reads "THIS SIDE UP."
GERALDI'm Gerald.
DANWhat?
GERALDI am Gerald.
DANIt's good to be named Dan, though.
Several moments later, DAN pulls down his pants. CYNTHIA, too, disrobes. DAN
reaches a hand into CYNTHIA's panties, and she takes hold of his genitals. The
two engage in phalangeal love without making eye contact.
GERALD(after this has endured too long)
H... hey!
CYNTHIA continues to text as the action unfolds. DAN stares open-mouthed at the
ceiling, groaning with increasing frequency and amplitude.
GERALD (CONT'D)Stop it!
The ATTENDANT picks his nose.
DANAAH!
GERALDAAH!
CYNTHIA removes her hand from DAN's undergarments, and she sends off her text
with an audible swoosh. The two put their clothes back on.
DANMan.
GERALD(to ATTENDANT)
Are you...is...is anyone going to do anything about this?!
The elevator bell dings. CYNTHIA puts her phone in her purse, then turns to
GERALD.
CYNTHIADeath is everywhere.
CYNTHIA departs, and the ride continues. Gradually, a smile spreads across
DAN's face. He, too, turns to GERALD.
DANI fucked her.
GERALD regards DAN, exasperated, hurt.
GERALDBut... why you?
DANWhat are you, some kinda fucking faggot?
Beat.
DAN (CONT'D)(sincerely)
I'm sorry I called you "faggot."
GERALDThank...thank you.
DANWhat would you prefer to be called?
GERALDWhat?
DANI did my training, man. This is a safe space. Do you prefer the term "gay"?
GERALDOh, no, not gay, I'm not—
DANHomosexual?
GERALDNo, I'm...heterosexual, I'm not—
The elevator bell dings, and the ride comes to a stop.
DANJust tell me, dude. Queer? I like anal, too!
The elevator doors open.
GERALD(becoming frustrated)
No, man, I'm not fucking queer!
TIMOTHY enters, wearing a rainbow t-shirt. The word "GAY" is written on the
shirt in hot pink bubble letters.
GERALD (CONT'D)I.
DAN briskly exits. GERALD is consumed by the horrible question of whether
TIMOTHY overheard his declaration of heterosexuality. After an unbearable
minute, the elevator bell mercifully dings.
TIMOTHYCunt.
TIMOTHY exits.
GERALD(calling after him)
I, I, I voted for Biden!
The doors close, and the elevator reinitiates its ascent. GERALD throws his face
into his hands.
ATTENDANTHint.
GERALD(lifting his head)
Hint?
ATTENDANTTalking to people.
GERALDOkay.
ATTENDANTC'mere.
GERALD walks to the ATTENDANT's side. The ATTENDANT leans close to GERALD to
whisper in his ear.
ATTENDANT (CONT'D)The secret, kid.
GERALD...Yes.
ATTENDANTUm.
GERALD...Yes.
ATTENDANTYou need to. You need to picture you; no, you, you picture them.
Picture themselves: naked. Or, or, you picture, you picture you naked, and them
also, are—
GERALD attempts to physically disengage, but the ATTENDANT puts a hand on his
shoulder to keep him close.
ATTENDANT (CONT'D)What, you, need, to do, is picture a naked, picture, and think
that all of you there are naked. Also.
The ATTENDANT releases GERALD and sits back on his stool, satisfied and proud of
his advice. The elevator bell dings, and KATHY comes on.
GERALD(quickly)
Hi, there.
KATHY(with warmth)
Hello.
Good enough, GERALD thinks. Good enough.
The elevator continues to ascend. After several moments, KATHY suddenly turns to
face GERALD, her eyes filled with tears.
KATHY (CONT'D)I can't do this anymore.
KATHY rushes to the button panel and smashes EMERGENCY STOP. The ride comes to a
screeching halt. She crumbles to the floor and weeps.
GERALDWhat's wrong?
(kneeling down to meet KATHY)
Are you—
KATHY(punctuated, hysterical sobs)
I can’t take this anymore!
The ATTENDANT seems to fall asleep.
GERALD(exasperated, becoming impatient)
What? What can't you take?!
KATHYI...I was with my friends at dinner the other night. It was Luke and
Olivia, who're dating, and Marianne and Gretchen, who're also dating, and me.
And they were telling me about this BuzzFeed quiz they all took, which
essentially assigns you a movie that best matches your "dating style," or your
"love style," or something.
GERALDOkay.
KATHYAnd...and they asked me to take it.
KATHY's face contorts as she recalls the details.
KATHY (CONT'D)And, like, Luke had gotten The Notebook, and Gretchen had gotten, like, The
Proposal, and, uh...
KATHY starts to sniffle.
GERALDIt's okay. Really.
GERALD holds KATHY's hand in his.
KATHY(barely able to get the words out)
And...and...and Marianne got La La Land, which is my favorite movie,
and...and...
GERALDYou can tell me.
GERALD holds KATHY's other hand in his other hand.
KATHYAnd...and...and I got SCHINDLER'S LIST!
KATHY erupts in sobs again, throwing her head onto GERALD's chest.
GERALDYou got Schindler's List? The Holocaust movie?
KATHY(muffled by GERALD's chest)
The Holocaust movie!
GERALDOh.
GERALD scrambles to think of something reassuring to say.
GERALD (CONT'D)Wait! Maybe the quiz meant you were, like, the hero, right? The
guy who saved the Jews!
KATHY sits up and pulls her phone out of her pocket.
KATHYQuote: "Your romantic aura is most like the 1993 Steven Spielberg classic
Schindler's List. You are nothing like Oskar Schindler, the guy who saved all
those poor Jews, honey. No, you are 100% the Nazis who killed all those Jews in
cold blood. Hashtag, boss bitch."
KATHY explodes once more in a violent fit of tears.
GERALDHey, no no no, I mean, I'm Jewish, and I'm not afraid of you at all!
KATHYNot yet!
KATHY leaps off the floor and stumbles to the button panel. She punches the
panel as hard as she can. The panel malfunctions, and the elevator is sent into
free-fall. This development stuns her out of despair. She, along with GERALD,
screams helplessly in the name of life.
The ATTENDANT briefly opens an eye and grumpily presses an unseen button on the
panel, halting their plummet. GERALD and KATHY catch their breath, and the
elevator bell dings.
KATHY (CONT'D)I think it's going to be okay.
(turning to GERALD)
Thank you.
KATHY exits, and the elevator continues its ascent. A long while passes before
GERALD speaks.
GERALDWhat does it mean, man?
ATTENDANT (eyes closed)Are you talking to me?
GERALDWhat does it mean?.
ATTENDANT(eyes remaining closed)
It means, Gerald, that you're going to be fine.
GERALD digests this.
GERALDAt least we're going up.
The ATTENDANT nods his head.
ATTENDANT(eyes remaining closed)
Better'n down.
The elevator bell dings. JULIA steps on.
JULIAIsn't it great having COVID?
GERALD stares at her.
JULIA (CONT'D)Total hoax, right?
JULIA smiles to herself.
GERALD(a chuckle crescendos to belly-laughter)
Ha...ha-ha...ha-ha-ha-ha! Yes! Yes it is!
JULIA turns to see whether GERALD's laughter is sincere (or whether he is
crazy). She finds that it is (and that he may be).
JULIAPeople don't usually like that joke.
GERALD(earnestly)
I love that joke!
JULIA(laughing now herself)
Yeah?
GERALDI made it when I got on, too!
(to ATTENDANT)
Tell her!
ATTENDANT(opening and rubbing his eyes)
Made the joke.
JULIAWell, I'm glad to hear that.
GERALD(stunned)
Great!
JULIAWhere are you heading?
GERALDI...I forget!
JULIAAh. Are you a serial killer by chance?
GERALDNo! No, I just, well...
GERALD realizes all at once that JULIA is someone he can talk to.
GERALD (CONT'D)Well, you see, I'm actually a spree killer.
JULIAOh! Yes, I do see.
GERALDYeah, we actually have a big thing about people confusing the
classifications. It's like, like, all we talk about—
JULIAAll you talk about at the meetings, huh?
GERALDRight, exactly.
JULIAGotcha, yeah, I see how that could be a pain.
The elevator bell dings.
JULIA (CONT'D)Listen: my lunch date just canceled. Do you want to replace him?
Or is there a spree killer summit right now?
GERALDI—
GERALD looks to the ATTENDANT. The ATTENDANT is trying to lick his own elbow.
GERALD returns his gaze to JULIA.
GERALD (CONT'D)I would like to date you.
JULIA(laughing)
Well, let's try one lunch first, okay?
GERALDOkay.
JULIAMeet me downstairs in five.
JULIA exits, and the elevator doors close behind her.
GERALDOkay! O-KAY! O-KAY, O-KAY, O-KAY!
GERALD dances as the elevator continues its ascent. Suddenly, he grasps the
intolerability of the direction.
GERALD (CONT'D)Wait!
GERALD reaches past the ATTENDANT and repeatedly smashes the button for the
lobby. But the elevator continues to ascend.
GERALD (CONT'D)Wait!
GERALD frantically scans the elevator for a solution. The ATTENDANT's tongue is
a millimeter from his elbow.
GERALD (CONT'D)Wait!
The ATTENDANT licks His elbow.
FIN*The following piece contains passages that may be best suited for a mature
audience.
This play is based on a true story. Its lessons are manifold: Don’t ride in
elevators. Be nice to gay people. See to it that your lady finishes, too.
I can only thank my lucky stars that I was there to see it all.
It is my sincere hope that you, the Reader, come away from this play a new man,
especially if you happen to be an old woman. Furthermore, it is my sincere
command that you, the Reader, reflect on the following themes as you read:
1. The rapid decay of communication skills not regularly exercised
2. The superficiality of the purported evolution of interactions between
heterosexual males
3. The part played by God in an age which has largely forgotten Him
4. The criteria duly considered in the evaluation of whether the proverbial life
is proverbially good
Think on these things, and let me know what you discover. My editor says we need
the answers by tomorrow. Good luck!
●EXODUS 13:21
GERALD enters an elevator, wherein the ATTENDANT awaits him.
ATTENDANTWhat for?
GERALDWhat?
ATTENDANTWhat for?
GERALDI...I have a meeting.
ATTENDANTWhat floor?
GERALDOh! I thought you were saying something else, ha-ha.
The ATTENDANT presses the button for the top floor.
ATTENDANTWalk down if you need t'.
The elevator ascends. GERALD, confused and perturbed, tries to form the words to
confront the ATTENDANT. He cannot; he elects cordiality instead.
GERALDThis is the first elevator ride I've taken in a year.
The ATTENDANT does not respond.
GERALD (CONT'D)Feels like I've forgotten how to talk to people after so long,
y'know? Ha-ha.
The ATTENDANT does not respond.
GERALD (CONT'D)You, too, huh?
The elevator bell dings, and the ride comes to a stop. CYNTHIA enters. She
begins texting, as GERALD searches for just the right thing to say to her.
GERALD (CONT'D)So am I the only one here who has COVID?
Not acknowledging GERALD, CYNTHIA reaches into her puRebecca Arp | The True | Artwork
Can the body be a searchlight (Eye) (2021)
glass, lead, fluxUntitled (Sea Ache) (2021)
deceased grandfather's oar, acrylic | paraffin wax, tissue paper, ink Artist’s
Note
My artistic practice concerns emotion, memory, ritual, and spirituality as seen
through the lens of my experiences as a queer woman raised in the rural Midwest.
I often use materials and motifs associated with the family, the home, and the
church alongside the barriers of participation and acceptance in those
structures for the LGBTQAI+ community. In all of my work, I am searching,
researching, constructing, deconstructing, and reconstructing commonly accepted
ideas and beliefs. I invert the traditionally hard and soft, explore the nuances
of interpersonal relationships and selfhood, and attempt to capture the
quotidian with sincerity.
Rembrandt's Storm on the Sea of Galilee, one of the most valuable objects ever
stolen, remains missing to this day. I explored the idea of forming a
relationship with a piece of artwork that I will likely never see in person. On
the oar, I inscribed quotes from Mark 4:35–41, some personal associations, and
a Dutch quote from Rembrandt, who said he wishes his work to portray "die
naetuereelste beweechgelickheijt" or, "the most natural/lifelike
emotion/motion". I also sought associations in astrology and music. Rembrandt is
said to be a Cancer sun and a Scorpio rising. Lana del Rey has these same
placements and her song "Mariner's Apartment Complex" fits into the theme
nicely. The music video also includes seascapes. I have embedded, on wax, an
image from this music video, an image from the music video for “The System Only
Dreams in Total Darkness” by The National, and the Rembrandt painting itself.
My lantern series approaches searching in a different light. A gay Christian may
be taught that their faculties of loving are unholy, directed toward the wrong
aims. One may have a crisis of integration—how does one feel at home in a body
where even its unconscious actions are seen as sinful? A lantern is a tool of
searching, illuminating, and guiding. How can the body, then, be used as a
lantern?Can the body be a searchlight (Eye) (2021)
glass, lead, fluxUntitled (Sea Ache) (2021)
deceased grandfather's oar, acrylic | paraffin wax, tissue paper, ink Artist’s
Note
My artistic practice concerns emotion, memory, ritual, and spirituality as seen
through the lens of my experiences as a queer woman raised in the rural Midwest.
I often use materials and motifs associated with the family, the home, and the
church alongside the barriers of participation and acceptance in those
structures for the LGBTQAI+ community. In all of my work, I am searching,
researching, constructing, deconstructing, and reconstructing commonly accepted
ideas and beliefs. I invert the traditionally hard and soft, explore the nuances
of interpersonal relationships and selfhood, and attempt to capture the
quotidian with sincerity.
Rembrandt's Storm on the Sea of Galilee, one of the most valuable objects ever
stolen, remains missing to this day. I explored the idea of forming a
relationship with a piece of artwork that I will likely never see in person. On
the oar, I inscribed quotes from Mark 4:35–41, some personal associations, and
a Dutch quote from Rembrandt, who said he wishes his work to portray "die
naetuereelste beweechgelickheijt" or, "the most natural/lifelike
emotion/motion". I also sought associations in astrology and music. Rembrandt is
said to be a Cancer sun and a Scorpio rising. Lana del Rey has these same
placements and her song "Mariner's Apartment Complex" fits into the theme
nicely. The music video also includes seascapes. I have embedded, on wax, an
image from this music video, an image from the music video for “The System Only
Dreams in Total Darkness” by The National, and the Rembrandt painting itself.
My lantern series approaches searching in a different light. A gay Christian may
be taught that their faculties of loving are unholy, directed toward the wrong
aims. One may have a crisis of integration—how does one feel at home in a body
where even its unconscious aYuriy Serebriansky, Sarah McEleney | The Human | Essay
Since we didn’t make it to that pet shop, let’s just say we’re still on our way
there. I write “we” because I wasn’t looking for it alone. Actually, all of this
happened only because there was a “you” back then. Someone might say that we
were only going there on account of you, and technically that’s the rotten
truth. But the thing is, already four years later I still keep going back to our
pet shop. I want to clear my conscience there.
I remember it clearly, and if it exists in actuality, I’d be able to recognize
it from a block away. A small but, of course, respectable store. Along the left
side from the entrance are shelves of dog food. Deposits of cheap pellets,
promising “the tender meat of delicious turkey” (I’ve always wondered about that
job—a taste-tester for dog food).
Above the door is a bell like the ones at Seven Eleven. On the right is an
entire wall of aquariums. There aren’t any expensive saltwater fish with
digital-looking color combinations here—only nice old freshwater ones are sold.
There’s a school of zebrafish (Danio rerio) wearing the striped outfits of
disco dancers. There’s the “Siamese fighting fish” (Betta splendens), who, with
the faded glamor of discolored dressing gowns on their sides, wander, not
looking at each other, like married artists who have grown old together. The top
aquarium to the right is completely without fish, here there are only aquatic
plants, snails, and water bubbles. Finally, I notice that there are bubbles in
every aquarium.
The aquatic plants are the most ordinary ones—Sagittaria Spec and Vallisneria. I
break the silence and start telling you about duckweed (Lemna). About how
there’s a kind of duckweed, of which the little leaves, if you don’t stop them,
will multiply and spread over the entire surface. Like parasites. They’ll block
out light to the large fish. You have to thin out duckweed from time to time. I
tell you about how when I was a child I wanted to lie in shallow water, slightly
below the surface, and watch the duckweed from below to see how rays of sunlight
managed to break through the gaps between the tiny leaves, while the top of my
head rested on the warm, sandy beach. A hedgehog in a cage has caught your
attention. For goodness’ sake, it’s just an ordinary hedgehog. What is it that
you see in them? That they can protect themselves? But you’re not trite like
that. I won’t ask you what you see in my plainness.
