Wednesday, December 26, 2012

A Guide to Sharikov Culture


    Imagine, for a moment, that someone from another planet landed in the United States and wanted to understand what the country considered to be important.  However, this alien wanted to do this without ever speaking to anyone.  Where would this alien turn for such information?  The most basic answer is television.  Some of the most popular television shows in the US are about crime, so, obviously, crime is very important to this culture.   Then this alien changes the channel and begins to watch “Real Housewives of ….”   Watching this show would give the alien the impression that this culture idolizes shallow, materialistic, self-absorbed people. 

    This alien can also see educational shows about history or other topics, as well as, shows about religion or the arts.  However, on the major television networks this alien would be able to “feast” on a daily diet of crime shows and other shows which serve to numb the mind more than anything else. 

    Now, let us assume that this same alien decided to travel to the largest country in the world, Russia, and observe what this country considers important.  Once again, this alien decides to watch television in order to obtain such information.  What does this alien see?  A steady stream of television shows about criminals or people who drink too much.    This alien can also find religious programs or shows about history, but if he or she decided to limit his or her viewing to the major networks, they would be exposed to shows about criminals or people who drink too much.

    It is difficult, if not impossible, to believe that the same culture which produced Pyotr Tchaikovsky (1840-1893), Lev Tolstoy (1828-1910), Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881), Sergei Rachmaninoff (1873-1943), and Andrei Tarkovsky (1932-1986), to name a few, also inspired television shows about criminals and drunks. 

    The fact is that these people were not the product of the culture.  These people were the product of traditional Russian culture, but what people are exposed to now to Soviet culture, which is something completely different.   Even Andrei Tarkovsky, who lived his entire life during the period of the Soviet Union, was not a product of Soviet culture because of the influence of his father, the famous Russian poet Arseny Alexandrovich Tarkovsky (1907-1989).  

     After the October Revolution of 1917, V.I. Lenin (1870-1924) began slowly destroying traditional Russian culture, beginning with the destruction of countless Orthodox churches, and attempted to replace this culture with glorification of the state.  The year after Lenin died, Mikhail Bulgakov (1891-1940) wrote a wonderful story about the rise of the “new Soviet man” which was entitled Heart of a Dog (Сердце Собаки).

     In this story, Professor Philip Philippovich Preobrazhensky and his assistant, Bromenthal, can be understood to represent two different views from traditional Russian culture, while Poligraf Poligrafovich Sharikov, a dog who is turned into a man by Professor Preobrazhensky represents the “new Soviet man”.  Professor Preobrazhensky and Bromenthal both have major problems with Sharikov’s behavior, but they choose to deal with these problems in two completely different ways.   

    Professor Preobrazhensky begins by taking pity on Sharikov and blames his bad behavior on the fact that Sharikov had received the testicles and pituitary gland of a drunken man in order that he might become a person.  However, Bromenthal wants to inject Sharikov with arsenic and destroy him.  Eventually, Sharikov is returned to his natural state and lives out the rest of his life as a dog.  It should not surprise anyone that this story was banned from the Soviet Union until 1987 since the premise of this story goes directly to the heart of the very society that Lenin and his followers were trying to create.

   When television was first created it had the enormous potential to be able to educate and inspire people.  However, it has never lived up to that potential.  There is no reason why people should have cable television service with over two hundred (200) channels available and these same people then complain that there is nothing to watch because the shows available are “garbage”. 

    Instead of uplifting cultural standards, television appeals to the lowest common denominator in order to insure that Sharikov is happy.  For many years a friend of mine has said, “In order to keep their people quiet, Rome gave them bread and circuses, while we give them drugs and television.”  There is a great deal of truth in this statement.  The ability to read is a rather late development in human history, but people read less now than in many generations. 

    While fewer people read than in previous generations, Russian television does offer more films based upon classic Russian novels than American commercial television does about classic American novels. It has been decades since any of the major networks presented a movie about “Tom Sawyer” or some other novel.  I love watching films about classic Russian novels, but is there something wrong with presenting a film about a story by Edgar Allan Poe (1809-1849)?

     It would be very easy to say that what is presented on television is simply a form of
entertainment; however, it actually directly reflects cultural values.  If this is a form of
entertainment, then Americans and Russians must find crime and alcoholism to be very
entertaining.  When it comes to television, we continue to sleep with dogs and continue to
be very surprised that we wake up with fleas. After all of these years of appealing to
“Sharikov culture” in the United States and Russia, why are we still surprised? 

Friday, December 14, 2012

The Virtue of Fairy Tales

   From the earliest fables and folk tales passed down through succeeding generations to today's cinematic versions of popular fairy tales, these stories have reflected the changing moral values in society and culture.

