Thoughts and Experiences

Posted on by

I grew up just after the Second World War.  At that time, soldiers were coming back from overseas battles with little to say.  Later, in my own military career, I saw things in Viet Nam that I have never discussed.  Perhaps with fellow warriors, but otherwise no.  As time moved on, I came to know Germans who, only after many years of confidences, began to open up to what they had experienced as children during their war.  All together, I have learned that such reticence is a typical reaction of people whose lives were shaken to their cores.

Today, we talk about PTSD.  During WW I, it was called shell shock; the next wars called it battle fatigue.  It’s all the same stuff.  The human psyche simply shuts down until the torment is either released or just buried.  “Seemingly buried” perhaps might be a better word for it.  Many times lives continue as though nothing had happened.  Astonishingly, most of the time, this apparent calm is all that is seen, even by the person dealing with it.  But, it’s always there.  It’s always working on the soul in some fashion or another.  It’s always slipping out into the open leaving small clues of its existence.  We see it in irritability, suspicion, homelessness, violent nightmares, alcoholism, whatever.  It’s there.

Readers of my book, Old Ghosts, and now, my new book,  Days of Atonement,  can see this theme of spiritual torment being replayed.  In both cases, these characters found relief only by being forced to talk with friends and lovers who demanded these demons be exorcised.  In both cases, Joe Brown and Lech Karnski were career soldiers who survived many battles while seeing friends and enemies die.  Life was sweet, but Death was so sudden.  There was so little time to say good-bye.  But, they carried on stocially until they could go no further.  They had to talk, and then they had to act.  Joe became a PTSD counselor, and Lech became a rabbi.  Only then could they go continue their lives with a sense of positive purpose.

Of course, war is dramatic.  It’s the stuff of legend.  But, torment can come in many ways.  Hurricane Katrina destroyed homes and lives.  The Ebola outbreak in Africa tore children, fathers and mothers from each other.  A person suddenly paralyzed never to walk again.  These are all sudden and tormenting occasions for bitterness, despair, and bewilderment. The results can be as deadly as if they were suffered in the midst of battle for indeed that is what these occasions are: a battle for life.

Perhaps all of these stories, mine and those of unknown others, are testaments to the strength of the human spirit. Ghosts haunt people for years as they carry on with their daily lives.  But, perhaps a greater testament is how these souls are finally able to address their fears and then rise to a higher plane of spiritual existence.  Such were the cases of Joe and Lech.  Such has been the case of every veteran who served in combat.  Such has been the case of anyone who has suffered an earth shattering disaster.  These millions of people…going on, carrying on, caring for others, and giving to those in need even as their own souls cry out for relief.  If my stories have any relevance, it is in homage to all of these people who are quiet heroes doing simple deeds of good to their fellows.

War and Pain

Posted on by

War and destruction brings pain.  It obviously hurts the invaded.  But equally, it hurts the invader as he or she destroys the lives of others.  My new novel, Days of Atonement, follows this theme.  Lech Karnski, a young Jewish boy was a gifted flutest who wanted nothing more than to follow his father into the Warsaw Symphony Orchestra and bring beauty to audiences.  But, then, World War II broke out, and instead of playing music, he found himself living in the city’s sewers waging war against German invaders.  As he killed soldiers, he himself became more like an animal focused on surviving.  Pity, concerns of right and wrong, conscience were all emotions he could not afford to carry as he went on to survive the horrors of Auschwitz.  They were simply excess baggage. Ultimately, starved and wounded, survival took him to Israel where he continued his work of leading his soldiers into battle.  Here, he was both defender and attacker.  And as he did so, his callused life of survival led to ever more desperate acts of violence.  Once, seeing an Arab soldier stand up to surrender, Lech simply shot him while thinking, It’s easier this way.  

Without going into further details, Lech survives wars and many battles until one day, he sees Arab boys staring at him with utter hatred.  This brings him up short.  Is this how I looked at German soldiers when I was in Warsaw?  Am I to these boys as those soldiers were to me?  Are they a mirror of myself?  Will they, in turn, become me as they fight through battles? Am I now a German soldier?