Oh, Chicago—with your head in the clouds and the chill along your river. You’ll
always be my New York. The view from the bridge of a rusty tugboat passing by
below. To touch your wall of a church covered in ivy. All of the doors are
locked. The street preachers are so convincing that you don’t even need to go
inside the church.
To grow up here, without the habit of ever thinking to lift your head up, then
go off to war, and return with a sense of the fragility of this world, which you
wouldn’t understand any other way. To know what kind of people are here and why.
How poems change this city. For the better—or not.
Your strange, one-of-a-kind Latina friend tries to convince us not to go there.
It’s dangerous. But the medicine can only be bought at this pet shop.
The owner doesn’t pay any attention to us. Now I’m certain. That is, certain
that the salesperson at the store is also its owner. An ordinary salesperson
would have said something. Even jokingly. An owner understands his work.
The display case for fish medicine is right behind his back. I ask him to
recommend fish antibiotics. He takes interest, responding, “WHAT KIND OF FISH
and WHAT HAPPENED?” It sounds like a prompt for a secret passphrase. He doesn’t
recognize my accent and is apprehensive, but by habit, I have a lot of trust for
people, which I push in front of myself everywhere I go, like a cart full of
apples. I know how to use it. In every country in the world people ask me for
directions. Though most often to the train station.The owner/salesperson points
at the display case with his hand: Aqua-mox forte, $28.99, Aqua-zole, $37.99,
Aqua- Ceph, $24.99, Fish Biotic Ciprofloxacin, $27.99, Fish Biotic Ampicillin,
$17.99.
You, of course, are thinking about your cat—she never did return home. I try to
imagine the scene of a nighttime shooting in Venezuela, in your hometown.
Bullets don’t leave a gleaming trail as they fly through the air. Such an image
is almost always a lie. Gunfire is panic. But who would ever think to shoot a
cat?
She’ll come back in two days and you’ll start reading your Brodsky again.
And that salesperson with the Czech eyes will listen to you.
Translator’s Note
Yuriy Serebriansky’s genre-defying meditation reflects on a trip he made to a
Chicago pet shop with a friend for the purpose of obtaining fish antibiotics for
his friend’s relatives in Venezuela, who were unable to receive antibiotics
intended for humans on account of the international sanctions imposed on the
country. Serebriansky also alludes to Yuri Norstein’s 1975 animated film,
Hedgehog in the Fog (Ёжик в тумане), in which a hedgehog, searching for a white
horse, finds himself lost in an expansive fog, making a journey through an
unknowable, mirage-like world. As Serebriansky brings attention to human
experiences that arise from economic sanctions, he evokes pensive hope for a
better alternative. Translated from Russian to English by Sarah McEleney.
Afterword (Author’s Note)
I wrote this piece in 2019. It took two years to find a way to speak about the
situation: US-imposed sanctions restricted, among other things, antibiotic
imports to Venezuela. I was shocked to learn the only way to legally buy
antibiotics for your relatives in Venezuela now is to buy them from the pet
shops. Fish treatments contain several types of antibiotics. Some might work.
I do not write and have never written intellectual prose; I am an observer. But
this narrative was written with the idea that one day the observer will be
replaced by someone empowered to act. We might see writing itself as a way to
call others to action, and to affect change however and wherever we can. Since we didn’t make it to that pet shop, let’s just say we’re still on our way
there. I write “we” because I wasn’t looking for it alone. Actually, all of this
happened only because there was a “you” back then. Someone might say that we
were only going there on account of you, and technically that’s the rotten
truth. But the thing is, already four years later I still keep going back to our
pet shop. I want to clear my conscience there.
I remember it clearly, and if it exists in actuality, I’d be able to recognize
it from a block away. A small but, of course, respectable store. Along the left
side from the entrance are shelves of dog food. Deposits of cheap pellets,
promising “the tender meat of delicious turkey” (I’ve always wondered about that
job—a taste-tester for dog food).
Above the door is a bell like the ones at Seven Eleven. On the right is an
entire wall of aquariums. There aren’t any expensive saltwater fish with
digital-looking color combinations here—only nice old freshwater ones are sold.
There’s a school of zebrafish (Danio rerio) wearing the striped outfits of
disco dancers. There’s the “Siamese fighting fish” (Betta splendens), who, with
the faded glamor of discolored dressing gowns on their sides, wander, not
looking at each other, like married artists who have grown old together. The top
aquarium to the right is completely without fish, here there are only aquatic
plants, snails, and water bubbles. Finally, I notice that there are bubbles in
every aquarium.
The aquatic plants are the most ordinary ones—Sagittaria Spec and Vallisneria. I
break the silence and start telling you about duckweed (Lemna). About how
there’s a kind of duckweed, of which the little leaves, if you don’t stop them,
will multiply and spread over the entire surface. Like parasites. They’ll block
out light to the large fish. You have to thin out duckweed from time to time. I
tell you about how when I was a child I wanted to lie in shallow water, slightly
below the surfMadeline Goetz, Jack Sentell | The Human | Comedy
A nature photographer pivots into the world of paparazzi.
After twenty-seven years of documenting penguins in Antarctica, I was
desperately searching for a new career. I left behind the desolate, frozen
tundra devoid of any human interaction for New York City. On my first day I
found myself standing outside of a Ruth’s Chris Steakless Steakhouse, ready to
shoot the vegan celebs as a new photographer for People magazine.
Now I’ll admit: I was nervous. I had never seen a celebrity in person. For
twenty-seven years, I had rarely seen other people at all. All I’d seen was
carnage. Most people don’t know that when you shoot penguins, you’re not
actually allowed to intervene if they’re being attacked by a seal or succumbing
to the elements. I had to remain calm and totally disregard the bloody bloody
bloodbath soiling the snow at my feet.
Anyway, there she was...Hailey Bieber! My first celebrity sighting! I wiped a
speck of penguin blood off of the lens and started shooting furiously.
“Hailey!” I screamed. “Are you vegan?”
“Today I am,” she said.
“Oh, so you wouldn’t burst out of the Antarctic Ocean onto an unsuspecting
mother penguin and gnash your orca teeth through its skin, chewing it up, bones
and all?”
“No, I would not do that,” she said.
This was clearly a different type of subject than I was used to shooting.
As she walked away, I checked the photos I’d taken. Sadly, I’d made a blunder.
When shooting Hailey, I had habitually set up my tripod to be penguin level, as
I had done for twenty-seven years, so I only had photos of her calves. I’ll sell
you one for $35.
I need the money. Just like I knew I needed to learn on the job, and fast.
Next up was Lin-Manuel Miranda. From my recent IMDB crash course, I knew he was
from Broadway. Well, I knew another star that could have been on Broadway once:
the penguin who inspired the character of Mumble in the feature animated film,
Happy Feet.
“Lin!” I hollered. “Lin! Over here!”
He turned.
“Lin, do you remember the character of Mumble in Happy Feet?”
“Of course!” He said.
“Well did you know that the dancing penguin who inspired him one day
accidentally tap danced to the edge of an iceberg that crumbled under his
weight, plunging the young bird into the frigid waters below? Three dozen hungry
hungry orcas mouths wide, clamoring for a chunk of penguin meat? And I just had
to stand there, watching, shooting, because as a nature photographer I’ve taken
a solemn oath never to intervene in the natural playing out of the food chain. I
don’t write the rules of nature. I just watch as the worst and most excruciating
circumstances of death imaginable befall the flightless birds. Sometimes I
pointed bloodthirsty seals in the right direction if I needed a shot. Or if the
penguins made me mad. But you can’t prove that.”
And that’s how I captured this beautiful image of Broadway’s Lin-Manuel Miranda
looking absolutely horrified. I’ll sell it to you for $50.
It was at this point in the night that someone from Ruth’s Chris Steakless
Steakhouse came outside and offered the press complimentary wine. I declined.
I’d sworn off the stuff since one fateful night in the barren lands of
Antarctica when after one too many glasses of Pinot Grigio, I accidentally
trampled two dozen penguin nests.
No, I must level with you; I did it purposefully.
You see, I had come to resent my subjects. They were the focus of my camera,
myself, my life. I was completely tethered to their existence yet, by a solemn
blood oath I swore to the Nature Photographers Association of America (Milwaukee
Chapter), I could never truly be a part of their lives. I couldn’t intervene. I
was stuck in one place. It was I who was the flightless bird.
Well, on that momentous day the Pinot Grigio said no more. I stomped, dear
reader. I lifted up my Patagonia boots and I stomped and stomped and stomped
until I no longer internalized the splintering shells beneath my feet. I was
human. I was in charge. I was the orca!
Of course, I was horrified by my actions. Actually, reader, it did not affect me
that much.
Halfway through the night, Jay-Z and Beyoncé stopped to chat with me! I couldn’t
believe it! I had a prime opportunity for an exclusive interview with two of the
most famed and elusive stars in the industry.
“Forgive me, celebrity power couple,” I said to them, “But why did you stop to
chat with me?”
“It’s nice how quiet you’re being,” said Beyoncé.
I nodded. “My silence was honed from years of quiet, stoic observation of
gruesome mass murder in the southernmost tip of the Earth. Who are you wearing
tonight?” I politely asked.
They walked away. If you want you can buy a photo of the backs of their heads.
$80.
At this point in the night, most of the guests had already made their way
inside. I thought my work was done. But then they arrived, fashionably late: The
New York Mets. Dozens of baseball players clad in fancy black and white tuxedos
were sauntering over to me. No, not sauntering—waddling. And not
players—penguins. It was like I was right back on the ice. I held my lens steady
as they approached. I knew not to move a muscle. Suddenly Noah Syndergaard, one
of the pitchers, tripped. He fell, skidding across the sidewalk and coming to a
stop directly at my feet.
“How embarrassing,” he said. “Can you help me up?”
“I CAN’T TOUCH THE PENGUINS!” I screamed. “DO NOT ENGAGE. DO NOT ENGAGE. IT IS
NOT UP TO ME TO PLAY GOD IN YOUR FIGHT AGAINST THE ORCAS. YOU BETTER SWIM,
MOTHER FUCKER.”
It turns out that was enough to have me removed by Ruth’s Chris’ vegan security
staff. Apparently, everyone who walked the green carpet ended their stroll by
complaining to the event organizer about my “off-putting demeanor.”
Worse, as I was leaving, I realized the D’Amelio sisters had been livestreaming
the entire event on TikTok with Andy Cohen. Any footage of the event would be
worthless. Everyone had already seen and consumed what they wanted. I trudged
home to my parents' brownstone on 68th and Broadway.
Was I sad? Of course. But not discouraged. Much like the penguins, I know I will
adapt. I will make it in my new chosen career. Mostly because my old career is
no longer an option: I am on an endangered species watch list, in the sense that
I am a serious threat to them because of the whole egg stomping incident. Also,
there’s that whole issue of the ice melting.
At the end of the day, it’s survival of the fittest for us all. For me, my
parents’ lucrative careers in finance ensured I would survive. I just hoped my
feathered friends would do the same. But I knew for a fact they would not. The
penguins would all be starved, drowned, or mauled. Imminently. All I can ask now
is that you visit my gallery documenting their suffering. It’s in this really
chic loft in SoHo.
ENDA nature photographer pivots into the world of paparazzi.
After twenty-seven years of documenting penguins in Antarctica, I was
desperately searching for a new career. I left behind the desolate, frozen
tundra devoid of any human interaction for New York City. On my first day I
found myself standing outside of a Ruth’s Chris Steakless Steakhouse, ready to
shoot the vegan celebs as a new photographer for People magazine.
Now I’ll admit: I was nervous. I had never seen a celebrity in person. For
twenty-seven years, I had rarely seen other people at all. All I’d seen was
carnage. Most people don’t know that when you shoot penguins, you’re not
actually allowed to intervene if they’re being attacked by a seal or succumbing
to the elements. I had to remain calm and totally disregard the bloody bloody
bloodbath soiling the snow at my feet.
Anyway, there she was...Hailey Bieber! My first celebrity sighting! I wiped a
speck of penguin blood off of the lens and started shooting furiously.
“Hailey!” I screamed. “Are you vegan?”
“Today I am,” she said.
“Oh, so you wouldn’t burst out of the Antarctic Ocean onto an unsuspecting
mother penguin and gnash your orca teeth through its skin, chewing it up, bones
and all?”
“No, I would not do that,” she said.
This was clearly a different type of subject than I was used to shooting.
As she walked away, I checked the photos I’d taken. Sadly, I’d made a blunder.
When shooting Hailey, I had habitually set up my tripod to be penguin level, as
I had done for twenty-seven years, so I only had photos of her calves. I’ll sell
you one for $35.
I need the money. Just like I knew I needed to learn on the job, and fast.
Next up was Lin-Manuel Miranda. From my recent IMDB crash course, I knew he was
from Broadway. Well, I knew another star that could have been on Broadway once:
the penguin who inspired the character of Mumble in the feature animated film,
Happy Feet.
“Lin!” I hollered. “Lin! Over here!”
He turned.
“Lin, do youNissim Lebovits | The True | Essay
"The universe,” wrote the Argentine author Jorge Luis Borges, “(which others
call the library), is composed of an indefinite and perhaps infinite number of
hexagonal galleries, with vast air shafts between, surrounded by very low
railings.”
The library in question is the imaginary Library of Babel, described by Borges
in a short story of the same name. Occupied only by wandering librarians, it is
eternal, an endless collection of unique books, all comprised of the same
twenty-five orthographical symbols, repeated in infinite permutations. And in
the infinitude of this library and its symbols, realize the librarians,
everything is to be found.
In Borges’ universes, though, “everything” is never so simple as it sounds.
“Everything,” he writes of the infinite contents of the library, includes not
merely the innumerable variations of letters on a page, but
> the minutely detailed history of the future, the archangels’ autobiographies,
the faithful catalogue of the Library, thousands and thousands of false
catalogues, the demonstration of the fallacy of those catalogues, the
demonstration of the fallacy of the true catalogue, the Gnostic gospel of
Basilides, the commentary on that gospel, the true story of your death, the
translation of every book in all languages, the interpolations of every book in
all books.
Everything, in other words, includes everything and its converse, truth and its
repudiation alike.
●Reading Borges today, one thinks it merciful that he did not live to see the
internet age. His oeuvre, renowned for its dealings with memory, signs,
infinity, and the like, anticipated today’s cultural atmosphere to a stunning
degree. It is almost impossible to read about information—digital or
otherwise—without stumbling across a reference to the Argentine, and for good
reason. To enter his world is to be treated to an intricate, encyclopedic, and
labyrinthian system of references—the internet avant la lettre. The mercy, of
course, is that Borges’ work is coherent; his stories are short (he sometimes
wrote reviews of his own non-existent books, declaring that it was not worth
writing the whole books themselves), and intentional to the point of being
didactic. If anything, his concision suggests that his relationship to infinity
was as much a fear as a fascination.
We who survive Borges may envy him in his tomb. As even the most articulate
describers of the information zeitgeist will tell you, there is no metaphor
sufficient to capture what we have lived through since the birth of the internet
at the end of the last millennium. First, there is the issue of speed. As
computer scientist Jaron Lanier has described it, the totality of available
information has grown at a scarcely-fathomable pace: “It’s as if you kneel to
plant the seed of a tree and it grows so fast that it swallows your whole town
before you can even rise to your feet.” Yet speed is the easy half of the
puzzle; far more bewildering is the question of scale.
In 1949, when information theory was in its infancy, the Library of Congress was
estimated to contain one hundred trillion (10^14) bits. It was then thought to
be the largest information repository in the world. Since the birth of the
internet, though, the numbers have exceeded anything remotely intelligible to
us. We now speak of zetabytes (10^21) and yottabytes (10^24), the latter of
which is equal to ten billion times the Library of Congress of only seventy
years ago. The creation, collection, and dissemination of information in the
twenty-first century has, by virtue of its scale, surpassed our capacity to wrap
our minds around it. For all intents and purposes, our library is like Borges’:
effectively infinite.
It is not odd, therefore, that we as a society seem to be experiencing a
collective sense of disorientation. It floats latent in the air, the wifi, the
socialsphere, and crystalizes in headlines and articles like “Are We Consuming
Too Much Information?”
[https://medium.com/@tunikova_k/are-we-consuming-too-much-information-b68f62500089]
and “Death by Information Overload.”
[https://hbr.org/2009/09/death-by-information-overload]The latter term,
“information overload,” dates back to Alvin Toffler’s 1970 book, Future Shock.
Fifty years later, a whole cottage industry of books, classes, talks, etc. is
devoted to helping people sort through the surfeit of available information
(doing so, of course, by providing them with more information). Clearly, we
think, there is too much to know.
What makes, I believe, this feeling of overload so freighted is its moral
dimension. Old is the notion that more and better information improves ethical
judgement. Socrates, the authors of the Gospels, and Shakespeare, for instance,
have all suggested that moral actors are best off when making informed choices,
and, inversely, that uninformed actors may be forgiven their moral errors.