   Fables are narrations in which animals speak and act like human beings, intended to inculcate a useful truth or enforce a lesson. Folk tales and folklore refer to any tales circulated by word of mouth among the common folk. Popular fairy tales are fanciful stories or explanations of legendary deeds and creatures, today usually intended for children. What we think of as traditional fairy tales do not necessarily involve fairies but do involve fantasy and some form of wonder or special powers; forces of good and evil dueling over the fate of the hero or heroine. 1

   In the same way that every culture in the world has its own myths and legends, every culture also has its own fairy tales.  In the US, many fairy tales were originally borrowed from the writings of the Brothers Grimm, Hans Christian Andersen, and others and adapted for an American audience.   Reading or watching fairy tales can provide a person with a great deal of insight into a foreign culture. 

    For example, the fairy tales of Alexander Pushkin (1799-1837) and stories about a very popular character known as “Ivan the Fool” are still extremely popular in many Russian speaking countries.  These are not simply children’s stories as they are in the US and many other Western countries.  There are many plays performed based upon Slavic fairy tales and the animated versions of these tales are often watched on television by both children and adults.

    Fairy tales exercise and cultivate the imagination. Now the imagination is a most powerful auxiliary in the development of the mind and will. In the next place fairy tales stimulate the idealizing tendency. Faith itself cannot abide unless supported by a vivid idealism. The value of the fairy tales is that they stimulate the imagination, reflect the unbroken communion of human life with the lived universal and incidentally, but all the more powerfully on that account, they quicken the moral sentiments. 2 

    The Tale of Tsar Saltan” written in 1831 by Alexander Pushkin is one such fairy tale.   The basic premise of the story is quite simple: The story is of three sisters, of whom the youngest is chosen by Tsar Saltan to be his wife, while he makes the other two his royal cook and royal weaver. They are jealous of course, and when the tsarina gives birth to a son, Prince Gvidon, they arrange to have her and her child ordered to be enclosed in a barrel and thrown into the sea. The sea itself takes pity on them, and they are cast upon the shore of a remote island, Buyan. The son, having quickly grown while in the barrel, goes hunting. However, he ends up saving an enchanted swan from a kite. The swan creates a city for Prince Gvidon to rule, but he is homesick, and the swan turns him into a mosquito. In this guise he visits Tsar Saltan's court, where he stings his aunt's eye and escapes.

    Back in his distant realm, the swan gives Gvidon a magical squirrel. However, he continues to pine for home, so the swan transforms him into a fly, and in the Tsar's court he stings the eye of his other aunt. In a third round he becomes a wasp (or bee) and stings the nose of his grandmother. In the end, he expresses a desire for a bride instead of his old home, at which time the swan is revealed to be a beautiful princess, whom he marries. He is visited by the Tsar, who is overjoyed to find his wife and newly-married son.4

     The tsarina’s sister is convinced that since she is not happy, no one should be happy.  There is a well known American idiom which states, “Misery loves company” (“Беда не приходит одна”) and one of the points made in this fairy tale is that this idiom transcends culture.  Human nature does not change based upon culture, but the way that these truths are conveyed vary depending upon the particular audience.

     It has been said that everything connected to the universe and nature can be found in the poetry of Alexander Pushkin.  For example, in his poem “The Fish and the Fisherman” the fisherman’s wife shows us that happiness cannot be found in having many things and disturbing the natural order.  In fact, there is sufficient evidence from nature that if we attempt to disrupt the natural order or acquire too many things from nature we end up having to deal with hurricanes, tornadoes, and other natural disasters. 

    In the fairy tale, The Tale of the Golden Cockerel,5 the golden rooster represents the forces of nature, just as the swan does in The Tale of Tsar Saltan and the magic fish in The Fish and the Fisherman. This theme can also been seen in Pushkin’s other fairy tales.

    Like myths and legends, fairy tales also convey the truth.  They are present in every culture and can help us to understand the world on a metaphorical, if not literal, level.  Just because an event did not happen in the exact same way that the story about the event describes it does not mean that either the event or the story is untrue.  In some cases it is important to look beyond the ‘facts’ of a story in order to see the greater message contained within. 

    Formed by the science of the twentieth century, fairy tales have been broken down into four basic schools: mythological, comparative (migration), the British "anthropological" structuralist school.  Analyzing stories of different ages and from different nations, scientists discovered their common plot schemes, "anthropologists" - one domestic, psychological basis of their origin, and the structuralists - a uniform structure in which there are constant and stable elements or functions.
  
