I am in Idaho. Devin is in class. Nick has the swine flu. I could be doing something besides writing in the basement of the frat house, but the Obamania on Facebook has got me thinking about intentions / semantics, largely, & one of my classmates wrote a poem that had me considering the word “vagina” in ways I haven’t since I first read Cunt when I was sixteen or seventeen.
My initial reaction upon reading that Obama the Nobel Peace Prize was confusion& disgust. My initial reaction to the reactions was a mix of fury & surprise. It is foolish not to think/know that the Nobel Peace Prize is largely symbolic, political– just like Obama’s hope, it works to assign meaning to a relative, abstract concept. We do not have peace, nor will we ever, but peace is something that can be worked towards. Obama may have intentions towards peace, but I do not think he intends peace. Look at escalations in Afghanistan, in Pakistan…
of course I know these things are all complicated, & Obama is working in a complicated two-party system in which one of the parties acts like a toddler most of the time. Not saying all Repubs are toddlers– far from it. The reasons the GOP ideology makes sense to some people makes sense to me. It’s all about motivations& intention– what we believe about others. I don’t see myself ever aligning with a party that ignores the systematic oppressions it so clearly perpetuates, but I don’t know who I’ll be at fifty. Maybe I’ll be in love with my money& suddenly blame poor people for not taking the opportunities which they never had. Possible.
What disgusted me about people’s reactions are that so many of them– so many democrats, largely, were unquestioning. Dems attacking others for “attacking” Obama, for, essentially, questioning whether he “deserves” the prize. Blind faith is blind faith, whether in Obama or Bush. Tastes too much like people calling liberals traitors for questioning the last administration.
I have complicated feelings about Obama. I did not care for his campaign, but I voted for him. I have a feeling I would like him as an individual. His campaign bothered me because it spoke the language of Bush, of buzzwords, of the things cognitive psychology might suggest we respond to as people, but as a poet I’m bothered by all of this– it lacks imagination& is reductive. I understand the concept of “framing” issues. Words do have frames, connotations. As a writer, this concept is a tool that is close to me. Still, I want heft, & I want others to demand meat& logic& passion in support of “hope” & “change” as well. I didn’t think Obama offered that. He does, sometimes, now.
Obama is what an article I read in the New Yorker the other day referred to as a “serene” personality. He listens. He makes decisions based out of consensus, compromise, out of trying to find the “best” option, which is unfortunately sometimes simply what makes the greatest number of politicians happy without the threat of filibuster (or even in the shadow of that). This is to his benefit & to his detriment. See the concept of framing. If he were to frame “hope” & “change” in a concrete way with concrete plans he could stand behind, he might look a little bit less like, say, Jimmy Carter.
Okay, perhaps I should better organize my thoughts. I understand why one might be compelled to give Obama the Nobel Peace Prize. It is not a decision I would make, & I don’t think it’s deserved, or even premature. Honestly, I don’t think awarding this to Obama is any different than awarding it to many of the other past winners. A prize is a construct. Subjective, political. Say what you will about good intentions. I’m not sure if it’s going to be good for him, for the anti-GOP of all stripes, for the word “peace…”
Lately, I’ve been finding it desirable to define, or at least reflect on where I stand politically. It’s not just this morning’s debacle that has me here, but also that I’ve been learning a bit about the recent financial crisis. From the New Yorker. (Yes, I know.) There are few things I know for sure, because I believe so many situations are complicated. Delicate. I cannot say whether I believe people are inherently “good” because “good” is a construct. I believe that individuals react to their individual situations in the moment. Good intentions are good, but they are nothing without awareness, action, and change.
Anyway, politics. It’s become increasingly clear to me over the past few months that while I can strive towards a personal pacifism, it can only be a striving because peace is an absolute, & therefore can never be achieved in its pure form. The only way in which one cannot do violence to another is to be passive, & to me, that’s not living. That’s doing a violence to yr life, so not very peaceful then, is it? So maybe all we can have is peaceful intentions& strive towards peaceful action?
In the face of this, I’ve recently decided that I cannot, with good conscience, be for outlawing guns entirely because it does not fit with my views on abortion, actually…maybe…let me work this out. If we outlaw abortion, people are going to get them anyway, & women will be less safe. Totally, totally against this. A woman should have the right to elect what is done to her body.
If we outlaw guns, people will be able to obtain them, anyway. I do not personally like hunting, but understand how it might be desirable from an ecological standpoint. I think people carrying, in, say, the suburbs for self-protection is absolutely ridiculous. Maybe if you work with high-risk populations who already illegally obtain firearms& regularly use them against one another…
here, I am making a judgement about who should be able to choose, who should not. In my idea of a perfect world, we would not be so afraid in the suburbs. Until then, people should have the right to feel protected…
we cannot know whether stricter gun control laws would lessen domestic violence, school shootings, etc….
guns are different than abortion, I can see that. I just feel like the government should regulate guns more heavily…
safe, yet available. I still believe almost blindly that a certain amount of information can provide freedom. This is likely foolish.
Individuals given the resource to question why they’re feeling what they’re feeling, to admit what they’re feeling in the first place. Right now this is a privilege. Who doesn’t love a utopian vision?
My political standpoint: always Kristeva, revolutionary questioning of everything. Never getting anywhere, never arriving at a dogmatic solid ground. Perhaps looking at the situation as it is, which I’m not as good at.
Some things: clear, though. Doctors should determine whether an individual receives a medical procedure or not, not the government, especially not profit-drive corporations…
***
Beauty might have been the abstraction of the week last week, but I have a feeling my next word is peace. I’m remembering a conversation I had with Claudia last year, this text she read once called Pacifism is Pathetic or something more clever than that.
It all depends on how one defines her/his/hir concept of peace. What does it mean to do no harm? To strive to do no harm? Isn’t this largely up to individual interpretation? Should it not be?
***
Okay, a subject I know better than politics, opinions, & peace: vaginas. More specifically the word. I love vaginas. I love cunts even more– the whole package. As most cuntlovers know, the term “vagina” refers strictly to the vaginal canal, the happy black hole. So, for example, Georgia O’Keefe’s flowers represent not vaginas, but vulvae, or cunts, or twats, or… you get the picture.
As poets, I think it is important to be aware of the effect of the word “vagina,” in its three-syllable, ugly, latinate glory. Sheath for a sword. Using this word in a poem is not only a mouthful, but is often incorrect & carries a long history of gendered connotations.
I wonder if I can somehow sneak this discussion into Laure-Anne’s class… I wish I had vocabulary this week….
***
In the past hour or so, someone on my Facebook feed has taken the whole stones / glass houses approach to Nobel Peace Prize analysis. Yes, we may be comfortable, safe, & privileged, but that does not mean that we’re not trying to live in a more peaceful ways in the spheres we can influence. Obama has a lot more power to influence peace on a global levels than I do. Yes, I agree that maybe we all ought to take this as a call to action, for us to work on ourselves first. It does not mean that we should not be critical of this decision, or at least question it.
***
My head is itchy, Facebook keeps refusing to let me in. Feels weird, but good to be here. Devin is super fluffy. Want to bake sweet potatoes tonight& avoid the party that I made a huge ass of myself at 2? 3? years ago…
Perhaps just make dinner& cuddle to the chaos…