Certainly it’s not always so simple; John Rawls, for one, has proposed with his
“veil of ignorance” thought experiment that some information can prejudice our
actions and lead us to make arguably less moral choices. And, finally, what if
the mere presence of information proves itself an obstacle to moral action?
In his introduction to the 2007 anthology of The Best American Essays, the
author David Foster Wallace coined the phrase “Total Noise,” which he described
as “the seething static of every particular thing and experience, and one’s
total freedom of infinite choice about what to choose to attend to and represent
and connect, and how, and why, etc.” Total Noise, according to Wallace, is more
than just too much information; it is the incapacity to remain conversant with
the ever-expanding volume of information necessary to remain a moral citizen of
the world. Wallace’s feeling of being overwhelmed therefore isn’t only a sense
of epistemic inadequacy—it is a distinct awareness of failing on levels ethical
and existential.
Lest these failings seem like the abstractions of a particularly torturous
graduate school philosophy paper, let’s take an aerial survey of American
information culture right now, in the fall of 2021. The immediately obvious
issue is COVID-19: the propagation of both mis- and dis-information (the key
difference being intentionality) has been declared an “infodemic” by the WHO.
[https://www.who.int/news-room/feature-stories/detail/fighting-misinformation-in-the-time-of-covid-19-one-click-at-a-time]
On top of that, we might point to the QAnon conspiracy theory or the “Big Lie”
about election fraud. The actions of adherents of both of these credos are
patently inexcusable—but one must admit the possibility that, if someone
genuinely believed that, say, Democrat politicians were running a satanic child
sex-trafficking ring, she would be morally obliged to do something about it.
Lastly, and more broadly, the atomization of American culture, fueled largely by
social media, has led to what the literary critic Sven Birkerts has called the
“balkanization of interests,” as well as its more explicitly nefarious
counterpart, the ideological echo chambers of contemporary politics. Information
overload, in other words, can credibly be viewed as the source of our most
pressing sociopolitical issues in America today.
So where does that leave us? We feel overwhelmed by a perceived excess of
information, which in turn makes us morally agitated. Our social, political, and
cultural institutions all suffer for it. This raises, then, a question: if all
this information is the source of so many problems, why are we producing and
collecting it? What is information for, and what do we hope to find at the
bottom of it all?
●“Infoglut” is, at present, the term of choice for describing this flood of
information, but the feeling of inundation itself is far older than the
neologism. More than two thousand years ago, the author of Kohelet
(Ecclesiastes) decried the excess of books being written in his own time. The
first-century Roman philosopher Seneca derided his peers for mindlessly
accumulating books, on the grounds that their pages contained more information
than a person could possibly absorb in a lifetime. The Muslim historian Ibn
Khaldun made similar complaints in the fourteenth century, and no lesser figures
than Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and Alexander Pope despaired at the “deluge” of
books that followed Gutenberg’s invention of the movable-type printing press.
Curiously, though, what spurred these experiences of infoglut was not
technological innovation, but cultural change. To be sure, the invention of the
printing press galvanized the spread of information; historian Elizabeth
Eisenstein has famously argued that the printing press effectively caused
modernity in Europe. But ancient China and Korea developed the printing press
more than five hundred years before Europe without ever succumbing to the same
sense of overload. On the other hand, medieval Islamic societies, despite
lacking mechanical printing technology, were sufficiently inundated by
information to prompt regular complaints from leading scholars. The difference,
according to Ann Blair’s Too Much to Know, was cultural: “the invention of
printing in Europe coincided with a renewed enthusiasm, visible in earlier
centuries but revitalized by the humanists, for the accumulation of
information.” Whether in ancient Baghdad, seventeenth-century Holland, or
present-day America, an overwhelming amount of information was always available;
the question was simply whether or not it was accompanied by a cultural belief
in the importance of its comprehensive accumulation.
In “The Library of Babel,” Borges describes the moment when a “librarian of
genius” discovers the fundamental law of the Library, that all things are found
therein:
> When it was proclaimed that the Library contained all books, the first
impression was one of extravagant happiness. All men felt themselves to be
masters of an intact and secret treasure. There was no personal or world problem
whose eloquent solution did not exist in some hexagon.
In a rush, the librarians set off to plumb the endless halls of the library in
search of the book that might contain the answers to their own lives, or to the
origin and fate of the library itself. For centuries, relates the narrator, they
have kept up the search.
Quixotic as Borges’ librarians may seem, they are not as alien to us as we would
like to think. Our problem with infoglut isn’t the glut, precisely—it’s our
unstated conviction that, in the ever-growing haystack, there is a needle to be
found. Infoglut is only a problem because we happen to believe that there is
some finite quantity of important knowledge that can only be found by parsing an
ever-growing accumulation of information. Although infoglut refers literally to
the haystack, its implicit quarrel is with the needle.
One of the primary impacts of the Enlightenment in the seventeenth and
eighteenth centuries was to undermine the nearly two thousand-year-old belief in
divine truth. Thinkers like Spinoza illuminated the too-human origins of the
Bible, while early scientists like Newton showed that the world’s purportedly
supernatural order could actually be explained through pure, mechanical laws. In
particular, the discovery of deep geologic time—that the Earth was far, far
older than the Bible claimed—shook the fundaments of Western knowledge,
incontrovertibly repudiating the claims of the Bible, which had until then been
thought the supreme arbiter of truth.
With the Bible’s credibility reduced by rubble, the West began its long, slow
abandonment of Christian explanations of the world, opening itself instead to
the novelties of science. Yet, while this entailed rejecting the divine
coherence of the world, those who put their faith in natural science did not
lose their conviction that explanations of the world must ultimately accord with
one another. Instead, they came to believe that the world was governed by a
collection of physical laws: all in harmony, and all eventually discoverable by
humanity’s rational, observational faculties.
The process of this progressive discovery—the assembly of the great edifice of
Science—has been so successful and become so much a part of the fabric of our
society that we rarely notice it today. Everyone who passed through an American
public school is familiar with the scientific method: advancing iteratively
through trial and error, buttressed by hypothesis, evidence, and reevaluation
that ultimately leads, no matter how slowly, to an increasingly accurate
conception of the world. Along the way, we discard our less accurate ideas—out
the window with the flat Earth, miasma theory, lobotomies. In his book Delete:
The Virtue of Forgetting in the Digital Age, Viktor Mayer-Schönberger offers a
clarifying anecdote:
> [My old friend] limited his personal library to exactly two hundred books. Once
he had read a new book, he would decide whether it was among the two hundred
best books he’d ever read. If so, he would add it to his collection, and discard
the lesser one. Over time, he thought this process of constant filtering and
deliberate forgetting would continuously improve his library’s quality, so that
he would retain in his external memory only the really important and valuable
thoughts.
This is the teleology at the heart of our civilization. Essentially, we see the
world not only as an open book, but as a comprehensive one, comprised of
knowable and ultimately coherent truths. There is no personal or world problem
whose eloquent solution does not exist in our hexagon, if only we are willing
and able to sort through 1024 bits worth of information.
We denizens of the post-Enlightenment also typically take for granted that the
truth lies in the future. Whether you’re a liberal, a Marxist, or a Christian,
you have inherited this teleological reasoning—just over the next hill, you
think, lies the End of History/a classless society/the Kingdom of God. Yet these
beliefs would strike many of the ancients as bizarre. For many in the
pre-Enlightenment world, both in the West and out, as well as for many
contemporary societies, we move temporally away from an original truth, to which
we must return.
Around the twelfth century, the intellectual elite of medieval Jewry were
engaged in a heated debate. One side maintained that God’s Law had been given in
utter clarity and completeness at Sinai and since distorted, while the other
held that the Law needed to be progressively uncovered as humans came to a
better understanding of the world around them. Traditional Islamic theology
holds that Muhammad’s revelation was not new, but in fact a corrective to Jewish
and Christian perversions of an original divine revelation (paralleled by Jesus’
oft-ignored claim in the Book of Matthew: “Do not think I have come to abolish
the Law or the Prophets. I have not come to abolish them, but to fulfill them.”)
Even today, the veracity of religious claims in the Jewish and Islamic worlds
depends on chronological lists of who learned what from whom, somewhat akin to
footnotes. The closer one gets to the original, oldest source (Moses or
Muhammad, respectively), the more authority a claim has.
Nor is this idea somehow superstitious or irrational; up until the time of
mechanized printing, older versions of a text were less likely to have been
subjected to multiple rounds of copying, and therefore less likely to contain
grave errors. New copies of texts were considered farther from the truth, which
is why the Library of Alexandria, for instance, always sought out the earliest
possible copy of a text for its collection, paying handsomely for its purchase
(or taking it by force when necessary). Even today, children playing “whisper
down the lane” understand that more recent information can serve to obscure what
is true.
Be that as it may, our present society is all-in on the notion that a final
truth is out there—and that, if we simply gather enough information, we will
find it. There is perhaps no better exemplar of this paradigm than a
now-notorious 2008 essay in Wired by Chris Anderson, titled “The End of Theory:
The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific Method Obsolete.” Anderson's basic thesis
was that, prior to the emerging data age, the scientific method functioned by
proposing inherently inaccurate models of the world and then continuously
improving those models based on small data sets. With our increasing ability to
make use of Big Data, however, Anderson argued that we would be able to simply
analyze incomprehensibly large quantities of data to find correlations. We no
longer needed to understand why things correlated in order to know that they did
so in a statistically significant way:
> Petabytes allow us to say: “Correlation is enough.” We can stop looking for
models. We can analyze the data without hypotheses about what it might show. We
can throw the numbers into the biggest computing clusters the world has ever
seen and let statistical algorithms find patterns where science cannot.
The crux of Anderson's argument was that data would lead us to the truth.
Collect enough data and, with or without the obdurate theorizing of the
model-blinded scientists, we would arrive at understanding. Such faith in the
power of fact and reason alone is admirable if not a little too dogmatic, but my
point here is not to criticize Anderson so much as to highlight how his argument
is emblematic of a larger social faith that we have—in many ways unique to our
civilization—in inexorable epistemic progress by the sheer force of information.
●It might be helpful to pause here and digress for a moment on what we mean when
we say “information.” Our present understanding of the term is, much like our
expectations for its uses, rather novel. It dates back to the revolutionary work
of Claude Shannon in the first half of the twentieth century. Shannon’s
“Mathematical Theory of Communication” (known today as information theory) was
built on the bit: the most basic unit of information transmission, representing
a logical state of two values (true/false, yes/no, 1/0, etc.), and it lies today
at the heart of much of our world. But “information” in Shannon's theory is a
unit generalized, the epistemological atom, and, like the atom, can form many
different things.
When we laypeople think of information, we tend to associate it with
quantitative data: life expectancy, likes on Instagram, probability of winning
an election, free throws made. With the rise of companies like FiveThirtyEight
and the omnipresent spectre of The Algorithm, this is certainly one of the most
popularly visible manifestations of information. But it is not the extent or
limit. Information, in contemporary parlance, is much wider in scope.
Consider a field outside the sciences, such as history. Sixty years ago, at the
outset of the data revolution, professional historians felt themselves stifled.
They were reaping the informational surpluses of the digital age, but, in
contrast to their quantitative counterparts in scientific fields, at a loss for
how to proceed. Carl Bridenbaugh, president of the American Historical
Association, warned in 1962 of a “historical amnesia” as the result of new
technology like Kodak cameras and radios, which he feared were rapidly eroding
the skills and communicative ability of historians specifically and society in
general. Yet not everyone agreed that the problem was one of perdition. As
Elizabeth Eisenstein herself explained at the time, “It is not the onset of
amnesia that accounts for present difficulties but a more complete recall than
any prior generation has ever experienced. Steady recovery, not obliteration,
accumulation, rather than loss, have led to the present impasse.”
For historians, an abundance of information was an obstacle to actually using
that information effectively. This is because gathering and analyzing historical
information, most of which is inevitably qualitative, demands a painstaking and
largely subjective application of parameters. At a minimum, competence as a
historian depends on an ability not just to find patterns in data, but to put
those patterns in a broader context. Equally problematic, the abundance of
information gives a false appearance of comprehensiveness, as if a lot of
information is effectively the same as all the information. But, as
historians-in-training are often admonished, “the absence of evidence is not
evidence of absence.” Big Data today, for instance, largely leaves out the many
millions of people around the world who are not online. The hard work of
history, then—contextualization—is often undermined by the accumulation of
information, which gives the illusion of completeness while becoming ever harder
to understand en masse.
To further complicate our definition of information in the context of history,
various historians, philosophers, and literary scholars have pointed out over
the last half-century (e.g., Jacques Derrida, Edward Said, Michel
Rolph-Truillot, etc.) that the parameters of our questions themselves—i.e., the
assumptions we make about the information that we are analyzing—are often
themselves the sources of profound bias. “The winners write the history books”
isn’t only an indictment of propagandist historical writing; it is an
acknowledgement that all historical work is an act of interpretation. Whether
victory is military or epistemic, history is the construction of competing
narratives. Historical judgement therefore requires a meta-understanding of why
and how we make those judgements in the first place. Yet ultimately, we cannot
but admit that our own biases sneak into the parameters we set for historical
study, making objectivity or truth impossible to attain no matter how much
information we have at hand.
This cuts at the heart of the study of history itself: all historical evidence,
being ephemeral, is incomplete. Like a limit in calculus, we might approach
historical truth, but our presumptions will always be conjecture, shaped
arguably as much by our own contemporary experiences as by the actual conditions
of the past. As Mayer-Schönberger points out,
> Even in the digital age, not everything we communicate is captured in digital
format—and certainly not what thoughts we ponder, and how we assess and weigh
the pros and cons before making a specific decision. ... Put simply, even if
perfect contextualization may re-create the information context, it cannot take
us back in time.
All this accumulation elides a plain reality: the past is a foreign country. No
amount of information will allow us to revive subjects who were once flesh and
blood, to know what jokes Nefertiti laughed at, or how the market smelled in the
morning at Caral-Supe, or whose breasts inspired the author of the Song of Songs
to think of two fawns browsing among the lilies. We may have the facts of
history, but we can never wholly grasp the meaning as it was for those who lived
it.
●In New Jersey, at Bell Laboratories in 1943, a portentous meeting took place
between Alan Turing and Claude Shannon. Turing, brought recently to popular
awareness by Benedict Cumberbatch in The Imitation Game, is considered the
progenitor of theoretical computer science and artificial intelligence. He was,
like Shannon, a visionary, capable of understanding long before others the
transformative potential of the technology at their fingertips. But Turing, for
all his foresight, left his meeting with Shannon astounded by the scope of
Shannon’s notion of information. “Shannon wants to feed not just data to a
[computer],” said Turing, “but cultural things! He wants to play music to it!”
Turing’s astonishment might now sound naive. The world’s 365 million Spotify
listeners seem to prove pretty conclusively that you can, after all, play music
to a computer. We have managed not only to play music to a computer, but to show
it art and movies, to read it books, to play sports with it, and so on. We’ve
even managed to quantify (or so we think, anyway) culture’s reception: cultural
phenomena today are measured in likes, views, clicks. If anything, we now
live—in the Global North, at least—at a moment when culture unfolds
predominantly as digital information and our digital reaction to it.
To Turing, Shannon’s idea of handling culture mechanically must have sounded
like philistinism. Both inside the West and out, civilizations have long thought
of culture’s genesis as ineffable. The Bible speaks often of divine inspiration,
the Greeks of the muses, Arabic poetry of the influence of jinn. More than one
cultural moment in recent memory has depended on a heady stock of psychoactive
drugs as a means to (in their view, at least) transcend rationality. Simply, it
is hard (both conceptually difficult and, for certain people like myself,
somewhat galling) to imagine the paintings of El Greco, the music of John
Coltrane, the novels of James Joyce reduced to a string of bits to be
apprehended by a machine.
At present, though, the bits appear to be winning. Computers at least comprehend
culture in the literal sense that they contain it—and increasingly they attempt
to lay claim to its creation, too. There is a growing interest in using AI to
generate visual art
[https://www.vice.com/en/article/n7bqj7/ai-generated-art-scene-explodes-as-hackers-create-groundbreaking-new-tools]
and music [https://openai.com/blog/jukebox/]. Google has introduced
Verse-by-Verse, an AI tool that generates poetry in the style of famous
American
poets [https://sites.research.google/versebyverse/] (though the poetry itself
leaves much to be desired). And beginning in 2010, a multidisciplinary team of
researchers created the Culturomics project
[https://cyber.harvard.edu/events/luncheon/2011/05/Culturomics], which analyzed
the corpus of available literature on Google Books to identify and analyze
culture trends over time, such as the social media leadup to the Arab Spring.