   In spite the lack of a clear definition and classification, researchers still highlights a number of features in common: an epic-narrative framework and reliance on folk "genre memory" psychology in the interpretation of the characters.  Researchers point to the literary fairy tales of the twentieth century as having multifunctional ties with folk and world culture, flexibility in the orientation of the mythology, folk demonology, legends, and multi-genre, as well as conventional and metaphorical allegory.
   
   Nikolai Leskov (1831-1895), a well-known Russian author, once said, "My dear sirs, Russian people are at peace with their old fairy tales! Woe to the one who will not be in his or her old age."

                                                          End Notes

1)    Popular Fairy Tales Reflect Moral Values in Society and Culture http://news.vision.org/press-release/articles/popular-fairy-tales-reflect-moral-values-society-and-culture

2)    The Value of Fairy Taleshttp://www.oldandsold.com/articles14/mothers-guide-book-58.shtml



4)    “Russian Fairy Tales” http://www.russfolkart.com/folkTales.htm

Thursday, December 6, 2012

Be Careful What You Ask For

   Throughout the world many people are panicking as the date “December 21” approaches.  According to various “experts” the Mayan calendar predicted that a major cataclysm will take place on December 21, 2012 because it is on that date that the calendar enters a new cycle.
    For the past two thousand years Christians all over the world have been asking Our Lord Jesus to return. He promised us that He would return prior to His ascension into heaven and now that there is a possibility that He might actually be fulfilling His promise, how do we respond?  Are we happy that Our Lord Jesus will finally return and we might actually be able to meet Him face to face?  No, we panic and go to the store to buy candles, food, water, and other supplies.  Why?  Did we not believe that Jesus would fulfill His promise?  Do we believe that Jesus will be angry with us and we must hide from our angry “parent” so we do not get punished? 
    Christian monks and nuns all over the world have been praying “Maranatha” (Come, Lord Jesus); however, instead of looking forward to the possible fulfillment of this prayer, people are telling everyone that they meet that “the sky is falling” and acting more like Chicken Little than a person of faith.  If this is the end of the world, what good is buying candles, food, and extra water going to do?   This is not going to be similar to a bad rain storm where we will lose power for a few days.  All of this panicking is not going to help anything or anyone. 
     It would be one thing if all of this panicking was taking place among people who are unbelievers.  Those people who do not believe in God or have no understanding of Christianity.  However, most of the people who are panicking are those who claim to be Christians.  It is as times like this that faith should become a priority.  If we know exactly what is going to happen in the future, there is no need for faith.  However, many people seem to have faith when they are aware of what will happen, but if the future is unknown they panic. 
     In the year 1000, many people believed that the world would come to an end because it was one thousand years since Our Lord Jesus had ascended into heaven.  However, nothing happened.  The same was true in the year 2000.  The fact that the Mayan calendar predicts that a major event will take place on December 21, 2012 is no reason for panic.  Numerous dates have been given for the end of the world over the past two thousand years and none of them have come true.
     Several years ago there were people who were predicting that the world would come to an end when Haley’s Comet appeared again.  This comet was seen by people all over the world and nothing happened.  There is no reason for someone to base their faith upon the movement of the stars or planets.  If such was the guide for determining when Jesus would return He would have given us some indication of this.  However, Jesus told us that no one knows the day or date when this will happen.  
    There will be many people who will feel very foolish when they wake up on December 22 and everything is ok.  They will realize that they panicked for no reason.  Others will be very happy that everything did not come to an end.  Neither of these responses will have any connection to faith.  
     This should be a time for people to ask themselves, “What do I believe?”  Instead people run to the store to buy food, milk, batteries, and extra water.  The sad part is that most people will simply forget about December 21 by January 1, 2013 and life will go on as if nothing ever happened.  If we truly believe than what is the need for panic?  If we do not believe, then why do we call ourselves believers?   

Wednesday, November 28, 2012

Learning to Fish for Yourself

     "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime". This well known quote by Lao Tzu (6th Century BC) expresses the reality of life in the countries which made up the Soviet Union quite nicely.  It has been twenty years since the breakup of the Soviet Union and many people are still looking to the government to do things for them.

      A Russian physician in his forties expresses the frustration of many when he says, "The Soviet system deliberately kept us as dependent children," he said. "They told us when to sit, when to stand, what to say, what to think, what to do — we were punished severely if we ever tried to think for ourselves or to show any initiative. Then when the Soviet system fell in 1991, we were like 3-year-olds who someone had thrown out into the snow, saying, 'Here, now you go take care of yourselves!'"

