The Guermantes and politics: social conduct and political conduct. "Oriane's latest".
Proust looks at arbitrariness in the behavior of M. and Mme de Guermantes. Mme de Guermantes's arbitrary social behavior I'll look at below. I think the most important conclusion from the passage on Guermantes's and others' political behavior is that political savvy (which ought not be confused with great leadership) derives in large part from the ability to control the perception of arbitrary behavior---to make the unmotivated seem both natural and essential. Many...most?...political positions are frankly pretty arbitrary: They arise from feelings, grow from religious roots, or are spread by persuasive politicians who arrive at their own conclusions, perhaps with as little reason we all often do, perhaps at the counsel of scientists (who are better informed than almost all of us, but who are still speculating, often). My criticism is more of social attitudes and soft sciences (like economics...) that end up in law.
In the next post I'll look at arbitrary beliefs and their political manipulation in two cases.
//
I've never before noticed how much more effective and impressive it is to appear principled than it is to state and codify principles that can then be sniped. How often do politicians hawk their "strong family values"---whatever that means. Who'd admit they don't much care for values? As soon as a politician is challenged to lay out his beliefs, he merely gives a litany of positions on sensitive issues. Not one begins with first principles and follows them to their logical ends. It's all feeling. It's all how they were raised.
Sorry this is such a political gripe this time.
//
On a slightly more meta note: I'm tiring of Oriane. I think she's just an attention seeker, fundamentally. (Though in the next paragraph I'll entertain another possibility.) She is as contrary as she can get away with---to pique the interest of those (probably) more genuine and (certainly) less intelligent folk who orbit her. I say they're (probably) more genuine just because their level of consciousness is so low they really do believe in the necessity of what they do. But I'm sick of Oriane, sick of people like her I encounter in life, and sick of Proust's exhausting analysis of her and her shallow world. At least for now.
But the more I think about her the more I find myself fascinated by her complexity, just as Proust was. With the last episode in this section---in which she insists on sitting in a cheap seat near the orchestra from the beginning of the show---my judgment of her shifts, or is at least doubtful: Is she sitting with the proles to show how little she regards rank? Is she sitting there just to be scandalous and position herself at the center of gossip? Or is she more like me: oblivious and does as she pleases? Or perhaps not oblivious: Does she simply recognize the arbitrariness of convention and ignore what doesn't please her? There's an important difference between being scandalous because you want to be scandalous and happening to be scandalous because you're not a leaf in a river.
//
Proust's comment that it is the combination of a psychological quirk and a lack of sensitivity that makes us always feel the need to say something smarts a bit. I smart as a blogger. And I'm reminded of something a very smart asshole once said in a different but related vein: That "[y]ou should spare yourself the embarrassing discovery of [the exact value of unsolicited opinions] to your listener." But...I'm able to convince myself that blogging is not exactly sharing unsolicited opinions. I hold my tongue all the time; my blog is where I can disburden myself appropriately. Analogies to other forms are inaccurate (since a blog's a blog, and is nothing else), but writing in a blog more resembles writing in a diary, but for an exhibitionist (or for (in this case) an intellectually lonely person), than it resembles a didact cornering his victims.
And besides, Dear Reader (if you exist), you are free surf over to FoxNews or Facebook at any time.
//
Another meta note: Proust is such a ruthless observer. Even though he sees with a great deal of compassion, I'm a bit terrified there may be people in my life who can see as totally as he might have through my complications, bullshit, dissimulations to whatever is most fundamental about my motivation. I'm not sure whatever's in there is flattering. Reading Proust helps me try to be honest with myself.
Proust looks at arbitrariness in the behavior of M. and Mme de Guermantes. Mme de Guermantes's arbitrary social behavior I'll look at below. I think the most important conclusion from the passage on Guermantes's and others' political behavior is that political savvy (which ought not be confused with great leadership) derives in large part from the ability to control the perception of arbitrary behavior---to make the unmotivated seem both natural and essential. Many...most?...political positions are frankly pretty arbitrary: They arise from feelings, grow from religious roots, or are spread by persuasive politicians who arrive at their own conclusions, perhaps with as little reason we all often do, perhaps at the counsel of scientists (who are better informed than almost all of us, but who are still speculating, often). My criticism is more of social attitudes and soft sciences (like economics...) that end up in law.
In the next post I'll look at arbitrary beliefs and their political manipulation in two cases.
//
I've never before noticed how much more effective and impressive it is to appear principled than it is to state and codify principles that can then be sniped. How often do politicians hawk their "strong family values"---whatever that means. Who'd admit they don't much care for values? As soon as a politician is challenged to lay out his beliefs, he merely gives a litany of positions on sensitive issues. Not one begins with first principles and follows them to their logical ends. It's all feeling. It's all how they were raised.
Sorry this is such a political gripe this time.
//
On a slightly more meta note: I'm tiring of Oriane. I think she's just an attention seeker, fundamentally. (Though in the next paragraph I'll entertain another possibility.) She is as contrary as she can get away with---to pique the interest of those (probably) more genuine and (certainly) less intelligent folk who orbit her. I say they're (probably) more genuine just because their level of consciousness is so low they really do believe in the necessity of what they do. But I'm sick of Oriane, sick of people like her I encounter in life, and sick of Proust's exhausting analysis of her and her shallow world. At least for now.
But the more I think about her the more I find myself fascinated by her complexity, just as Proust was. With the last episode in this section---in which she insists on sitting in a cheap seat near the orchestra from the beginning of the show---my judgment of her shifts, or is at least doubtful: Is she sitting with the proles to show how little she regards rank? Is she sitting there just to be scandalous and position herself at the center of gossip? Or is she more like me: oblivious and does as she pleases? Or perhaps not oblivious: Does she simply recognize the arbitrariness of convention and ignore what doesn't please her? There's an important difference between being scandalous because you want to be scandalous and happening to be scandalous because you're not a leaf in a river.
//
Proust's comment that it is the combination of a psychological quirk and a lack of sensitivity that makes us always feel the need to say something smarts a bit. I smart as a blogger. And I'm reminded of something a very smart asshole once said in a different but related vein: That "[y]ou should spare yourself the embarrassing discovery of [the exact value of unsolicited opinions] to your listener." But...I'm able to convince myself that blogging is not exactly sharing unsolicited opinions. I hold my tongue all the time; my blog is where I can disburden myself appropriately. Analogies to other forms are inaccurate (since a blog's a blog, and is nothing else), but writing in a blog more resembles writing in a diary, but for an exhibitionist (or for (in this case) an intellectually lonely person), than it resembles a didact cornering his victims.
And besides, Dear Reader (if you exist), you are free surf over to FoxNews or Facebook at any time.
//
Another meta note: Proust is such a ruthless observer. Even though he sees with a great deal of compassion, I'm a bit terrified there may be people in my life who can see as totally as he might have through my complications, bullshit, dissimulations to whatever is most fundamental about my motivation. I'm not sure whatever's in there is flattering. Reading Proust helps me try to be honest with myself.
No comments:
Post a Comment