Taken together, these efforts suggest authority, tangibility—a belief that there
is some truth in culture to be pinned down and known, some definite direction to
which we are headed.
Many civilizations in history have believed that culture moves in a fixed
direction. Sometimes this has been forward: the sense of indomitable progress in
nineteenth century Europe, for example, inspired the poet Tennyson to write:
“Not in vain the distance beacons. Forward, forward let us range. / Let the
great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change.” Others have
revered a semi-mythic Golden Age, and thought all subsequent culture a fall from
grace. The eleventh-century Chinese literary critic Huang Tingjian, having
declared that all the best poetry had long since been written, dismissed
innovators, asserting that “the quest for new expressions is itself a literary
disease.” (The specific target of Huang’s ire was Li Bai, considered today among
the greatest Chinese poets.) Too often, the notion that culture has a necessary
direction has even been the precursor to violent chauvinism, such as under the
Nazi regime. Unfortunately for all of these views, the clarity of theory and
expectation is inevitably muddled by, well, life.
Only the benefit of hindsight makes cultural change appear inevitable. It’s easy
to say, for instance, that our high estimation of Shakespeare was a matter of
course. But Shakespeare was for two hundred years discounted by the
English-speaking world in favor of his contemporary, Ben Johnson. The Bard was
only rescued from relative obscurity because the German philosopher Johann
Gottfried Herder extolled his virtues in Shakespeare, a 1773 book that helped
launch Romanticism across Europe. Likewise, the now-canonical Dutch painter
Johannes Vermeer died impoverished in 1675. His work languished, virtually
unknown, until its rediscovery two centuries after his passing. So even if we
can agree, say, that Michelangelo and van Gogh represent peaks in the Western
canon of visual art, it would be hard to claim that Michelangelo led to van
Gogh, and absurd to think that van Gogh’s art would inevitably supplant
Michelangelo’s by virtue of a greater claim to truth or beauty.
Chris Anderson's 2008 Wired article explains that, from Google's perspective,
cultural explanations were irrelevant—only predictability mattered: “Who knows
why people do what they do? The point is they do it, and we can track and
measure it with unprecedented fidelity. With enough data, the numbers speak for
themselves.” Thirteen years later, we know that this predictability has been
willfully harnessed
[https://thepointmag.com/examined-life/the-logic-of-the-like/] by Big Tech to
drive us into more and more predictable consumer niches, along the way knowingly
exacerbating ideological extremism. While we may pride ourselves today on a
willful degree of cultural tolerance and pluralism, our present idea that there
is a truth to be found in the analysis of culture remains deeply problematic
because, fundamentally, what all this information does is narrow things. It
takes an immense corpus of work and gives us a vector, a probable direction.
This may be useful when examining something like the laws of physics, but it is
antithetical to the function of culture.
This is because the value of culture is not in information to be sorted and
analyzed to find a truth, but precisely in that it defies monolithic
interpretation. Metastudies of culture such as cultural history, might benefit
from accumulation of information, insofar as we “better” understand the culture
being studied—but culture itself does not. Cultural items rise, decline, and
reappear as needed; their meaning and value are contingent upon the needs of the
present generations. The point of cultural information is not Truth, but
truths—to call our attention to the staggering, ecstatic plurality of human
experience. As the American literary critic Lionel Trilling wrote of literature
in his preface to The Liberal Imagination,
> To the carrying out of the job of criticizing the liberal imagination,
literature has a unique relevance, not merely because so much of modern
literature has explicitly directed itself upon politics, but more importantly
because literature is the human activity that takes the fullest and most precise
account of variousness, possibility, complexity, and difficulty.
The determinism inherent in not caring why culture is one way or another reduces
cultural actors (read: us) to pieces in a fixed game of chess, endlessly
traversing a shrinking board. Rather than succumb to this homogenization, we
might insist that the vagaries of culture are in fact the best defense against
the increasingly rigid factionalism of our algorithm society.
●Doubtlessly, the mass of available information will continue to swell. We will
need new numbers, new metaphors of scale that make our present befuddlement seem
quaint. It is often taken for granted that we will eventually emerge from this
cultural moment, that we will learn to cope with infoglut like our ancestors
learned to deal with the deluge of books that followed the invention of
printing. I am fairly confident that (if we survive the climate crisis) this is
true. My question, though, is not if but how we survive this moment—what kind of
society will we be when it has passed?
By the end of Borges’ story, most of the librarians are despondent. Centuries of
searching have proved fruitless. If the truth is out there, they realize, it
will never be found, not in all the vastness of the library's infinite halls. In
despair, they turn to mysticism, to nihilism, to violence, to suicide. But the
narrator, curiously, is possessed of a strange optimism. Though he is tired, and
not a little unsure of the meaning of his circumstances, he views the library's
boundless shelves as a sign not of death, but of life. “The certitude,” he
insists, “that everything has been written negates us or turns us into
phantoms.” In their innumerable possible permutations, the library’s pages are a
bulwark against erasure.
Contrary to what our present culture insists, there is no final truth out there
for us to find. No amount of accumulated information—nothing short of the entire
universe itself—will explain everything, wrapped neatly with a bow. But there
are smaller, personal truths out there, and beauties, and freedoms. In embracing
them, we might find that they, far more than any singular vision of Truth,
accommodate the illimitable possible futures that lay before us. The world is
not a finite thing to be known once and for all. It expands, growing ever larger
in what it might encompass, and information, if it seeks to describe our world,
finds its truth not in uniformity, but in constant flux and evolution. Without
the burden of teleology, then, the abundance of information is not moral
encumbrance, but hope for change—not a final end, but fodder for meaning, which
varies infinitely according to the ceaselessly changing constellations of human
experience. "The universe,” wrote the Argentine author Jorge Luis Borges, “(which others
call the library), is composed of an indefinite and perhaps infinite number of
hexagonal galleries, with vast air shafts between, surrounded by very low
railings.”
The library in question is the imaginary Library of Babel, described by Borges
in a short story of the same name. Occupied only by wandering librarians, it is
eternal, an endless collection of unique books, all comprised of the same
twenty-five orthographical symbols, repeated in infinite permutations. And in
the infinitude of this library and its symbols, realize the librarians,
everything is to be found.
In Borges’ universes, though, “everything” is never so simple as it sounds.
“Everything,” he writes of the infinite contents of the library, includes not
merely the innumerable variations of letters on a page, but
> the minutely detailed history of the future, the archangels’ autobiographies,
the faithful catalogue of the Library, thousands and thousands of false
catalogues, the demonstration of the fallacy of those catalogues, the
demonstration of the fallacy of the true catalogue, the Gnostic gospel of
Basilides, the commentary on that gospel, the true story of your death, the
translation of every book in all languages, the interpolations of every book in
all books.
Everything, in other words, includes everything and its converse, truth and its
repudiation alike.
●Reading Borges today, one thinks it merciful that he did not live to see the
internet age. His oeuvre, renowned for its dealings with memory, signs,
infinity, and the like, anticipated today’s cultural atmosphere to a stunning
degree. It is almost impossible to read about information—digital or
otherwise—without stumbling across a reference to the Argentine, and for good
reason. To enter his world is to be treated to an intricate, encyclopedic, and
labyrinthian system of references—the internet avant la lettre. The mercy, of
course, is that Borges’ work is cNowk Choe | The Plain | Exhibition
Photos C/O Nowk Choe
Daniel Schine Lee’s “Jam and Cook” (a functional karaoke machine + oven) and
“Pagoda Go-Go” (an 80s-esque analogue of Heelys) mock the cynical manipulation
of trends for profit, while also asking whether art and culture cannot be
meaningful despite arriving “late.”
Suyon Huh’s “Monument” and “Payphone” reference the great mass of artistic
movements across time and culture, materializing competing but ultimately
cumulative ideas of beauty by the application of gradually-layered paper dough.
Hyejoo Jun’s “Matter of Nakwon” and “Tourist Gaze” use light boxes and a
microscope to display particulates from nearby cities. Suggesting that we
consider ourselves “dust of the Earth,” she invites us to ponder a different
timescale: that of cosmic matter.
Jaekyung Jung’s “A Village” contrasts the apparent insignificance of
impoverished people catching abandoned dogs with the historical narratives of
the rich surrounding village, interrogating the ways that divergent identities
can yield unique experiences of the same moment in time. Artist’s Note
We live in capricious times. Everywhere we are pressured to keep pace with fads,
and no less so in the art world. Artists, curators, and critics chase relevance
by addressing popular topics, but these trends are ephemeral, and relevance
itself a chimera. In this context, my exhibition The Long Now abandons “timely”
topics in order to explore timeliness itself.
The exhibition was hosted in the Nakwon building in my native Seoul, Korea. An
official piece of Korean architectural heritage, the Nakwon building is
something of an oxymoron: the destruction of most Korean traditional
architecture during the Japanese occupation and the Korean War means that most
of our “historical architecture” was built in the last half-century. As an
employee at an architectural firm that focuses on historical preservation, I am
particularly sensitive to these contradictions, and chose the site as a way to
question the relativity and paradoxes of timeliness.
Four artists participated in the exhibition, each bringing a unique perspective
to the issue of timeliness. Jaekyung Jung’s documentary footage questions grand
narratives of Korean history by juxtaposing a slum with its rich surroundings.
Daniel Schine Lee’s fictionalized “archive” of 80s culture—assembled from
imitation clothes and music that he produced specifically for this
exhibit—questions the cynical manipulation of trend culture. Hyejoo Jun
considers the timeliness of the microworld, offering dust particles from nearby
cities and asking how our participation in the ever-changing landscape informs
our sense of the present. Finally, Suyon Huh’s layered sculptures evoke
iconography to suggest that meaning and beauty are the product of the accretion
of time.
The uniting force of the exhibit's display is the pedestal. Traditionally the
literal foundation of monuments, the pedestal has become structurally
unnecessary in most buildings and statues. Today, therefore, it serves as a
symbol of monumentality, rather than an essential part of monuments themselves.
I chose to display each artwork on a pedestal in order to emphasize the same
tension between artistic vainglory and the sands of time that led Percy Bysshe
Shelly to write his famous poem, “Ozymandias.” Tiny gaps between the pedestals
and the gallery floor purposefully evoke the unmoored feeling of the passage of
time.
Ultimately, what I propose in The Long Now is measured hope. While the
exhibition questions the pessimism of relentless fads, it does not dismiss the
importance of relevance according to the conditions of each new generation. It
is skeptical of the hubris of eternality, but also recognizes the need to look
beyond the immediate present and into the distant future. Perhaps we will find
this apparent paradox more tenable than either flippant transience or stubborn
constancy.Photos C/O Nowk Choe
Daniel Schine Lee’s “Jam and Cook” (a functional karaoke machine + oven) and
“Pagoda Go-Go” (an 80s-esque analogue of Heelys) mock the cynical manipulation
of trends for profit, while also asking whether art and culture cannot be
meaningful despite arriving “late.”
Suyon Huh’s “Monument” and “Payphone” reference the great mass of artistic
movements across time and culture, materializing competing but ultimately
cumulative ideas of beauty by the application of gradually-layered paper dough.
Hyejoo Jun’s “Matter of Nakwon” and “Tourist Gaze” use light boxes and a
microscope to display particulates from nearby cities. Suggesting that we
consider ourselves “dust of the Earth,” she invites us to ponder a different
timescale: that of cosmic matter.
Jaekyung Jung’s “A Village” contrasts the apparent insignificance of
impoverished people catching abandoned dogs with the historical narratives of
the rich surrounding village, interrogating the ways that divergent identities
can yield unique experiences of the same moment in time. Artist’s Note
We live in capricious times. Everywhere we are pressured to keep pace with fads,
and no less so in the art world. Artists, curators, and critics chase relevance
by addressing popular topics, but these trends are ephemeral, and relevance
itself a chimera. In this context, my exhibition The Long Now abandons “timely”
topics in order to explore timeliness itself.
The exhibition was hosted in the Nakwon building in my native Seoul, Korea. An
official piece of Korean architectural heritage, the Nakwon building is
something of an oxymoron: the destruction of most Korean traditional
architecture during the Japanese occupation and the Korean War means that most
of our “historical architecture” was built in the last half-century. As an
employee at an architectural firm that focuses on historical preservation, I am
particularly sensitive to these contradictions, and chose the site as a way to
question the relativity aJosh DeFriez | The Human | Poetry
Poet’s Note
I never sent this letter to J– because it wasn’t written for him. I wrote it for
S–, for me, and for anyone else searching for healing after a bad romance.
People like J– say one thing but do another, and that leaves you constantly
searching for how they really feel.
In the time I’ve known him, J– has never had the guts to face his feelings. In
one of our first conversations, he told me, “I just don’t have emotions. I don’t
get them.” When he was dating S–, he’d call him his “friend,” his “guy,” and,
rarely, his “boyfriend.” But he’d say it all sarcastically, with air quotes, and
his face would flush at the shame of admitting to feeling something. After they
broke up, J– suddenly referred to “you know who” with a name instead of a
euphemism. The death of his affection restored his power, but it broke what
remained of my trust.
I wondered, did S– ever know that J– avoided using his name? How would that make
him feel? How did the break up feel for him? How was he handling the broken
dreams?
Many poems feel intentional, but this one did not. I don’t remember which parts
I wrote first or why it felt so necessary for a second voice to crisscross the
poem. But I distinctly remember the alchemy that happened in my heart during the
hours I spent spilling out the words, cutting them back, and rearranging them.
As I began writing, I felt angry and hurt, but I finished it feeling hope for
S–, for myself, and for all of us searching to heal from toxic relationships.
The friends I’ve shared this poem with always ask, “how am I supposed to read
this?” And I always say, “I have no idea.” After they sit with the poem for a
while, some people see what I found by writing it; others don’t. I hope you do. Poet’s Note
I never sent this letter to J– because it wasn’t written for him. I wrote it for
S–, for me, and for anyone else searching for healing after a bad romance.
People like J– say one thing but do another, and that leaves you constantly
searching for how they really feel.
In the time I’ve known him, J– has never had the guts to face his feelings. In
one of our first conversations, he told me, “I just don’t have emotions. I don’t
get them.” When he was dating S–, he’d call him his “friend,” his “guy,” and,
rarely, his “boyfriend.” But he’d say it all sarcastically, with air quotes, and
his face would flush at the shame of admitting to feeling something. After they
broke up, J– suddenly referred to “you know who” with a name instead of a
euphemism. The death of his affection restored his power, but it broke what
remained of my trust.
I wondered, did S– ever know that J– avoided using his name? How would that make
him feel? How did the break up feel for him? How was he handling the broken
dreams?
Many poems feel intentional, but this one did not. I don’t remember which parts
I wrote first or why it felt so necessary for a second voice to crisscross the
poem. But I distinctly remember the alchemy that happened in my heart during the
hours I spent spilling out the words, cutting them back, and rearranging them.
As I began writing, I felt angry and hurt, but I finished it feeling hope for
S–, for myself, and for all of us searching to heal from toxic relationships.
The friends I’ve shared this poem with always ask, “how am I supposed to read
this?” And I always say, “I have no idea.” After they sit with the poem for a
while, some people see what I found by writing it; others don’t. I hope you do.Tripp Woolf | The Human | Poetry
Shh, shh, shh...
Breezes caper in the dogwoods; white petals twirl onto the sidewalk.
The air smells green, and sweet, and forgiving.
Shh, shh, shh...
White wicker rocker creaks in the gloaming.
My sister moves her downy head into the blanket and breast.
She smells of talcum powder and Johnson’s tearless shampoo.
I marvel at her wrinkled fist clutching the crochet weave of the afghan. I
drowse on the floor at our mother’s feet, green sculpted carpet rough against my
face
“Down in the Valley” sung in rocking-chair time—shh, shh, shh...
I lie awake in the bottom bunk, curled against my pillow, feet drawn nearly to
my chin.
Spiderwort hangs in a ceramic cowboy-boot planter,
A gift from my grandmother that casts tendril and talon shadows across the path
to my door.
I wait for the tired cough to come from the room down the hall—a signal that she
sleeps and will not turn me away when I crawl under her covers
Shh, shh, shh...
Her hand already a skeleton in my grip—shh, shh, shh...
The mechanic breath of the ventilator—shh, shh, shh...
Until no breath comes—shh, sh, sss—
Lost.
I think I see her a dozen times the first month, a dozen more in the next six.
I delete her number from my contacts a year later—no longer in service.
I delete her voicemails two years later, to the day.
I mine for artifacts occasionally—the dusty mementos that evoke the story,
A piece of clothing, a kept baby tooth in a velvet box that held a piece of
jewelry.
Perhaps her touch left a signature to attest to the permanence of things—
Of her.
An autographed baseball never forgets the hand that held it.
My daughter names the world, all things must be spoken into existence.