      His right arm thrust upward with flexed muscles and clenched fist as he declared: "We are not stupid! We are not lazy! We just don't know how!" Both his arm and his voice dropped as he softly said, "Please help us. Please teach us how to be good husbands and wives, fathers and mothers, sons and daughters, friends and lovers, employers and employees. No one has ever role-modeled to us how to become these people in a healthy, balanced way." 1
      Most Americans would be astonished to read this, especially since we were raised to be very independent, self-reliant, and taught not to rely upon the government for assistance unless absolutely necessary.  The United States is more of a "left-brained culture" that respects and encourages: logical and analytical thinking, rationality, objectivity, responsibility, initiative, independence, honesty, dependability, trustworthiness and punctuality; and an active work ethic that emphasizes quality workmanship and accomplishing objectives in a timely manner. While there are many people in the United States who are innately more right-brained, the country as a whole still remains a left-brained culture in education, business and government. Emphasis is placed on "doing."

    Russia is more of a "right-brained culture" that respects and encourages: communication, connections, spirituality, philosophy, subjectivity, adaptability, flexibility, survival, communal concepts, formality, and tradition; and emotions that are deep and passionate. Relationships with friends and family are a high priority, and most Russians have a wide knowledge and love of the arts and culture. They are more reactive than active. While there also are many people in Russia who have left-brained personalities, the country as a whole still remains a right-brained culture, and this affects all aspects of life. Emphasis is placed upon "being." 2

    What is true of people in Russia is also true of people from the other nations that comprised the Soviet Union.  There are some individuals in these countries who have taken personal initiative to improve their own personal surroundings, but the number of people who have done so is very limited. There are also cases where people get together with the intention of improving their surroundings, but they lack the necessary funds to accomplish this goal. 

     Overall, the people are very kind, but they feel helpless because they lack the necessary resources to bring about the changes that they want and need.  Public roads and buildings are the responsibility of the government, but taking pride in one’s neighborhood or home is a matter of personal initiative.  

    One of the major differences between the American and Russian people is the influence of the Orthodox Church on Russia.  The Russian soul has been described as: sensitive, imaginative, compassionate, patient, strong (well-known for survival in unbearable circumstances), poetic, mystical, fatalistic, introspective, mistrusting of rational thought, trusting intuition, fascinating, having ability to feel a wide array of extreme human emotions (from absolute joy and peace to the darkest despair) — the list goes on. Russians maintain their integrity in a way that conforms to their inner notion of what a human being should be, with a blatant honesty and integrity seldom seen elsewhere in the world. Above all they have an appreciation for wholeness or complete commitment and faith, no matter what that faith might be related to.3  
    The Russian soul evolved and entered into Western consciousness in the 1860s and 1870s, most famously through the work of Fyodor Dostoevsky. In his novels and stories, Dostoevsky often exhibited an anti-European nationalism and frequently suggested a “people’s spirit” held together by “unexpressed, unconscious ideas which are merely strongly felt.” By the time of Dostoevsky's death in 1881, the “Russian soul” had completed its evolution in Russia.4  

     From about 1880 to 1930, largely thanks to Dostoevsky, the “Russian soul” concept spread to other countries and began to affect foreign perception of the Russian people. For many Europeans the idea offered a positive alternative to the typical view of Russians as backward, instead depicting the Russian people as an example of the innocence the West had lost. The popularity of the “Russian soul” continued into the 20th century but faded as Soviet power increased. By the 1930s the concept was slipping into obscurity, but it would survive in the work of the numerous writers who devised it.5

     The concept of the “Russian soul” may have gone out of fashion as Soviet power increased; however, now that the Soviet Union is no longer a reality, it is my contention that this concept is returning.  Even among those who do not profess a faith in the Orthodox Church, the ethos of Orthodox spirituality is very much a part of the daily life of the Russian, Ukrainian, and Belarusian people.      

   Since the fall of the Soviet Union, life has been very challenging in these various countries; however, there is hope that things will improve over time. What has helped the people to deal with these major changes is their Russian soul which is their source of inner strength allowing them to cope with so many things that would have probably destroyed them, had it not been for their soul.

   The impact that men such as Fyodor Dostoevsky, Nikolai Gogol, Leo Tolstoy, and others have had on Russian culture has been profound.  These men were certainly products of their generation, but they also influenced and continue to influence countless generations that have come after them. 