Soldiers coming home from battle are battered and often broken in spirit.  They may seem tough on the outside, but inside are raging memories that will be carried for life.  But, as hidden as they are from sight, they still come out.  Some erupt through drink, others lead to homelessness, and still others are buried into walls of stoic silence until suicide intervenes.  Or, like Lech, they are simply submerged in battle under layers of even more horrors.  The modern term for this is PTSD, but it’s still pain, excruciating pain, that simply never goes away.

A few veterans successfully confront this pain and deal with it.  The vast majority of them do so only with outside help.  It’s almost impossible to do so alone.  But, they do, however paradoxically, the hardest part for each of them is to admit they are suffering.  Soldiers don’t cry.  They’re supposed to suck it up.  And they do, until the burden becomes too much to bear.  At that point, they are reduced to tears and agony of terrible depths.  At that point, they ask for help, and with luck, it’s available.  With luck, someone comes who has known defeat and suffering and who can offer solace with a compass direction out.

As they travel through this thicket of confusion, their pain does not go away.  The memories cannot be erased.  But, life’s resiliency assumes command and gives direction.  Forgiveness of self and atonement to others proceeds.  This is not easy, but it can be done.  Watch a veteran as he or she progresses along this tortuous path.  They won’t say anything, and they don’t want to be asked.  Their pain is too private.  It can only be shared with another veteran who was in that same Hell.  But, they do come back to a sense of true redemption and self.  Such is the joy of living.

Betrayal

Posted on by

Betrayal is a human experience.  It is perhaps the most mysterious of experiences.  Why would Benedict Arnold, an early hero of the American Revolution, attempt to frustrate George Washington is a subject of never-ending conjecture.  The same is true of Judas Iscariot.  Why did he sell his savior for thirty pieces of silver?

Many will say simply this betrayal was needed to set the stage for Jesus’ martyrdom.  But, it is not enough to let things rest there for both in Jewish and Christian theology, free will is a God-given attribute of mankind.  Man can and must decide, and furthermore, be held responsible for those decisions.  This is seen in our judicial principles where trials assume rationality of actions.  Only in rare and obvious cases of insanity can it be used successfully as a defense. Thus, to say that Judas Iscariot’s action was ordained for a higher purpose is to deny free will.  No free will would make Judas a puppet without control or responsibility for his actions.  In a larger sense, it denies Jesus the moral turpitude he needs to forgive the sins of the world.  If all is pre-ordained, what is there to forgive?  So, for sin to be forgiven, both the sinner and the aggrieved must have free will.

In attempting to suggest an answer for Judas’s betrayal of Jesus, I have created a work of fiction.  Little is actually known of the circumstances surrounding this infamous act, and therefore, imagination must be used to fill in the holes of a suggested thesis.  Consequently, historians and theologians are asked to view this effort as an attempt to answer larger questions of free will and tragedy rather than provide a literal rendition of history.  In this regard, this story must be seen as a drama among living people dealing with the problems confronting them.

Some readers will see things in this story that do not agree with what they have been taught.  But, think about it.  What existed then were only twelve men and a number of women who were following a man whom they knew was special.  Did they think about the exact divinity of Jesus?  Did they worry whether Mary was a virgin?  The meaning of the crucifiction was unknown to them because it hadn’t occurred.  Rather, they were simply people wrapped up in events that were happening around them without a strong sense of their significance.  Consequently, they acted on in reaction to the immediate “here and now” that was presented to them.  And truly, isn’t this how most of us respond to the events of our own day?

Consequently, only after three hundred years of discussion amongst Gnostics, Coptics and most recently, the The Judas Gospel did the Nicene Creed come into being.  This creed may have been implicit in the times of Jesus; that could very well be.  However, it wasn’t recognized at the time of eleven ordinary men and one extraordinary betrayer.  Rather, they saw only the actions of one leader and how they affected each of them.  This story is a rendition of their times and events.

 

 

What’s a Republican

Posted on by

A year has passed since the publication of my latest novel, Section 5, and the reaction of readers has been most interesting.  Generally, they have not liked the book, and in particular, they have hated the central character, Rodney Macefield.  One friend, who is an admitted conservative, thought Rodney was almost a cartoonlike person.  So, there you have it.  Section 5 will never be seen as a popular work of literature such as Gone With the Wind.