Tree, bubberfly, moon—Sophie, the dog, and Masha, the cat.
When the streetlights flicker into orange and the cicadas sing their songs
I fold her long-legged body into my lap, and I sing,
“Down in the valley, the valley so low.”
Poet’s Note
As a child, my mother rocked me and my younger sister in a white wicker rocker
that stood sentinel in every place she lived except the last. It represented the
quiet and comfort of childhood. As I grew older and moved away from my childhood
home, I would call her from whatever adventure I might be enjoying at the
moment. My whole life, she tethered me to reality and to the rest of the family.
I called her from Mardi Gras, the Ocoee River, Iraq, Afghanistan, and when I
discovered I was going to be a father. On March 9, 2019, she took her last
breath with her hand in mine.
Following her death, I found myself looking to fill the void her absence
created. I saved voicemails so I could hear her voice whenever I wanted. Even
though I knew she was not there to answer, I called her number to tell her where
I was and what I was doing, longing to hear the mixture of motherly dismay
tinged with pride. I searched for her in all the places she no longer inhabited.
In the end, I found her: in the phrases I said and stories I told of hers. I
found her in trinkets and in artifacts. Most of all, I found her in songs—songs
that I still sing to my daughter that my mother once sang to me, rocking me in
that old white wicker rocking chair.Shh, shh, shh...
Breezes caper in the dogwoods; white petals twirl onto the sidewalk.
The air smells green, and sweet, and forgiving.
Shh, shh, shh...
White wicker rocker creaks in the gloaming.
My sister moves her downy head into the blanket and breast.
She smells of talcum powder and Johnson’s tearless shampoo.
I marvel at her wrinkled fist clutching the crochet weave of the afghan. I
drowse on the floor at our mother’s feet, green sculpted carpet rough against my
face
“Down in the Valley” sung in rocking-chair time—shh, shh, shh...
I lie awake in the bottom bunk, curled against my pillow, feet drawn nearly to
my chin.
Spiderwort hangs in a ceramic cowboy-boot planter,
A gift from my grandmother that casts tendril and talon shadows across the path
to my door.
I wait for the tired cough to come from the room down the hall—a signal that she
sleeps and will not turn me away when I crawl under her covers
Shh, shh, shh...
Her hand already a skeleton in my grip—shh, shh, shh...
The mechanic breath of the ventilator—shh, shh, shh...
Until no breath comes—shh, sh, sss—
Lost.
I think I see her a dozen times the first month, a dozen more in the next six.
I delete her number from my contacts a year later—no longer in service.
I delete her voicemails two years later, to the day.
I mine for artifacts occasionally—the dusty mementos that evoke the story,
A piece of clothing, a kept baby tooth in a velvet box that held a piece of
jewelry.
Perhaps her touch left a signature to attest to the permanence of things—
Of her.
An autographed baseball never forgets the hand that held it.
My daughter names the world, all things must be spoken into existence.
Tree, bubberfly, moon—Sophie, the dog, and Masha, the cat.
When the streetlights flicker into orange and the cicadas sing their songs
I fold her long-legged body into my lap, and I sing,
“Down in the valley, the valley so low.”
Poet’s Note
As a child, my mother rocked me and my younger sister in a white wicker rocker
that stRonan Quinn | The Human | Poetry
Your mellow touch has gone, off with the
Blue, red flashing lights that came for you on
That day. I hadn't noticed life being taken
From you, seized a little bit too rudely,
S0 quietly in the morning, the days, nights,
I feel the presence. You have not gone.
The empty space on your chair where you
Sat, a reflection in the mirror I can still see.
Our kindred spirits, a keen mind wandered
Astray, a lost memory you did try so hard
To catch, worried that you were losing it,
Not knowing what it was to begin with, to
Roll with the blows, a frenzy to end up like
My father. Peace of mind, a point to start
With, to look for, but it was in the family, a
Silent killer, a slow death that came to you.
A dent in your armchair looking to be filled,
Deep undulating undercurrents not leaving
Me be, a seismic shift in every day, I
Move to make you a cup of tea, but you
Are not around to drink it. Unspoken words
In heart-rendering times, some ongoing
Attempts to fill the time, empty results as a
Twilight of day ends in a hazy dew.
Loose ends, a void opened underneath me,
Unsure of what I should do next, the time
Thrown at me like a spring release, what to do
If the walls appear the same as before.
I'm wobbly on my feet, seeking to utter
Your name, were I small I would yet climb
On your lap as my place is lost in an hour's
Absence, I am by myself that much more.
If my girl could dance with me in this
Empty room, telling me the right foot to put
To fill the empty spaces, empty phrases.
Her lilting accent, silent gaps, help defeat
The dark, fill the crevices that have come.
Stayed, appeased, given me a new strut,
Resplendent in defeat that was, come give
Me a hug, as you would, show the lead.
A search among the bramble bushes and
A sight of a flower garden, to lay down
The ashes to sprout a tree of life and more,
The risk of time blowing back in my face.
That loss of intention replaced with an aim
Now, the wind will take off what remains sown,
The sea breeze blowing hard on my back,
Helping me, cajoling me to find my place.
Poet’s Note
I first thought of this poem one evening this past summer. I had been musing at
the time on my mother's death of a short illness a few months before, and her
dementia diagnosis some years prior to that. Long before the coronavirus
pandemic, I had been my mother’s primary carer. Her sudden death left me with
the uncanny and unanticipated experience of having a great deal of time on my
hands, and not knowing what to do with it, to say nothing of the great
existential gaps in my life that followed her passing. I also took to
anticipating my Russian girlfriend filling in some of the gaps.
In style and substance, this poem owes a great deal to the Russians and the
English Romantics, the former of whom I studied extensively during my Master’s
in Russian literature. Three poems in particular which have inspired my verses
below are Patrick Kavanagh’s “In Memory Of My Mother” and “Memory of My Father”,
and Pushkin’s “To My Nanny.”Your mellow touch has gone, off with the
Blue, red flashing lights that came for you on
That day. I hadn't noticed life being taken
From you, seized a little bit too rudely,
S0 quietly in the morning, the days, nights,
I feel the presence. You have not gone.
The empty space on your chair where you
Sat, a reflection in the mirror I can still see.
Our kindred spirits, a keen mind wandered
Astray, a lost memory you did try so hard
To catch, worried that you were losing it,
Not knowing what it was to begin with, to
Roll with the blows, a frenzy to end up like
My father. Peace of mind, a point to start
With, to look for, but it was in the family, a
Silent killer, a slow death that came to you.
A dent in your armchair looking to be filled,
Deep undulating undercurrents not leaving
Me be, a seismic shift in every day, I
Move to make you a cup of tea, but you
Are not around to drink it. Unspoken words
In heart-rendering times, some ongoing
Attempts to fill the time, empty results as a
Twilight of day ends in a hazy dew.
Loose ends, a void opened underneath me,
Unsure of what I should do next, the time
Thrown at me like a spring release, what to do
If the walls appear the same as before.
I'm wobbly on my feet, seeking to utter
Your name, were I small I would yet climb
On your lap as my place is lost in an hour's
Absence, I am by myself that much more.
If my girl could dance with me in this
Empty room, telling me the right foot to put
To fill the empty spaces, empty phrases.
Her lilting accent, silent gaps, help defeat
The dark, fill the crevices that have come.
Stayed, appeased, given me a new strut,
Resplendent in defeat that was, come give
Me a hug, as you would, show the lead.
A search among the bramble bushes and
A sight of a flower garden, to lay down
The ashes to sprout a tree of life and more,
The risk of time blowing back in my face.
That loss of intention replaced with an aim
Now, the wind will take off what remains sown,
The sea breezEmily Meffert | The Human | Short Story
And did you get what
You wanted from this life, even so?
—Raymond Carver, "Late Fragment"
The heat was historic.
“This heat is historic,” they’d said on NPR. At Pike Place fishmongers were
selling their souls for ice. The biologist visited each morning, drank coffee,
let seagulls drown the radio in her ears. She liked the rockfish, seeing them
bright and flop-bellied in their lukewarm display.
At home her computer monitor gathered dust like an artifact. It had been
untouched for three weeks. It baffled her that, after twenty-one years,
researching adaptations in extremophiles hadn’t joined her loose ends. Was this
it, then? She’d written a proposal that involved spelunking through the archives
of one institution or another. To see what life at the bottom of the ocean might
reveal about life on other planets, she’d explained.
In the afternoons she drank espresso martinis on her porch and watched Mr.
Cardoso swing his watering can among the dahlias next door. Perhaps she’d buy
one of those houses built around a big tree. She could become spiritual. Start a
watch collection. Fall in love.
On Friday she brought home a King crab. It reminded her of—where was it that
Gulliver traveled? Where everything was giant? Its spiked legs looked like a
desert plant. Today was the nineteenth day of her sabbatical, she realized. Was
it the twentieth? The heat made everything hazy. The haze seeped in through her
ears. She could feel it as soon as she woke up, that heavy film on her brain’s
machinery. The days bled together. The Pacific and the sky brewed a dull,
disorienting continuum.
It was there when she returned to her house. She set her crustacean on the step
and squatted to examine the envelope. Someone had dropped it on her welcome mat.
The letter inside had an official look to it. They requested her expertise to
investigate reports of an unnamed halophile in deep sea brine pools off the
coast of X. At the bottom someone had scratched an illegible signature. No name
was printed. She’d have to leave at once.
When she reported to the government office the clerk confirmed that she had been
invited to take a leading role at the X Astrobiology Laboratory. He used that
word. You have been invited, he said. She had never heard of it. How long were
they expecting her to stay? The clerk couldn’t say for sure. It would depend on
what she found. She asked the clerk who arranged her appointment. The clerk
shook his head. You never know with these things, he said.
“I’m sure you recognize,” he said, shuffling papers on the big mahogany desk,
“that the urgency of your assignment cannot be overstated.”
“I don’t quite understand.”
“They’re calling it Signifojn, I guess. It’s a kind of—what would you call it? A
nickname? It’s a kind of placeholder in the scientific community, until they
gather enough information to classify it.” His desk was like a repository for
all the papers that had ever been lost in the world. “That’s where you come in.”
He looked at her over his glasses. “The implications of a discovery would be
colossal. And given the state of things . . .”
What was the state of things?
“Who will I be working with?”
He pulled his sleeve back and scrutinized the top of his wrist. “You’ll have to
ask someone in country,” he said.
●She packed her passport, toothbrush, three bags of Planters Honey-Roasted
Peanuts, the June issue of Scientific American, and Annie Jump Cannon, her
basement Bengal. She left Noah’s old Huskies sweatshirt and her favorite
tuberose perfume. She kissed the boards of her acetaminophen-red bungalow and
left a spare key with Mrs. Cardoso, who would keep an eye on her ferns while she
was away. Mr. Cardoso joined his wife in seeing her off. Good luck, Irene. We’ll
miss you.
She met the pilot at a neglected regional airport south of town. He wore an
archetypal aviator’s hat—the kind lined with imitation wool—and motioned her
toward the open door of a Cessna. She thought that was odd. As they ascended she
watched her world become small. An arcing river balanced the sharp symmetries of
an industrial park. Baseball diamonds baked and freeways ribboned like hair
beneath a microscope. After several minutes the Sound carved the city into a
jagged puzzle. When everything beneath her turned blue, she closed her eyes.
She woke in a wall of clouds. The pilot’s voice had startled her. She plugged
her nose and blew hard and her ears popped like tiny bombs exploding in her
head.
“Cat?” he said without turning around.
Annie Jump Cannon purred like a spontaneous extrovert. Irene was irritated.
“Bengal,” she said. The pilot cleared his throat. She could see his shoulders
shifting. Her center of gravity was shifting, too.
“What’s your earliest memory?” he said. He was wearing a cotton t-shirt that
might have been white in a previous life. She couldn’t see his face.
“Um,” she said. “What?”
“That you can remember,” he clarified. And, hurriedly, “I’m just making
conversation.”
A long moment passed. Annie Jump Cannon was tense in her lap. “Spilling Cheerios
in Alaska,” she offered.
“Alaska,” he said. She couldn’t place his accent.
“The cafe was up on stilts,” she said. “One big room without corners.”
“I’ve always wanted to go to Alaska,” he said. She felt vaguely sideways.
“When the bowl flipped I thought the world had turned over.”
That made him laugh.
●Except for distant mountains, her destination was brown and featureless, like a
face she couldn’t read. It wasn’t a town but a cluster of buildings—each a dozen
stories and earth-colored with hexagonal windows she couldn’t see into. The
pilot left her with an old-fashioned skeleton key and instructed her to report
to the seventh floor of the building with the short lavender door. You’ll see a
room with a circle of hands on the door, he said. That’s the one you want.
Before she had time to ask questions he was back in the plane. Then she was
alone there, on that dusty plain sewn with endless replications.
Inside the door engraved with a circle of hands she found an austere bedframe
and a plasticky, dorm-style mattress. Aside from those, light from a hexagonal
window with acid-etched glass revealed a couple dozen large bins. On the bed
there was a letter addressed to her.
Dr. Gadbois—
Welcome! We’re thrilled to have you here. Please take some time to settle in and
get your bearings. We look forward to meeting you.
It wasn’t signed. Someone knocked on her door.
When she opened it a man pushed past her and heaved himself against the fort of
bins. One tumbled to the floor and busted open. It was full of bags. Annie
jumped from where she had been perched on the bed and scampered beneath it. The
man shouted something she didn’t understand. She was frozen. He scooped up an
armful and dashed out of her apartment, manic as he’d come.
The bags were all sizes. There was a coin pouch woven with hemp. A pleather
clutch in the shape of a corndog had rolled across the room and popped open. One
lunchbox featured a roost of embroidered butterflies. There was an oversized
duffle and a guitar case and a whole line of fatigued paper grocery bags and a
fanny pack. She touched them one by one. She opened the other bins and they
contained bags, too. Touching the bags made her sad. She missed the pilot. She
needed some air.
●Outside it occurred to her that she might have left her oven on. She tried to
text Mrs. Cardoso but there was no service. There were no streets or sidewalks
or signs or traffic lights or cars—just the negative space between buildings.
Around her people sat on benches or leaned against walls or sat cross-legged in
the dust. Most were alone; most seemed mildly vigilant. She struggled to catch
people’s eyes. She thought of little islands.
Ten minutes into her walk someone poked her on the shoulder blade. Irene spun
around and found a small insistent woman pointing at the canvas tote Irene
carried. The insistent woman excavated her pocket and produced a fistful of
something. Then she thrust both cupped hands toward Irene and mumbled
unintelligibly.
If the old insistent woman had been physically imposing Irene would have
sprinted. Instead, Irene peered into the cavity formed by the woman’s small
fingers. An array of glass beads pooled inside. Some were big as marbles and
others appeared to be as tiny as salt crystals.
“Eh?” the woman said. She eyed the canvas tote hung on Irene’s shoulder,
insistent. Irene touched its topmost strap. The woman’s eyes widened.
Irene removed the tote from her shoulder. She extended her opposite hand and
displayed her blank palm. The timid woman moved toward her. She loosened her
fingers and let the beads drop like sand in an hourglass. When Irene’s hand was
full the woman seized the tote and pressed it against her chest.
When she got back to her building there was a very tall man sitting outside,
manning a cardboard box. A hooded figure approached him and traded a basket for
a roll of toilet paper. When she came to the door he inspected her and shrugged.
Another person offered him a pair of purple socks. He reached in the box and
produced a second roll. Irene fished the beads from her pocket and displayed
them beneath the building’s leaking light. The very tall man frowned. Then he
extended a roll of toilet paper and cupped his extended hands.
There were no outlets in her room. Two bulbs burned on the ceiling; the meager
furniture glowed. Filaments coiled inside the bulbs like metallurgical slinkies.
Irene’s phone was at seven percent. It was two in the morning.
●At first it was impossible to acclimate. The second day was a nightmare. Irene
woke in a flushed room; the light was dim but expectant. She inhaled a bag of
peanuts then walked where she didn’t walk the previous evening. She struggled to
get information. Someone squeaked and clucked at her on the corner of one
not-street and another. A man toting bungee cords opened his mouth and expelled
the sound of wind through high trees. She couldn’t get over that. That night,
she was brushing her teeth in the bathroom down the hall when a woman yodeled
with several voices at once.
She never found the X Astrobiology Lab. At first she thought if she could find
the coast she would walk it until a research institute appeared. But there was
no coast. On the third day she traced the development’s single continuous edge.
Past the peripheral buildings there were dust, immaterial shrubs, and a
suggestion of mountains on the earth’s long rim.
On her fourth day Irene met a soap peddler who refused to open his mouth.