    As long as the spirit of these men remains alive in the East the “Russian soul” will also remain alive.  Suffering for its own sake makes no sense, but since suffering is a part of human life it is easier to suffer knowing that one’s suffering is united to the suffering of Jesus than believing that it has no point at all.  This is one of the aspects of a Russian soul.  It is an indication of the resilience of the human spirit and confirmation of the words of Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) who said, “Anything which does not kill you, will only make you stronger.” 6

     Hopefully, the younger generation of people from the former USSR will be able to learn to fish for themselves so they will not be so dependent upon the government.  This is necessary for the survival of the nation and the culture.  Imposing Western ideas on the Slavic people is not the answer because their thought process is different from the West; however, it is important to introduce such ideas so that they can be understood and adapted into an Orthodox mindset.

                                                   End Notes


2)    “Left Brained Americans, Right Brained Russians”

3)    “Russian Soul” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_soul

4)    Robert C. Williams, "The Russian Soul: A Study in European Thought and Non-European Nationalism," Journal of the History of Ideas 31 (1970): 573-588, accessed November 28, 2012.

5)    Robert C. Williams, “The Russian Soul…”

6)    “The Beauty of the Russian Soul” http://heideggerm1.blogspot.com/2011/10/beauty-of-russian-soul.html

 

Monday, October 8, 2012

Showing Little Interest in Life

    It has been said that life is a series of one challenge after another.  There may be periods when the challenges are not as frequent, but they exist nonetheless. Some people are able to deal with these challenges as though they were not very important and there are those who reach a point in their lives when these challenges overwhelm them so much that they give up.

   Some people believe that no matter how difficult today is; tomorrow will be a better day.  This sense of optimism is what inspires them to keep going.  You will often hear such people use pietistic phrases like, “it is always darkest before the dawn” or “every cloud has a silver lining” as a way of reassuring themselves that everything will be alright and, perhaps, even offer some sort of encouragement to others.

   However, there are those who say, “The light at the end of the tunnel is not freedom, but the headlight of an oncoming train”.  Such people would normally ignore the pious platitudes of an eternal optimist. I would consider myself to be a rather pessimistic person. I am rather fond of Woody Allen’s phrase, “I believe the glass is half full; however, it is full of poison.”  I realize that I am not alone in regard to being a pessimist, but I also realize it is not easy to be around such pessimism for long periods of time.

   This issue of pessimism was dealt with satirically by Ivan Alexandrovich Goncharov (1812-1891) in his most famous novel, Oblomov. which first appeared in 1859 and for which its author was highly praised by such notable authors as Lev Tolstoy (1828-1910) and Fyodor Dostoevsky (1821-1881). 

   Goncharov portrayed his famous character sympathetically, although Oblomov became the personification of the idle nobility or more widely, the national psyche IIya Ilyich Oblomov spends his time in bed, comfortably in his dressing gown of Persian cloth - "a real oriental dressing-gown, without the slightest hint of Europe" and argues wearily with his morose, drinking manservant, Zakhar, who thinks that fleas, lice, and other vermin are a natural part of life.

   Incapable of occupying himself with practical matters, Oblomov is cheated by his financial adviser and his country estate slides into ruin. Shtoltz, his friend, half-German by birth, is a completely different character.  He is a determined, learned, and successful businessman. Oblomov's great love is Olga, but he puts off marrying her too many times and finally loses her to his more pragmatic friend. Eventually Oblomov marries Agafia Pshenitsina, a widow. They have a son, and when Oblomov dies, Shtoltz adopts him. Oblomov is a daydreamer, he has great visions, but he has lost his ability for doing things.  Shtoltz calls him a poet. "The trouble is that no redeeming fires have ever burnt in my life," he confesses to Shtolts. "My life began by flickering out."

   In the novel Oblomov is trying to get out of the bed, but within nearly the two hundred pages he barely manages to move from his bed to a chair. From this figure derives the Russian term oblomovshchina, meaning backwardness or inertia. In modern Western literature, Oblomov is said to have inspired Samuel Beckett's play Waiting for Godot.1

   This novel was not written as a comedy, but gives the reader insight into the mindset of some members of the 19th century Russian aristocracy by creating a character who exhibits the combined traits of many people at that time. As a superfluous man, Oblomov is part of a gallery of great Russian fictional creations, which includes Alexander Pushkin's Eugene Onegin, Mikhail Lermontov's Pechorin, and Ivan Turgenev's Rudin.2

   As someone who has a strongly pessimistic nature, I can empathize with Oblomov. There are many people who believe that laziness is an acceptable option and others who see no point in accomplishing anything.  I find virtue in educating others and make it a point to not pass my pessimism on to others.  

    It is possible to show little interest in life from time to time, but I would not recommend it as a steady diet.  There are some who will read this who might find my pessimistic outlook to be rather surprising since this is not part of their experience of knowing me, but it is true.  If you are an optimist you realize that everything that will be fine over time.  If you are a pessimist, I encourage you to keep going because the alternative is not healthy for you or those around you.