But, I had not intended to draw a portrait of a sensitive soul or to create a heroic, happy end story.  Rather, Section 5, is intended to show what happens when a singular political ideology becomes dominant in governmental halls of power.  This story presses to its logical end and the results are explosively obvious.  If anyone doubts that my scenario could become possible, I suggest a cursory review of history.  Germany’s Hitler, Russia’s Stalin, Japan’s Hirohito, and today’s Hamas make for a vivid list of horrors.  Such can happen here in America if restraint is not applied.  I chose the Republican side of this example of what could happen, but truly, a similar story could be written about liberal extremism.

Thinking about Republicanism since the publication of Section 5, has led me to wonder about the motivations of its ideology.  Why do they act as they do?  Why are they so adamant about confronting their antagonists: the Democratic Party? For the rank and file Republicans, it can’t just be a contrary drive for power, because without a vision, power alone is meaningless.  Furthermore, for the average Republicans, access to real power such as described in Section 5 is simply not available to them.  So, what are Republicans all about?  Why do they vote for the candidates that they do?  This blog suggests three ideas.

The first of these ideas is a belief that life is a serious business.  Getting ahead towards survival is paramount.  Consequently, there is little room for charity.  Ann Rynd, a leading inspiration of Tea Partiers, expounded this central idea in her novels, Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead.  Her childhood struggles for survival during the turmoils of the Russian Revolution would certainly have taught her that self-survival alone is paramount.  Consequently, when interviewed about the subject of charity to others, she stated: “ My views on charity are very simple.  I do not consider it a major virtue and, above all, I do not consider it a moral duty.”[1]

Seen against this background, Democratic ideas of social security and Medicare all smack of charity which is not, to Republicans, a moral duty of government.  They look back on American frontier history as our example of rugged individualism where the only reliable resource for survival was a steely reliance on one’s self.  No one else was available despite the portrayals of warm-hearted help in western movies.  Therefore, how little room for concern for others can exist among these people?  Republicans think, “Very little.”

The second impulse of Republicans is an absolute belief in the “pursuit of happiness.”  This phrase leads the opening sentence of our Declaration of Independence.  Before then, it was used by John Locke who believed that the central role of government was the protection of private property.[2]  Ironically, in his time, those espousing this idea were considered to be “liberals.”  That is, individual liberty to pursue one’s fortunes without reference to feudal heredity was a new liberal movement.[3]  Government’s role was therefore to be focused on this ideal.

Thus, when Democrats advocate worker protection, ecological constraints and higher taxes, Republicans view them as constraints on their natural right to pursue happiness.  Perhaps it’s not too much to say that even if a governmental policy could be proven as beneficial, these “liberals” would object saying that it is, in principle, a violation of their right pursue happiness, and so, they would oppose it.  We see this today.  ExxonMobil fought the science of global warming for years as an unfounded idea.  The reasons were obvious: actions that could be taken to reduce this threat was seen as an infringement of their right to do business.  It was only when the possibility arose that scientific forecasts were right and that ExxonMobil might be held liable for saying otherwise, did they begin to modify their stance. [4]  In essence, ExxonMobil’s antagonism about global warming and governmental interference hadn’t changed, only their legal defenses.

The final aspect of Republican ideology is a Calvinist theory that “ is a concept in theology, sociology, economics and history which emphasizes hard work, frugality and diligence as a constant display of a person’s salvation in the Christian faith [lies] in contrast to the focus upon religious attendance, confession, and ceremonial sacrament in the Catholic tradition.”[5]  First promoted by the German sociologist, Max Weber, in 1904, this idea now permeates Republican beliefs such that those who aren’t wealthy are inherently a lesser people.  They have not been destined by God to greatness but rather to evil.  Numerous examples follow that illustrate this attitude.  Charles Murray wrote in his book, The Bell Curve, that minorities are intellectually and morally inferior.  Presidential Candidate, Mitt Romney’s “47 percent” comment about the American populace being lazy clearly exposed this attitude of inferiority.  Jared Bernstein’s blog comment accurately reflected the Republican idea that “all you have to do to get a job is want a job.”[6]  By implication, those without a job are, by definition, people of lesser moral character.  Therefore, going back to their attitudes about charity, one doesn’t do that for undeserving people.  One doesn’t create public policy for undeserving people.

Of course, these few paragraphs are a broad swipe and in detail don’t pertain to everyone.  But, I believe there is enough truth in them to warrant discussion.  Section 5 was my attempt to generate such a conversation.  Does anyone have any comments?