Inexplicably, she offered him a triple gusset briefcase. As he reached toward
her she swam in silent gratitude. He reciprocated: a bundle of bright bar soaps
bound in twine. He placed her hands on either end and squeezed lightly. She
thought of Noah. She looked away. Later, a scalding shower made one fragrant:
tuberose.
Her quick acceptance surprised her. On the fifth day she scanned articles about
deadly fungi, ongoing projects to deflect asteroids on their way to Earth, and
electrodes at the roots of conscious experience. She wrote Signifojn in the
magazine’s slick margins with the obsessive agony of a first crush. On the sixth
day she cried until Annie Jump Cannon’s fur was a salty mop and on the seventh
day she slept. That night she dreamed of microbes pulsing in a sea of molten
rock on a planet far away. She woke into darkness without contour and her
loneliness throbbed like they throbbed.
On the eighth day she resigned herself to a life of tragic surrealism and vowed
to find the person who signed her original letter. Instead she found Mona,
bartering fire.
●She went to the square in the morning to see what she could get. She carried a
battered Tumi suitcase and a sequined pencil pouch and a backpack with a bloated
pocket shaped like a soccer ball. She noticed a young woman showing pedestrians
a picture of something. The chemical symbols for sulfur, argon, calcium, and
samarium were arranged on her t-shirt to spell S-Ar-Ca-Sm. Irene squinted to
read the text below it. My Main Element. Were her eyes playing tricks on her?
Was this a mirage?
“Hey!” Irene shouted.
The woman made a visor of her hand. She was a nest of copper hair and a swatch
of painfully pink skin. She looked about the age of Irene’s students. She held
out the picture to Irene—a vintage 7up ad severed from some publication. An
uncanny family smiled around an awkwardly cultish bonfire. You like it...it
likes you! the slogan ventured.
When Irene approached her the woman extended a matchbox. “You speak English?”
Irene said.
The woman looked baffled. She reached backward and set her clumsy merchandise on
a folding table.
She lunged forward. She collided with Irene. Irene was alarmed.
“Sister,” she said. She squeezed Irene. Her arms were tight. “Yes,” she said.
She was rubbing her hands on Irene’s back. “Yes.”
Irene shut her eyes. Pressure surged from her chest; it shattered the ceiling in
her head. The relief was dizzy and private. The woman’s ear pressed against
Irene’s shoulder.
“When’d you get here?” she asked.
“Eight days ago,” Irene said. “I think.”
“The heat makes your memory lazy,” the woman observed.
“When’d you get here?”
“God, I don’t know. I think we’re at the top of the world. Or the bottom. Pretty
soon the sun won’t set at all. Then it won’t rise for longer than you can
imagine and the dark is bitter cold. That’s what happened when I got here. The
days stretched and stretched and then they snapped.”
Irene felt a wave of nausea. “What is this place?”
She shrugged. “Hell, I guess?”
Irene looked around. Across the square the man who sounded like wind appeared to
be singing to no one.
“Why did you come here?”
“I left St. Paul to see my longtime friend in Michigan. I was supposed to catch
a ferry in Manitowoc for the last leg of my trip.”
“Who arranged that?”
“What, the ferry?”
Irene nodded.
“Some service, IDK. Had this chick pick me up in a private plane and told me to
look for a ferry named SEEG-NEE-FO when I got here.” She accented each syllable
of the word. She shook her head. “On the other side of town, the agent said.
It’ll take you right to us.”
Irene paused. She watched the woman. “Have you seen—”
“That the place is a blip in a big desert?” The woman twirled her pointer finger
in the air and opened her eyes wide. “Hadn’t noticed.”
Irene showed her hand. “Irene.”
The woman studied it. It was as though she thought something would happen that
could not be taken back. “Mona,” said Mona. They shook.
●A lot of people seemed distressed, Mona said. She and Irene sat on the ground
in the shadow of the building on the square’s western edge. Everyone had their
thing that they had a lot of and traded it for other things. She was lucky, she
said, to have found in her apartment several bookcases stacked with matchboxes.
Fire was practical. The poor man who lived next to her moved into an apartment
full of violins. She thought about giving him some of her matchboxes but then
people would trade with him instead of her, and how would she eat?
Irene couldn’t say.
“Sometimes people you see everyday just disappear,” Mona said. “Poof. Into thin
air.”
Irene thought. Then she said, “Earlier, when you said you were supposed to take
a ferry, what did you say was its name?”
“SEEG-NEE-FO.”
“Signifojn,” Irene murmured, half inside and half out. “The clerk who briefed
me—if you can call it that—on my appointment said that word. Said it was a
microbe.”
Mona frowned. “Sorry?”
“He told me Signifojn was the nickname of an unclassified microorganism off the
coast of this place. I was assigned to investigate it.”
“Um, that’s weird. That’s actually kind of funny,” Mona said. “That’s like,
really weird.”
“Have you ever heard the word?”
Mona looked reflective. “I think, yeah, I think it’s like the name of a boat
company. I’m pretty sure I’ve heard of it before.”
Irene was skeptical. “Well I’m certain I’d never heard it before. Have you
mentioned it to anyone else?”
“To who? Tornado man? The squeaky chicken girl? I have to talk to myself just to
fight off insanity.”
“That’s very odd.”
Mona shrugged. She stood and brushed the sand off her backside. “You a
scientist?”
Irene nodded. “I study salt at the bottom of the ocean. Looking for life where
survival is hard.”
“Why?”
Irene stood. Her legs felt like they’d been clasped for eons. “There are
comparable bodies of water on one of Jupiter’s moons. Very salty.”
“So you’re hunting aliens?”
“Hunting, no.”
“Why?”
Irene looked around. A man sprawled on a patchwork of primary colors, surrounded
by stacks of quilts. People idled and calculated. A crowd was forming around
some kind of food. The air smelled nutty and rich. A woman kneeled at the large
well in the center of the square, driving a gourd-shaped basket across its
surface. A procession of rings swelled. The disruption was arresting.
“If you’re searching for something where it might not exist,” Irene said, “it’s
important to know the signs of that thing where it does.”
●That night she dreamed a vivid memory. Once—several lifetimes ago, it seemed,
before the eggshells and impasses—Noah had taken her to the roof of his
apartment building to try a mercurial malbec. In the nautical twilight she’d
pointed upward. “Bats.”
The next weekend they returned. Noah’s eyes seemed fixated on the wide vacancy
above the buildings around them. She asked him why. He hadn’t known those things
were bats, he said. He was looking for them because he thought he might find
them.
Had he ever looked for something he was confident he wouldn’t find? She
conversed on the brink of a second glass. That vintage had been tainted by fire.
She liked it; the taste helped her imagine something she’d never seen.
He squinted at her. Said finally what are you getting at. You couldn’t speak
abstractly without inviting accusations, even in those days. She hadn’t seen it
then. She wasn’t getting at anything.
He said people were more likely to look for things they guessed they could find.
Wouldn’t be rational otherwise. Scientists, maybe, to rule out the far fetches.
He kissed her floral wrists, her necklace. Before he’d met her he’d looked for
love on the streets of Chicago without believing he’d find it. She thought about
that. Low odds, high reward, she said. He wouldn’t go out in a snow storm. But a
nice spring evening, he’d walk the streets for hours anyway. Notice people.
They agreed that they had a better shot at finding something from the roof of
his building—given they knew what they were looking for—than from the street,
which was full of obstructions. But a birdseye view lacked intimacy. They could
guess at the texture of a leaf or the sound of an engine but had no way of
verifying these. They might locate some sought thing from the roof and never
know whether something else would have pleased them more. But roaming took
forever. All that wasted time.
Overhead the bats convened and dispersed, shouting across the broad failing
light. Noah was swirling his wine. Here and there she caught his eye. It was as
though all the actors on that stage were determined to crystallize for a moment,
then dissolve.
●After a week of fruitless contemplation they resolved to say it to everyone.
Signifojn, they whispered in doorframes, in confidence, in shadowed corners of
the square. They were startled by the number of people who were startled to hear
it. How would they describe the reactions they encountered? Incredulous, moved,
paranoid, desperately familial. Irene said it to the woman who housed the choir
of yodelers. Her vocalizations became clumsy, frantic. She grabbed Irene’s
shoulders and seemed to plead with her. When Irene spoke other words the woman
sputtered toward silence, like a candelabra suddenly and devastatingly snuffed.
Irene and Mona started recording their impressions of reactions in a notebook.
They started drawing lines between them. The web became thick. They catalogued
clusters. There was the curious camp, which thrilled to attempt commiseration
across languages. There was the group of cryptic gesturers, who motioned and
demonstrated with evangelical fervor. There was the huggy group that offered
water and food and seemed to spend many hours each day admiring the immaterial
shrubs. Mona named the smallest cluster The Unruffleds—rare individuals who
rolled their eyes and clipped their nails and could not learn bewilderment at
all.
“What are your conclusions?” Irene asked one night. They’d traded a picnic
basket full of matches for bathtub brew and had danced while Mona’s neighbor
played something scratchy and atonal. Now that it was late they were stumbling
around outside, figuring. Irene balanced herself against the cool wall of the
building. She tried to concentrate. The sun had been whittled down as far as the
season would allow. The sky was lilac-colored, blank, barely lucid.
“Signifojn is not a microbe,” Mona said. “Or a boat. I mean, not more so than it
is anything else,” she considered. “A tote. A flame. The thing that creates the
possibility of a flame. A tiny piece of glass.”
Irene seemed unsatisfied by her answer. “I keep thinking—and I hate this thought
every time it surfaces—I keep thinking that this place,” she said, “is a red
herring. You know?”
Mona scratched her cheek.
“Like, plane drops us here, then we’re bent on locating the answer to something
that doesn’t exist within the limits we’ve taken as givens.” Irene paced
unsteadily. “Who decided that X describes just the ground beneath these
buildings?” She looked around. “What if it’s out in the desert? The next town
over, the one we can’t see?”
Mona squatted. She laid her palms on the earth and made little dunes between her
fingers. “I’ve noticed something,” she said. “I told you how people disappear.”
“Yes. The tall toilet paper man who used to sit outside my building. One day he
wasn’t there and I haven’t seen him since.”
“Yes. Yes. Just like that. Poof.”
“You have a theory?”
“I don’t know,” Mona said. “A relationship, maybe.”
Irene raised her eyebrows.
“Well,” she began. “I’ve been thinking about the people I’ve known who
disappeared, like, thinking about what cluster they’d belong to.” She scattered
the dunes between her fingers and dusted her hands off. “From what I can
remember, seems like everyone would’ve fallen in that smallest group.”
“The Unruffleds.”
She nodded.
“What do you make of that?”
“I don’t—I mean, there can’t be just less Unruffleds of all the people who get
dropped here. Right? You know? Like, what if it’s the smallest group because
they don’t last long?”
Irene was silent. Then she said, “You think that’s the ticket out?”
Mona shrugged. “Seems like it. But how can we know where they go?”
“Wouldn’t you guess they’re taken home?”
“I thought I was going to Manitowoc and now I’m here. So who knows? I think
you’d have to make a big bet on whether the place they go to is better than this
one.”
Irene shivered. Mona’s face looked unfamiliar in the vague purple light. The
buildings loomed like staunch shells in a world that was passing ceaselessly
through them.
●In her dream that night Irene stood on the ground where her building had been
built. This was centuries before that, though—before that dust had become
foundational. In the crook of one arm a heavy manuscript moved her speech. She
turned its illuminated pages carefully, admiring the spiritual colors. The
people in that general vicinity nodded, pondered, shook their heads, scoffed,
affirmed, laughed, glanced with curiosity or none, struggled to understand or
didn’t, formulated rebuttals, listened occasionally, shrugged, moved along. She
traveled to all the corners of the earth and stood at every intersection,
proclaiming the answers to the original questions. She gave them names that were
broadly recognizable and elusive as contours in a cave.
In her dream it was unknown to Irene why she was doing these things, but she was
overcome with the impression that she had failed to achieve the outcome she was
seeking. After the failure she sang. It was a wordless, unpredictable song. She
was stunned to hear the notes she sang as she produced them. After a long time a
bystander moved close and yielded to impulse. His body twisted and popped like a
spark. Later, another approached them and stretched a reptile over a hollowed
tree. He rapped and slapped and thumped and struck until there was a perceptible
correspondence between the three. Day after day they returned to that place and
did those things.
Irene woke feeling strangely comforted. After so many days waking to the
immediate challenge of reconciling her present situation with the complex and
long-rehearsed situation that she’d expected to be her life, she had become
adept at retraining her focus on things that couldn’t be taken from her. At
mid-day she sat by the well in the center of the square and watched people draw
water. She wanted to reach out and touch each of them—a gesture of compassion
and understanding. Suddenly she was overwhelmed by their shared, inarticulate
sadness.
Mona sat beside her in the afternoon. The sun was intense then and the square
was quiet for a long while.
“I dreamed last night,” Mona said.
Irene became aware of her surroundings at once. The voice had startled her. She
looked up.
“What’d you say are signs of life?”
“Um, they’re different. It depends. There are certain molecular signatures. . .”
Irene trailed off. On the other side of the well a man pressed his basket
against the force of the water until it was submerged. The still surface
crumpled like a paper bag.
“There has to be some kind of disturbance,” she said. Waves arced toward her.
She thought of bats calling out, getting their bearings in the night. “Some
transformation of energy. Nothing lives without ruffling everything.”
Mona seemed to be anticipating more. Then she squeezed her hand. “Sister,” she
said.
Irene looked at her. The pressure on her hand was kind and safe and knowing—it
knew. It was like regaining a pair of misplaced glasses. Mona’s copper mane
sharpened at the edges. The pale lines crossing her perpetual sunburn flashed
with clarity and contrast. So many places the sun hasn’t touched, she thought.
That was easy to forget at the bottom of the world. The top. Wherever they were,
this inexplicable X.
“Sister,” Irene said. “Yeah.” She exhaled. “Yes.”And did you get what
You wanted from this life, even so?
—Raymond Carver, "Late Fragment"
The heat was historic.
“This heat is historic,” they’d said on NPR. At Pike Place fishmongers were
selling their souls for ice. The biologist visited each morning, drank coffee,
let seagulls drown the radio in her ears. She liked the rockfish, seeing them
bright and flop-bellied in their lukewarm display.
At home her computer monitor gathered dust like an artifact. It had been
untouched for three weeks. It baffled her that, after twenty-one years,
researching adaptations in extremophiles hadn’t joined her loose ends. Was this
it, then? She’d written a proposal that involved spelunking through the archives
of one institution or another. To see what life at the bottom of the ocean might
reveal about life on other planets, she’d explained.
In the afternoons she drank espresso martinis on her porch and watched Mr.
Cardoso swing his watering can among the dahlias next door. Perhaps she’d buy
one of those houses built around a big tree. She could become spiritual. Start a
watch collection. Fall in love.
On Friday she brought home a King crab. It reminded her of—where was it that
Gulliver traveled? Where everything was giant? Its spiked legs looked like a
desert plant. Today was the nineteenth day of her sabbatical, she realized. Was
it the twentieth? The heat made everything hazy. The haze seeped in through her
ears. She could feel it as soon as she woke up, that heavy film on her brain’s
machinery. The days bled together. The Pacific and the sky brewed a dull,
disorienting continuum.
It was there when she returned to her house. She set her crustacean on the step
and squatted to examine the envelope. Someone had dropped it on her welcome mat.
The letter inside had an official look to it. They requested her expertise to
investigate reports of an unnamed halophile in deep sea brine pools off the
coast of X. At the bottom someone had scratched an illegible signature. No name
Andrew Najberg | The Necessary | Poetry
I do want hope, belief
in intercession. That my children,
if in need, could expect bread.
To know them is to know the dirt
-engrained lines of their shoeless feet
as they belly sprawl over coloring books.
Just one state over, a blue newborn found
in a blue cooler beneath a speed limit sign.
This, exactly, has happened before: a life
as iteration of the facets of human cruelty,
what I read the first occurrence only
to me—tragedy sealed in Ziplocs
and four-wheel drive Suburbans parked
windows up in summer sun.
Blame it on the snake, or belts, or lineages
of fists, but my children are too real
to allow anyone such grace.
I watch them totter in pajamas.
They bicker about games and turns
and who looks at whom, dip
crackers in milk and brush crumbs off
lips with forearms as they dance,
make it hard to understand that as humans,
something monstrous lives in us all.
No parent can be innocent
and expect to keep their children
the same while they sing at bedtime.
After mine are tucked in, I lie
in bed under the fan as the dog
circles its rug. Tomorrow, again,
I look for new roads, choose one
that leads to more than that.