                                                            End Notes

    1) “Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov (1812-1891)” http://www.kirjasto.sci.fi/ivangont.htm (accessed 10/8/12)

    2) “Ivan Aleksandrovich Goncharov Biography” http://www.bookrags.com/biography/ivan-aleksandrovich-goncharov/ (accessed 10/8/12)

Monday, September 17, 2012

The Problem with Eugenics

   Margaret Sanger (1883-1966) served as a public health nurse on the Lower East Side of New York City where she encountered poor families and became convinced that population control was the premier way to deal with the issue of poverty in the United States.
   In 1916, Mrs. Sanger founded Planned Parenthood in New York City for the purpose, as described by Planned Parenthood, of providing reproductive information and assistance to men and women who might not otherwise be able to afford it. On the surface, this sounds rather benign; however, when one carefully examines the philosophy of the organization’s founder and reads her own words, the reader is left with a much different impression of Mrs. Sanger.
   It is quite evident that Mrs. Sanger was a major proponent of eugenics Eugenics, from the Greek words eu-genos (meaning “good birth”) is defined as:
the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).1
   In 1921, Mrs. Sanger stated, “Eugenics is… the most adequate and thorough avenue to the solution of racial, political, and social problems.”2 Her philosophy involved various avenues of implementation. A proponent of abortion, at a time when it was illegal, Sanger stated, “The most merciful thing that a family does to one of its infant members is to kill it.”3 She also proposed the belief that “birth control must ultimately lead to a cleaner race.”4 In regard to birth control she also stated:
As an advocate of birth control, I wish…to point out that the unbalance of the birth rate between the “fit” and “unfit” admitted the greatest present menace to civilization, can never be rectified by the inauguration of a cradle competition between the two classes. In this matter, the example of the inferior classes, the fertility of the feeble-minded, the mentally defective, the poverty-stricken classes, should not be held up for emulation… On the contrary, the most urgent problem today is how to limit and discourage the over-fertility of the mentally and physically defective.5
   Based upon her writings, it appears that she was also convinced that the poor should be sterilized as a way of preventing them from reproducing. Mrs. Sanger stated, “Eugenics sterilization is an urgent need…We must prevent multiplication of this bad stock.”6
   If her comments appear to echo the teachings of Adolf Hitler, this should come as no surprise. While I am not proposing that Mrs. Sanger was a Nazi, the fact remains that what she proposed was accepted as completely valid by the Third Reich. The Nazi belief that there were certain people who were not worthy of life was stated by Mrs Sanger in 1922 when she wrote:

   “Our failure to segregate morons who are increasing and multiplying demonstrates our foolhardy and extravagant sentimentalism... [Philanthropists] encourage the healthier and more normal sections of the world to shoulder the burden of unthinking and indiscriminate fecundity of others; which brings with it, as I think the reader must agree, a dead weight of human waste. Instead of decreasing and aiming to eliminate the stocks that are most detrimental to the future of the race and the world, it tends to render them to a menacing degree dominant. We are paying for, and even submitting to, the dictates of an ever-increasing, unceasingly spawning class of human beings who never should have been born at all..."7
   A “dead weight of human waste” is how these children, who were made in the image and likeness of God, were seen by Mrs. Sanger. There is no necessity to embellish Mrs. Sanger’s comments since the very words she wrote give a clear and exact explanation of her philosophy. She went on to say, "The undeniably feeble-minded should, indeed, not only be discouraged but prevented from propagating their kind."8
   The interesting thing is that term “feeble minded” appears to have a rather fluid definition when used by Mrs. Sanger. The traditional definition of feeble mindedness is one who has only a limited capacity to learn or understand. Does the fact that these people would not agree with her philosophy make them, by definition, feeble minded? Nowhere in the definition is there a listing for “a refusal to accept arrogance” as a criteria for feeble mindedness.
   Not surprisingly, Mrs. Sanger directly challenged the teachings of the Catholic Church and others who believe in the sanctity of human life:

"The third group [of society] are those irresponsible and reckless ones having little regard for the consequences of their acts, or whose religious scruples prevent their exercising control over their numbers. Many of this group are diseased, feeble-minded, and are of the pauper element dependent upon the normal and fit members of society for their support. There is no doubt in the minds of all thinking people that the procreation of this group should be stopped."9
   Apparently having religious convictions qualifies one as “feeble minded” according to Mrs. Sanger.
   Recently U S Secretary of State Hillary Clinton received the Margaret Sanger Award from Planned Parenthood. Mrs Clinton stated that she was “in awe” of Mrs. Sanger and stated that Mrs Sanger’s “life and leadership was one of the most transformational in the entire history of the human race.” Given Mrs. Sanger’s philosophy, the very same thing could easily be said of Adolf Hitler.
   Speaking on the floor of the U S House of Representatives, Congressman Christopher Smith (R-NJ) challenged the fact that Mrs Clinton visited the Shrine of Our Lady of Guadalupe immediately before receiving the Margaret Sanger award. Appearing to St Juan Diego at Tepeyac, Mexico on December 12, 1531, as a pregnant woman, the Blessed Virgin Mary under the title of Our Lady of Guadalupe is both the patroness of the Americas and of the pro-life movement.
   After briefly narrating the story of the apparitions of Our Lady of Guadalupe, Congressman Smith stated, “last Thursday, Hillary Clinton visited the shrine On Friday, she paid homage to Planned Parenthood and to Margaret Sanger. Margaret Sanger is the founder of Planned Parenthood. She was a self-described pro-abortionist eugenist and a racist who considered charity care for impoverished, disenfranchised women, including women of color, especially pregnant women to be ‘cruel’.”10
   The teachings of Margaret Sanger are not worthy of emulation. Eugenics is not an acceptable form of scientific research. However, this does not mean that it is not practiced. On Saturday, February 21, 2009, Pope Benedict XVI warned participants at a conference sponsored by the Pontifical Academy for Life of the rise of a “new eugenics” which judges the worth of a person based upon his or her genetic makeup, as expressed in factors such as health and beauty. Statistics show that in many Western nations up to ninety-five (95) percent of unborn children diagnosed in utero with Down syndrome are killed in their mother’s womb before birth. Recently it was announced that a screening technique is in development that may enable the diagnosis of autism in utero. Critics have said that such a test will inevitably lead to the eugenic abortion of children with autism.11 Even though some might argue that this would never happen, the fact remains that we see very few children with Down syndrome anymore. Some would like us to believe it is because modern science has found a cure for this syndrome; however, the fact is that these children are simply denied the right to live.
   The fact that prospective parents can actually pre-determine the eye color and other characteristics of their child prior to birth has a certain “Frankenstein-like” quality about it. The idea of in utero genetic screening is the logical conclusion when one follows the methodology of people like Margaret Sanger. Ideas truly do have consequences. Once again, it is the Catholic Church which is standing up and saying, “This is not acceptable.” People like Pope Benedict XVI, Congressman Christopher Smith, and others need to be encouraged in their efforts to continue to stand up for the truth. The legacy of Margaret Sanger and Planned Parenthood should be presented for what is it, a violation of the God given right to life of the most defenseless among us.

   Such profound philosophical questions as, who has the right to play God?, certainly did not begin with the Nazis or Margaret Sanger, but we are able to see the consequences of these teachings.  Earlier in history there were other authors who wrote about this same topic.  For example, Mary Shelley (1797-1851) wrote about this exact same theme in her most famous novel, Frankenstein: The Modern Prometheus (1818), which deals with the consequences of Dr. Frankenstein’s experiments with bringing the dead back to life. 
    In 1925, Mikhail Bulgakov (1891-1940), a Russian physician turned author, wrote a story entitled Собачье сердце (The Heart of a Dog). The summary of this story is as follows: A bedraggled street dog is about to perish in the cold winter night, after having been scalded by boiling water earlier in the day. Suddenly, an elegant man feeds him and takes him home. The dog's savior is a famous and wealthy medical professor, Philip Philippovich Preobrazhensky, who rejuvenates people by hormonal manipulations.
    As soon as the dog becomes accustomed to his new life of plenty, he finds himself the subject of a strange experiment--the professor and his assistant implant the testicles and pituitary gland of a dead criminal into the dog's body. After a rocky post-operative course, the dog gradually begins to change into an animal in human form and names himself Poligraph Poligraphovich Sharikov. The half-beast-half-man, who gets along very well in the prevailing proletarian society, turns his creator's life into a nightmare--until the professor manages to reverse the procedure.12
    Comparisons were made between Bulgakov’s “dog-man” character and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein monster.  However, in the case of Frankenstein everyone who encountered the creature rejected it because it was so unnatural.  Poligraph Sharikov is equally unnatural, but fits in quite well in 1920s Russian society.  The Bolsheviks came to power by convincing the people that they needed to get rid of Czar Nicholas II and share all things in common.  In no time at all, these same people slowly began to turn on the very people that put them into power. The highly educated were banished from Russia and those who did not leave were eventually executed.
    Every generation comes up with an idea which they are convinced are both new and original.  Eugenics is one of these ideas.  As a result of the Second World War, eugenics is now associated with Nazi Germany; however, even without the Nazi connection eugenics is still problematic.  If we do not learn the lessons of history we are prone to repeat them over and over again. 