[1]  Charity, Ann Rynd Lexicon. http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/charity.html.  20 July 2014. [2] Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.  Wikipedia.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life,_Liberty_and_the_pursuit_of_Happiness.  20 July 2014. [3] Liberalism, Wikipedia.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism.  20 July 2014. [4] Coll, Steven.  Private Empire: ExxonMobil and American Power.  New York, NY: The Penguin Press.  2012.  Kindle Page: 6130-46. [5] Protestant Work Ethic.  Wikipedia.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant_work_ethic.  2 August 2014. [6] Pitts, Leonard.  “A Republican with Serious Things to Say About Poverty.”  The Herald Mail Opinion.  Hagerstown, MD.  31 July 2014.  Page A4.

Section 5

Posted on by

Section 5 is a new title, but it’s a story I’ve worked on for a number of years.  It was sparked by the increasing rancor that our politics have taken on.  The basic work of solving the nations’s problems has been pushed aside in favor of single-minded drives for power.  The philosophical positions of our leaders in Congress have become so set and permitting so little room for reason and compromise that attaining office alone has become the all important issue.

This being the case, I began to speculate on what would happen if one party did, in fact, achieve its goal of total and permanent political domination with its philosophical planks being nailed firmly into its platform and the law of the land.  At the time I started this story, the Republican Party under George W. Bush came fairly close to being able to do this had it chosen to try for this domination.  This situation just made for a logical place to start my tale, and it has continued as such since then.  Of course, I could have written a similar novel with the Democrats in power, but timely relevance made the GOP my incumbent for Section 5.

Now, the question arises: could absolute power be achieved?  Yes, it can.  Had the GOP succeeded in re-interpreting Section 5, Article I of the Constitution as I suggest in my book, they could have developed an absolute control of the Congress.  I’ll leave it for you to read the story and see how this obscure clause could become the vehicle for political domination.  But, you’ll find out that, in fact, people in the past have tried to use it for political gain.  Fortunately, no one has succeeded … yet.

If there is a lesson to be gained from this story, it is that the American people have selected their president, representatives and senators to govern.  Governance is the art of solving real problems through means that can’t be solved elsewhere.  How far politicians can go in any particular direction towards solutions can be seen in the balance of power that has been given to them through the power of the vote.   If the balance of power is close, then caution is being called for.  However, in times of crisis, strong powers have been given.  We have seen this in the Civil War and the two World Wars.  Leaders were given trust to lead the nation back to peace.  When it was achieved, a political balance was restored that forced leaders to solve problems through compromise.

Compromise is a sloppy way of doing business.  It has been defined as achieving a solution that satisfies no one.  Doing so involves a clash of wills and ideas.  But, through the conflict, if compromise is pursued honorably, workable solutions for the commonweal can be achieved with room for further perfection later in time.  But, when the parties concerned are only interested in attaining absolute power, then tragedy can only loom on the horizon.

What Writing Means to Me

Posted on by

Writing has always been important to me.  Ever since the first grade when I read the story of King Arthur, good writing has conjured images of romance, drama, comedy and tragedy that are far more vivid than anything movie or television screens can present. With this love in mind, I was recently offered the opportunity to facilitate a reading group called “Read About It!.”  Sponsored by the Pennyslvania Humanities Council, it provided four memoirs to each group member that highlighted the adventures of four people of different backgrounds as they have lived in America.  These authors were: James McBride, who wrote of having a Jewish mother and black father; Esmeralda Santiago, who described her childhood in the Puerto Rico of the 1950′s/60′s; Firoozeh Dumas, who was an Iranian girl growing up in Whittier, California; and Frank McCourt, who is an Irish immigrant to the USA.  Their books were respectively, The Color of Water, When I Was Puerto Rican, Funny in Farsi and Tis.  This rich treasure trove of new images led me to jump on the opportunity with both feet. Each of these stories brought insights to the group’s readers about how America with its particular ways of doing things looks to outsiders.  Seeing what is “natural” to us from the perspective of others led the group to reconsider what it is that we do and why.  As a result, a lot of learning has gone occured. Such is the power of reading.

For more infomation about this program and similar ones offered by the Humanities Council, go to: http://www.pahumanities.org/.  It’ll be worth your time and perhaps benefit your community at large.  I know it has here in my town of Mercersburg.