Poet’s Note
Even before the twenty-first century, many felt battered by the brutality of
daily news, but today, the internet and social media allow us to track the
struggles of everyone we know alongside those we’ve never met. We coexist with
tragedies that are simultaneous with our most innocent moments. “Things I Need
to Know” grapples with the braiding of children’s play and horrific abuses, and
emphasizes the necessity of this discordance. My intention is to show a speaker
ready to break under the world’s weight, while also allowing them to recognize
their worthiness of the very grace they seek for their children. In a world
where a narrow few hold seemingly overwhelming power, I see this poem as a
reminder that we must grasp our own agency if we hope for anything better to
follow.I do want hope, belief
in intercession. That my children,
if in need, could expect bread.
To know them is to know the dirt
-engrained lines of their shoeless feet
as they belly sprawl over coloring books.
Just one state over, a blue newborn found
in a blue cooler beneath a speed limit sign.
This, exactly, has happened before: a life
as iteration of the facets of human cruelty,
what I read the first occurrence only
to me—tragedy sealed in Ziplocs
and four-wheel drive Suburbans parked
windows up in summer sun.
Blame it on the snake, or belts, or lineages
of fists, but my children are too real
to allow anyone such grace.
I watch them totter in pajamas.
They bicker about games and turns
and who looks at whom, dip
crackers in milk and brush crumbs off
lips with forearms as they dance,
make it hard to understand that as humans,
something monstrous lives in us all.
No parent can be innocent
and expect to keep their children
the same while they sing at bedtime.
After mine are tucked in, I lie
in bed under the fan as the dog
circles its rug. Tomorrow, again,
I look for new roads, choose one
that leads to more than that.
Poet’s Note
Even before the twenty-first century, many felt battered by the brutality of
daily news, but today, the internet and social media allow us to track the
struggles of everyone we know alongside those we’ve never met. We coexist with
tragedies that are simultaneous with our most innocent moments. “Things I Need
to Know” grapples with the braiding of children’s play and horrific abuses, and
emphasizes the necessity of this discordance. My intention is to show a speaker
ready to break under the world’s weight, while also allowing them to recognize
their worthiness of the very grace they seek for their children. In a world
where a narrow few hold seemingly overwhelming power, I see this poem as a
reminder that we must grasp our own agency if we hope for anything better to
follow.Garrett Allen | The Plain | Essay
A few weeks ago I heard a scream and turned my head to see Robert stomping his
foot. He and Harry, both around four years old, were standing next to each
other. Robert was leaning forward, chest out, holding his arms straight down,
fists clenched. When I got there, I asked, “What happened?”
“He took my train!” Robert screamed.
I turned to Harry, who was holding a Thomas train in his hand, and asked him,
“Was Robert playing with that train?”
“Yes,” he said.
“Did you take it?”
“Yes,” he answered, brow furrowed. “I want it.”
We talked about it and moved on. The whole encounter lasted less than a minute
but it stuck with me. Harry didn’t deny taking the train or lie about the
circumstances. He didn’t apologize or give an excuse. And yet there wasn’t a
hint of meanness about him. He was perfectly serious when he uttered, “I want
it,” which to him was sufficient grounds for taking the train. I admire the
awesome simplicity of Harry’s behavior.
I also shudder to think about what lies ahead for Harry and the others in my
preschool class as they grow up. In infancy, reality and desire lie flush
against each other. There is no boundary between them, no fault line. In
preschool the first cracks emerge. A child wants a toy, or to have their mother,
or simply to say what’s on their mind, but they don’t get to have it. They see
the toy but don’t get to play with it. They want their mother, but she is not
there. They have an idea but don’t get to make it known.
The gap between desire and reality continues to grow as we age. Eventually, it’s
not that we want the train and don’t get it, but that we do and it doesn’t
satisfy us. It isn’t what we had hoped for. Not what we had been promised. We
hold the actual train in our hands and yet seem to long for something different,
something hidden and remote. We enter a school or church or career and are
disappointed. We enter society and find it is different than we had imagined.
The gap widens into a canyon, and the canyon becomes too wide to see across.
I think it is impossible to avoid encountering this canyon between the ideal and
real. The more you get to know a thing—its historical and contemporary
reality—the more you see a mismatch between the idea in your head and what it
actually is. The hopeful intuitions that lead you down a path turn out,
inevitably, to be inconsistent with reality.
●I spent ten years of my life formally studying philosophy. I was initially
attracted to the discipline because I wanted to understand my place in the
universe and my path through it, in the largest and most comprehensive sense of
the terms. But as I began to move through the field it became clear to me that
professional philosophy is more about universities, papers, and CVs than what I
had hoped for. It is formal, conventional, and professional. Its nature is
dictated by the institutions that support it. Faced with this inconsistency, I
eventually concluded that what goes by the name “philosophy” in the contemporary
university is a corrupted and distorted image of philosophy rather than
philosophy itself.
But what is this “philosophy itself”? When I say this, the image of Harry comes
to my mind again. Harry explained his taking the toy, grabbing it out of
Robert’s hands, by saying he wanted it. The logic behind his action, which he
articulated so beautifully and shamelessly, was simple: “I want it, therefore I
take it.” And I would guess it’s even better to get rid of the “I,” since at
Harry’s age the ego, the sense of self, is between nonexistent and inchoate.
There is no distinction between self and world, and no space for others. Reality
answers immediately to desire, individual desire.
When I say that what we call “philosophy” is not philosophy, how am I different
from Harry, innocently but ignorantly imposing my desire on things? Granting
that it is not what I desire it to be—the organic attempt to know yourself, the
universe and your place in it—how am I not naively confusing myself, my own
needs, with the world?
I can relate to the mixture of confusion and outrage Harry felt when I implied
that he might well want the train but still can’t grab it out of Robert’s hands,
which suggests to me that I might be in an analogous situation, and have an
analogous lesson to learn. But the source of our confusion is different. Harry
is confused because he is used to what he wants being his, and now he wants
something and is being told it is not his. Desire is decoupling from reality for
him. But I am confused because I am used to one thing being called “philosophy,”
and now we are calling something really different “philosophy.”
Traditionally, philosophy was understood to be a way of living that involves
regular attempts to know oneself and the world through examination of received
norms, habits and conventions. By making these unconscious norms explicit, we
come into a position to evaluate them and their alternatives, to select and
reject. By giving an account of ourselves and holding ourselves to account, we
put ourselves in a position to pursue the good life, to live wisely.
Accordingly, philosophy has traditionally been considered to be both
comprehensive and transformative. It reorders everything a person knows and
does, and thereafter sits at the top of their priorities. This love of wisdom
includes theory and practice, words and action, and is pursued with a solemn,
religious, joyful devotion that makes the practitioner idiosyncratic,
unconventional, fanatical.
This conception of philosophy is held in common by my philosophical heroes, who
railed against the professionalization of intellectual life. In his dialogue
Gorgias, Plato criticizes teachers who teach their students skill in
argumentation without concern for the truth of the argument being made.
According to Plato, absent a concern for the truth, what they teach is just
verbal acrobatics and fancy argumentation, a parody of true intellectual life.
Similarly, in his essay “The American Scholar,” Ralph Waldo Emerson argues that
“Action is with the scholar subordinate, but it is essential. Without it he is
not yet a [human being].” Professionalization, he says, is dangerous when it
leads to specialization and abstraction. When thinking is not part of an
integrated whole, it becomes distorted.
Yet philosophy today is professional, in that the object of reflection is
circumscribed. What a professional philosopher thinks about is limited and the
limit is given by the profession. Because you need to publish papers in
established journals to become established in the field, you have to write about
what the established journals are interested in. From the inside, that is a big
umbrella, but from the outside it is an extreme limitation.
One result of this attitude is that PhD students and early career academics
concentrate on what is hot in the field at the expense of their own interests.
As a graduate student I often met even mid-career professors who wistfully
lamented the ongoing neglect of their deeper philosophical interests due to
career pressures, the necessity of establishing themselves in the field as it
exists. They look forward to tenure, when they imagine they will have the time
to explore their own questions, the writers and issues that originally drew them
to the subject.
I saw this in my own experience as a PhD student in philosophy at the University
of Chicago. Emerson and Henry David Thoreau are two of the writers whose work I
find the most interesting, culturally relevant, and philosophically rich, yet I
was told I could not write a dissertation because the few senior faculty who
might have advised me thought that such a dissertation would not help me secure
a job at a university as a professional philosopher. Not one of them took issue
with the worthiness of the topic. They just didn’t think it would be a passport
to the profession.
Across the board, members of the discipline focus their energy on what is being
talked about in the field more than the practical interests which surround them
on the professional track. Why are some writers excluded from the mainstream of
professional philosophy? Why do people in the field use the phrase “adding a
line to your CVs” as if it were an end in and of itself? What does this mean
about the profession I am entering? Along with many others, these questions are
excluded from professional reflection, but that alone makes such reflection
unphilosophical. No question which arises out of genuine interest can be
excluded from our inquiry when we inquire with a philosophical spirit.
Philosophy is the discovery and pursuit of our interests. Not an ancestor’s, or
corporation’s, or institution’s, but our own.
But professional reflection is limited in a second way in that it is detached
from action, except a few actions of a professional sort. Healthy reflection is
part of a cycle that runs from experience to reflection to judgment and back
into experience. In the healthy cycle, knowing leads into doing. Making
arguments with where you put your muscles and bones. Professional reflection, on
the other hand, exists in isolation. It has no urgency, no outcome, and no end
point, other than giving a talk at a conference or publishing a paper or book.
It prizes only the articulation of ideas, not the employment or embodiment of
them. The whole sphere of action, the use or neglect of ideas, lived and
embodied reality, is invisible to it.
Once, at a philosophy conference in Germany, I heard a young academic give a
talk about the idea of art in the tradition of German idealism, an important
philosophical movement of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. He
argued compellingly for the idea that life is essentially an artistic process.
As he spoke I thought about how this line of thinking must have consequences,
for instance, for how we write philosophy. Afterwards, I approached him, excited
to ask him about the next steps, the practical implications of his thesis. But
he merely answered by connecting new ideas to those he had talked about and
adding what another philosopher had said about them. Ideas, but no actions. For
him it was enough to talk about the thesis, to spell the ideas out
theoretically. My questions, which grew out of my interest in enacting them,
were foreign to him.
Nowadays philosophy is thought of as a department at a university, but
historically it was much more than that. When I was a professional philosopher,
I was shocked other philosophers didn’t reflect on these issues more.
Philosophy, as I understand it, inherently involves questioning. It involves
submitting received norms and practices to examination in the here and now, by
you and me, by our own lights. It makes titles alleged, and it turns credentials
into “credentials.” And yet most graduate students take it on authority that
they are entering the profession of philosophy.
Graduate students must simply adopt, for instance, the writing norms of the
contemporary academic world. In the history of philosophy, it is easy to see
that Plato, Nietzsche, and Wittgenstein all write in very different ways: plays,
essays, aphorisms, myths, etc. Graduate students, however, simply adopt the
norms of the contemporary academic world. To mention just two things, this means
writing impersonally, so that the author as a subject disappears from the text,
and it also means a lot of what is called “sign-posting”: “My argument in this
section will proceed in three steps. First I will…” Graduate students take it on
faith that these norms are conducive to their ends—but philosophy involves
questioning precisely that.
In the end, you get a situation where academic philosophers can lecture at
length and with nuance about the special abstract topic of their professional
attention, but their reflection on the innumerable practical issues surrounding
them is stuck at an elementary level. They seem to have had no thought to spare
for the practical questions that must assail them left and right as they move
through the discipline, let alone the world. Their reflection is not like the
radiating curiosity of a child. It goes only in a particular direction. As
Emerson says of the “multitude of scholars,” “their talent is some exaggerated
faculty, some overgrown member, so that their strength is a disease.” Why do we
call what they do “philosophy”?
Here I am back with Harry again. He was confused by the gap between desire and
reality, and I am confused by the gap between language and reality, and also
desire and reality, the gap between the idea and tradition and promise of
philosophy and the way it actually exists in the modern university. Why aren't
graduate students and professors, many of whom desire to do philosophy for the
same reasons you do, able to achieve their desire in the one context that would
seem to be most conducive to it? I was as stunned by that context, and the gap I
had found between expectation and reality, as Harry was by the gap that suddenly
emerged between his desire and reality. Unlike Harry, however, I can struggle to
understand the gap, to articulate it in language and to live in the space opened
up by that understanding.
One thing living with the gap means is embracing the role of action in
philosophy, thereby distinguishing it from the academic discipline called by the
same name. As it is understood in the professional world, philosophy doesn’t
require any action, but that understanding appears to me as a fruit grown from
rotten and corrupted institutional soil. Philosophy is a way of life.
●After I left my graduate program at the University of Chicago, I got a job
teaching second grade at a German-speaking elementary school in Ravenswood, a
neighborhood on the north side of the city. Teaching second grade, while
thinking and writing about it, is a key part of the expression of my philosophy.
It is to me what journal papers are to a professional philosopher. They are
publications of my thinking. It appears in my CV, my life course.
And yet I wonder who, if anyone, reads these publications. Because, of course,
teaching second grade and preschool is not commonly read as an expression of
philosophical significance. This fact points to a problem of incongruence or
lack of recognition between myself and society, a problem that arises
necessarily in the attempt to live in the gap between the ideal and the real.
People don’t recognize me as a philosopher, though I consider myself one, and
people whom I don’t consider to be philosophers are publicly recognized as such.
Society does not see in me what I see in myself.
In fact, embracing the role of action in philosophy seems to be intensifying
this problem rather than solving it. In essence, I believe that the degrees and
titles formally handed out by universities are empty decorations, and that the
entire field of professional philosophy is inherently compromised. On the other
hand, I imagine that I, a titleless, PhD dropout, working in a preschool,
practice genuine philosophy. And from that point of view the world appears
turned on its head. The field of people, teaching courses, writing books,
working for actually-existing, multibillion-dollar institutions? A distortion. A
corruption. They are philosophers by letter, but I embody the spirit of the
tradition. I am the true philosopher.
Of course, my own thinking reminds me again of Harry. He thought the reality of
his playing with the train followed simply from his desire to play with it. He
was struggling to separate desire from things, to see the high-resolution
complexity of the world, to recognize that other people are as real as he is. Am
I, like Harry, selfishly imposing my desire on the world? Am I ignorantly
concluding that something is so, because I want it to be that way?
Such a possibility is an inherent danger in the path I have chosen. Arguments to
the effect that philosophy is a way of life and cannot be institutionalized and
professionalized are sound, I believe. Moreover, I fancy the idea of a
philosopher living simply, humbly, anonymously. Anonymity combined with a great
desire for recognition can easily produce delusion, but I am honored to face
this danger, because philosophy, as I understand it, is essentially dangerous.
Philosophy inherently involves questioning everything, and above all questioning
yourself. Of course questioning is dangerous. The philosophical wager is that it
is worth it.
Suppose I am right that philosophy cannot be professionalized or
institutionalized or credentialized, can be practiced as much by a preschool
teacher as by anybody else. Suppose you believe this. How do you keep believing
it? When all the social and economic and institutional evidence goes in the
other direction? When you are alone?
You need spiritual practices. Spiritual practices help you free yourself from
the troubles and desires that harass you. They are sequences of thought that
help you regulate your mind. Philosophy has traditionally understood these
structures of thought, and practices of making them, to be indispensable for
wise and contented living. These sequences are not intended merely to be objects
of abstract contemplation. They are practices: things you do, and do not once
but again and again.
The expert on such practices is Pierre Hadot. A leading scholar of ancient
philosophy in the second half of the 20th century, Hadot shows how spiritual
practices have been integral to the philosophical tradition throughout history,
developed and used by everyone from Plato and Epictitus and Marcus Aurelius to
Nietzsche. They can take the form of dialogue, meditation, reminders or
story-telling. He emphasizes that spiritual practices are not just theoretical
objects but engage the imagination and affectivity. They are to be used in
learning to live. That’s what makes them exercises or practices.
One classic variety of spiritual exercise involves achieving what Hadot calls
the “view from above.” Everyone is familiar with the effect of looking down on
human affairs from the height of a mountain or airplane. The promise of a
spiritual exercise is to create a state of mind, an attitude, from a natural
experience like this one. To see things “from above” means to see things in
perspective, from the largest plain available to you. The spiritual exercise
involves deliberately cultivating such an experience, harnessing its power so
that it can be returned to at will. Then it is built into a poem, a saying, or a
myth, which can be repeated as the situation demands. They are to be
ready-to-hand, put to use in daily life.
In my case, I need spiritual practices to tie down for myself what philosophy is
and to free myself from the desire for recognition from those I don’t recognize.
In one of my favorite practices, I meditate on the opening chapter of Moby-Dick,
where Ishmael explains his reasoning for going to sea as a “simple sailor”
rather than as a cook or an officer. Although they have more prestige for their
office, they are less free, he asserts, and he prizes his freedom to be a
revolving eye and to, say, climb the masthead when he pleases. “I abominate all
honorable respectable toils,” Ishmael says. “It is quite as much as I can do to
take care of myself.” I repeat these lines like scripture, holy writing that
reaffirms me in my choice to be untitled, a simple sailor on the seas of life.
In a broader sense, I consider the work I do at the preschool a spiritual
practice. My power of observation is constantly rewarded, as I learn not only
about my utterly individual children but also about myself and universal
humanity. It is a constant exercise in patience. Patience in execution and
patience in iteration. No one recognizes the pleasure and consolation of
repetition better than children! Working daily in a preschool classroom, I
deliberately and concretely live out my own conception of philosophy, instead of
getting carried along by the implicit disciplinary assumptions of professional
philosophy. Every day the environment brings home to me that life is not thought
or said but lived.
More basically, however, when the question is how to stay sane in a world that’s
gone insane, the answer, making exceptions for abnormal psychology, is that you
can’t do it alone. You need understanding, and you need other people. identities
are social, and die in isolation. This means that, if there is a sense of
philosophy I want to preserve and realize, I need to find other people to do it
with. I need to find my way to peers who can speak my language and share my
questions and values, help me formulate and progress toward goals, who can
recognize me and be recognized by me in turn. Why aren't graduate students and
professors, many of whom desire to do philosophy for the same reasons I do, able
to achieve their desire in the one context that would seem to be most conducive
to it? And if that context—the university—is not, in fact, the most conducive to
philosophy, which is?
That’s where I am now. I am searching for friends who I can think with while
transforming myself, and my sense of philosophy. For me, that means looking
inside and outside the academy, perhaps even preferring the misfits and
dropouts. It means finding those who are organically intellectual, asking not
only the sanctioned, professional questions but the natural and urgent ones
arising from their experience. Those who not only speak but act. Those who are
broadening their audience and experimenting with new forms like YouTube and
podcasts. It means preferring those who don’t have a title, an official name for
themselves, at least not yet. Those who are still searching for one.
In this spirit, I am reaching out to real, living like minds, whether at work,
or on Substack, where I write a newsletter and read others, or at home. Since
July I have lived in an intentional community in Los Angeles that attempts to
weave activism together with prayer. The founder of the house, who was the first
person I’ve ever met who described himself, candidly, as a mystic, had spent
years participating deeply in radical politics before realizing that the call
for political action must be balanced by and combined with contemplative
practice. In the last few months he has guided me into the world of monasticism:
meditation, fasting and daily mysticism. He has also introduced me to his
concepts of organizing for transformational social change. His methodology
combines old-school, bottom-up, daily-grind organizing with mass-action,
out-in-the-streets, front-page protest. While providing a vocabulary for
thinking about the structure of social movements, he has invited me to see the
value in, and ingenuity of, well-executed symbolic protest, like Occupy Wall
Street or Gandhi's salt march.
Here, again, I find some of myself in Harry. Someday Harry will come to see
others not as obstacles to his desire but companions in it. With or without his
acknowledgment, they already are. And if Harry comes to recognize Robert’s
desire for the train, for example, as like his own, then his own desire for the
train is validated as a good thing, as not purely arbitrary but grounded in
something real and shared.
LIke the Harry I am imagining, I believe the next step for me is opening up to
my need for other people in grounding, solidifying, and ultimately realizing my
desires. In order to realize my philosophy, I need to be open to my conception
of it changing as it grows more real in conversation with others. I need them in
order to live in the gap between philosophy as I experienced it and the
philosopher I want to be, the lover of wisdom I want to become.A few weeks ago I heard a scream and turned my head to see Robert stomping his
foot. He and Harry, both around four years old, were standing next to each
other. Robert was leaning forward, chest out, holding his arms straight down,
fists clenched. When I got there, I asked, “What happened?”
“He took my train!” Robert screamed.
I turned to Harry, who was holding a Thomas train in his hand, and asked him,
“Was Robert playing with that train?”
“Yes,” he said.
“Did you take it?”
“Yes,” he answered, brow furrowed. “I want it.”
We talked about it and moved on. The whole encounter lasted less than a minute
but it stuck with me. Harry didn’t deny taking the train or lie about the
circumstances. He didn’t apologize or give an excuse. And yet there wasn’t a
hint of meanness about him. He was perfectly serious when he uttered, “I want
it,” which to him was sufficient grounds for taking the train. I admire the
awesome simplicity of Harry’s behavior.
I also shudder to think about what lies ahead for Harry and the others in my
preschool class as they grow up. In infancy, reality and desire lie flush
against each other. There is no boundary between them, no fault line. In
preschool the first cracks emerge. A child wants a toy, or to have their mother,
or simply to say what’s on their mind, but they don’t get to have it. They see
the toy but don’t get to play with it. They want their mother, but she is not
there. They have an idea but don’t get to make it known.
The gap between desire and reality continues to grow as we age. Eventually, it’s
not that we want the train and don’t get it, but that we do and it doesn’t
satisfy us. It isn’t what we had hoped for. Not what we had been promised. We
hold the actual train in our hands and yet seem to long for something different,
something hidden and remote. We enter a school or church or career and are
disappointed. We enter society and find it is different than we had imagined.
The gap widens into a canyon, and the canyon becomes Kyle McCollom | The Necessary | Essay
Imagine that you make a salary of $100,000 a year. After taxes and various
living expenses, you manage to save $10,000 of that original figure. You tuck
that sum into a savings account that steadily accrues interest. You feel like
you are making financial progress. Suddenly, the socio-political situation in
the country where you live nosedives. Month after month, your original $10,000
dwindles in value as runaway inflation dashes your financial dreams. After a
year of turmoil, a little over half of your savings remains. Almost $5,000 in
value seemingly evaporates into thin air.
You feel powerless. Despite your hard work, you cannot get ahead. That’s the
experience of those living in countries with inflationary currencies like
Argentina, where the annual inflation rate broke 50% in July
[https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/argentina-inflation-seen-year-low-32-june-likely-reheat-2nd-half-2021-07-15/]
of this year. As a result, the Argentine peso is a game of currency hot potato.
To escape this devaluation, people seek refuge in a more stable home: the US
dollar.
Demand for the dollar in Argentina is so high that, in the most recently
available estimate, one-fifteenth of all physical U.S. dollars were in
Argentina. According to the Federal Reserve
[https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/coin_data.htm], there is a little
over two trillion U.S. dollars in circulation worldwide, meaning that Argentines
may hold over $136 billion—a mind-boggling amount of cash to be concentrated in
a single foreign country.
One of the ways to acquire physical dollars in Argentina mirrors the
pre-legalization process for acquiring weed in the US: you text your “weed guy.”
He shows up and sells you an illicit drug, which you store somewhere in your
home. In Argentina, you text your “dollar guy.”
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/why-argentinas-hot-delivery-item-is-cold-us-cash/2020/11/16/2aae26c2-2824-11eb-9c21-3cc501d0981f_story.html]
The dollar guy shows up, sells you illicit USD cash for pesos, and you store
that cash somewhere secret in your home, which is often referred to as “under
the mattress.” This analog approach to stable savings comes with a good amount
of risk: your home becomes a target for theft, you could lose your life savings
in a fire, and you, by attempting to protect your savings and family’s future,
are performing an illegal activity.
To address this risk, those who face significant devaluation of their local
currency are switching from physical USD to a new, digital alternative:
cryptocurrency. Cryptocurrencies are new internet networks that power online
finance. Many cryptocurrencies are run by a decentralized group of computers
around the world, much like the email network. The most popular of which is
Bitcoin, a digital alternative to gold that is highly volatile and not backed by
anything other than its code and cryptography.
But a new form of cryptocurrency—USD stablecoins—has grown to overtake Bitcoin
volume and usage. Each USD stablecoin token is equal to one US dollar and
maintains a stable value as a result. Regulated financial institutions like
Circle—a US-based company that operates a stablecoin called USDC—back each token
with a US dollar held in a US bank account and allow you to redeem each token
for a regular US dollar.
Like Bitcoin, USD stablecoins are globally available, can move freely between
accounts, and can be traded for any other cryptocurrency. These tokens’
accessibility and stability make them great vehicles for escaping inflation, and
using cryptocurrency—or “crypto” for short—as a tool to solve pervasive problems
like inflation is becoming more and more common. Stablecoins in Argentina are
just one example of the equitable financial access that crypto can unlock for
the rest of the world.
Flush with Flaws
And yet, that’s not the impression you’d get of crypto when reading the
headlines. Those headlines are not wrong; crypto is flush with flaws.
Cryptocurrency exchanges have been hacked to the tune of nineteen
[https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/currencies/cryptocurrency-hacks-fraud-cases-record-bitcoin-ethereum-wallets-breaches-defi-2021-8]
billion USD so far, losing users’ funds due to the irreversible nature of
cryptocurrency transactions. Scam projects like Bitconnect
[https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdca/pr/director-and-promoter-bitconnect-pleads-guilty-global-2-billion-cryptocurrency-scheme]
and Onecoin [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OneCoin] defrauded investors of a
combined six billion USD using multilevel marketing schemes packaged as
cryptocurrencies. The technology used to validate transactions for many
cryptocurrencies—”proof of work”—uses more electricity than some countries
[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2021/09/03/climate/bitcoin-carbon-footprint-electricity.html]
. Cryptocurrency has been used as the payment mechanism in ransomware attacks,
like the Colonial Pipeline hack
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Pipeline_ransomware_attack], which
caused a rush on gasoline in the American South in spring of 2021.
All that said, we are still in the early days. The first cryptocurrency,
Bitcoin, was created just twelve years ago and wasn’t widely known until 2017.
As with crypto, most nascent technologies came with their fair share of early
concerns.
The telephone was at first written off due to its low sound quality and
inability to work over long distances. An internal memo at Western Union
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2014/07/31/why-we-should-believe-the-dreamers-and-not-the-experts/]
stated, “This ‘telephone’ has too many shortcomings to be seriously considered
as a means of communication. The device is inherently of no value to us.” But
they and other communication companies underestimated the rate of technological
improvement that would follow: better microphones, better speakers, and better
wiring infrastructure to carry the sound data.
Similarly, the first computers were seen as too expensive, too large, and not
widely applicable—a hobbyist toy for the wealthy. Even Kevin Olson, the founder
of computer manufacturer Digital Equipment Corporation, wrote off the concept
of
a personal computer
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2014/07/31/why-we-should-believe-the-dreamers-and-not-the-experts/]
, saying, “There is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” But
the technology soon improved, costs dropped, and what was built on top of
computers was otherwise unimaginable. Word processing, digital spreadsheets, and
games opened up massive new industries and productivity gains.
Almost thirty years after the invention of the personal computer came the
internet. At first, the internet was for niche forums and had no clear purpose.
The dot-com bubble was seen as a cash grab
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble#The_bubble] where investors
speculatively bought internet-related stocks at any valuation. Today, the
internet has transformed media, music, entertainment, and commerce. Even
Wikipedia was considered untrustworthy not that long ago by many teachers who
advised against it as a source. Now, according to studies by Nature
[http://blogs.nature.com/nascent/2005/12/comparing_wikipedia_and_britan_1.html]
and the Wikimedia Foundation
[https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/29/EPIC_Oxford_report.pdf],
Wikipedia is of a similar quality to its predecessor, Britannica. Through an
army of connected contributors, Wikipedia has managed to organize the world’s
knowledge into a reputable resource.
Even though these new technologies seemed unfeasible, irrational, and toylike in
their infancy, we as a society explored their possibilities. Despite the new
problems that came with these breakthroughs, we searched for more compelling use
cases that could significantly improve the human condition. Today the same hunt
is still on, but for what crypto makes possible.
Global Financial Access
Beyond access to a stable store of value like USD stablecoins in Argentina,
developers are bringing standard financial services—like savings accounts and
assorted investment apps—to the crypto ecosystem, making these products more
accessible to people around the world who wouldn’t otherwise have access to
them.
For example, PoolTogether [https://pooltogether.com/] is a crypto app that
provides a lottery-based savings account. Each stablecoin saved on PoolTogether
acts as an entry ticket into a lottery for the interest earned that week across
all depositors. This project reimagines the predatory nature of gambling service
providers, offering an alternative way to save money with a globally accessible
financial product.
Another crypto app called Compound [https://compound.finance/] allows anyone to
take out a loan for about three percent APR at time of writing. By cutting out
middlemen, Compound allows you to earn about three percent APY (at time of
writing) on money deposited into it. This significantly beats traditional
banking interest rates like the Marcus
[https://www.marcus.com/us/en/savings/high-yield-savings?prd=os&chl=ps&schl=psg&cid=1897658841&agp=71134098180&cre=481148736143&kid=goldman%20sachs%20savings%20account&mtype=e&adpos=&gclid=CjwKCAjwyvaJBhBpEiwA8d38vHvJGS55Pnq7Seg2nw6CtAv54XdqbnU3uAurdYxLp9ZM_ElWZ6SsOBoCmkYQAvD_BwE&gclsrc=aw.ds]
product by Goldman Sachs with a current APY of half a percent.
Or take Uniswap [https://uniswap.org/], which provides a decentralized exchange
app where anyone anywhere can invest in any token. This trading happens 24/7,
and NASDAQ, Robinhood, or any other financial institution cannot shut you out or
control what you trade.
All these services are decentralized and unstoppable apps that run on crypto
networks. Because there is no central organization offering these services,
there’s no legal entity to regulate. This ability for a developer to write code,
upload that code to a crypto network, and quickly create a globally accessible
financial product without an army of lawyers, expensive licensing fees, and all
the requisite back office operations means that financial access can grow faster
and these lower costs can be passed on to users as lower fees.
That said, the above decentralized tools and their like are difficult to use and
confusing to understand. Some cryptocurrency networks where financial tools like
the ones described above are often overwhelmed due to high demand for these
services and limited transaction capacity, causing the cost of a transaction
(ten to one hundred USD) to price out many around the world who are excluded
from the financial system. However, just as corporations and governments built
the infrastructure to scale the telephone and the internet, the online
communities around crypto are self-organizing to provide the education and build
the improvements necessary to scale networks and meet the demand of the world
while keeping transaction fees and energy usage low.
New Public Infrastructure
While still searching for purpose, crypto is becoming what the internet is
today: public infrastructure. The internet created instant and global access to
knowledge and communication. Crypto, too, will create instant and global access
to financial services. The internet powered movements like the Arab Spring that
were historically difficult to organize due to dictatorial control of
communication. Now, crypto is enabling people to circumnavigate bad actors like
corrupt governments and expensive middlemen to plug into the basic financial
services that we take for granted in the US. Compound and Uniswap are also
commoditizing previously gated financial services, letting anyone take out a
loan or make an investment without having to go through special brokers.
Thanks to the internet, digital communication is commoditized in the form of
email; no corporation has privileged access to the email network. Because most
of traditional finance is online, Wall Street’s power is in the digital world
more than the physical. And, because crypto is digitally native, we can now
truly occupy Wall Street and decentralize what they control: money.
This is why crypto matters.
●All views expressed above are solely my opinion, do not reflect the opinions of
my employer, and should not be taken as investment advice. Imagine that you make a salary of $100,000 a year. After taxes and various
living expenses, you manage to save $10,000 of that original figure. You tuck
that sum into a savings account that steadily accrues interest. You feel like
you are making financial progress. Suddenly, the socio-political situation in
the country where you live nosedives. Month after month, your original $10,000
dwindles in value as runaway inflation dashes your financial dreams. After a
year of turmoil, a little over half of your savings remains. Almost $5,000 in
value seemingly evaporates into thin air.
You feel powerless. Despite your hard work, you cannot get ahead. That’s the
experience of those living in countries with inflationary currencies like
Argentina, where the annual inflation rate broke 50% in July
[https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/argentina-inflation-seen-year-low-32-june-likely-reheat-2nd-half-2021-07-15/]
of this year. As a result, the Argentine peso is a game of currency hot potato.
To escape this devaluation, people seek refuge in a more stable home: the US
dollar.
Demand for the dollar in Argentina is so high that, in the most recently
available estimate, one-fifteenth of all physical U.S. dollars were in
Argentina. According to the Federal Reserve
[https://www.federalreserve.gov/paymentsystems/coin_data.htm], there is a little
over two trillion U.S. dollars in circulation worldwide, meaning that Argentines
may hold over $136 billion—a mind-boggling amount of cash to be concentrated in
a single foreign country.
One of the ways to acquire physical dollars in Argentina mirrors the
pre-legalization process for acquiring weed in the US: you text your “weed guy.”
He shows up and sells you an illicit drug, which you store somewhere in your
home. In Argentina, you text your “dollar guy.”
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/why-argentinas-hot-delivery-item-is-cold-us-cash/2020/11/16/2aae26c2-2824-11eb-9c21-3cc501d0981f_story.html]
The dollar guy shows up, sells yo