                                                        End Notes


2 Margaret Sanger "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda" Birth Control Review, October 1921, p 5

3 Margaret Sanger (editor), The Woman Rebel, Vol 1, No 1, Reprinted in Woman and the New Race (NY: Brentanos Publishers), 1922

4 Margaret Sanger Woman, Morality, and Birth Control (New York: New York Publishing Company), 1922 p 12

5 Margaret Sanger "The Eugenic Value of Birth Control Propaganda " Birth Control Review, October 1921, p 5

6 Margaret Sanger Birth Control Review, April 1933

7 Margaret Sanger The Pivot of Civilization, 1922 Chapter on "The Cruelty of Charity," pp 116, 122, and 189 (Swarthmore College Library edition)

8 Margaret Sanger quoted in Charles Valenza "Was Margaret Sanger a Racist?" Family Planning Perspectives, January-February 1985, p 44

9 Margaret Sanger Speech quoted in "Birth Control: What It Is, How It Works, What It Will Do" The Proceedings of the First American Birth Control Conference Held at the Hotel Plaza, New York City, November 11-12, 1921 Published by the Birth Control Review, Gothic Press, pp 172 and 174.


11 Pope Warns of Proliferation of New Eugenics: (Posted 2/24/09, Accessed 4/13/09)


 

Thursday, September 13, 2012

Поиск Счастья

Есть различные вещи, которые делают одну культуру отличной от другой,
включая музыку, живопись, обычаи и традиции. Однако, общее для всех
культур –– это легенды,сказки. Эти мифические истории присутствуют в
каждой культуре.
В американских историях Золушка, Златовласка, Три Медведя,
Принцесса на Горошине были очень популярны у разных поколений
детей. Многие из этих историй описывают путь поиска счастья. Этот путь
может быть пожизненным, а в некоторых случаях, даже никогда и не
достижимым.
Многие дети знакомы со сказкой Рапунцель писателей Братьев Гримм.
По всему миру известны также Гадкий Утенок и многие другие сказки
Ганса Христиана Андерсена. Эти сказки часто имеют счастливый конец.
Некоторые из этих историй заканчиваются встречей принцессы и принца.
Существует эпическая легенда, близкая к сказке, и в России. На берегу
озера герой этой легенды Садко играет на гуслях (древнерусский струнный
музыкальный инструмент, подобный лире). Морскому Царю нравится
его музыка и он предлагает ему помощь. Садко должен сделать ставку
с местными торговцами о ловли рыбы в озере и когда он ловит её с
помощью Морского Царя, то выигрывает пари, согласно которому
торговцы должны заплатить ему хорошую сумму.
Садко решает помочь крестьянам родного города Новгорода и сообщает
им о птице счастья, которая существует где-то по середине моря. Он
использует своё богатство, чтобы построить ряд судов и начинает эту
поездку, в надежде найти птицу счастья.
После поиска по различным уголкам мира, он наконец заканчивает
свой путь в Индии. Один из мужчин узнал, что птица счастья принадлежит
местному принцу. Садко соглашается сыграть партию шахмат с ним.
По договору, Садко может взять птицу Феникс (которая каждый раз
возрождается к жизни из собственного пепла), если он выигрывает эту
партию, и отдать собственную лошадь, если он проиграет индийскому
принцу.
В этой легенде Садко показан также романтиком и мечтателем.
Поэтому мать его возлюбленной Любавы считает его бесперспективным
женихом, "ни на что не годным" и советует дочери избегать его. Однако
дочь не может принять её решения. Садко рассказывает Любаве о
желании найти птицу счастья, и она согласна с этим, поскольку это
желание находится в его сердце. Она обещает ждать его всё это время.
И хотя Любава не получает известий от Садко в течении двух лет, она
думает о нем каждый день.
Садко выигрывает шахматное состязание с индийским принцем и берёт
птицу счастья с собой. Но вскоре он понимает, что птица не приносит
ему счастья. Он тоскует по дому и рассказывает об этом купцам, которые
собираются возвратиться в Новгород.
После этого он заключает соглашение с Морским Царём, согласно
которому он должен предложить дань взамен его богатства. Однако
Садко не полностью выполняет это соглашение. Когда корабль Садко
возвращается домой, то попадает в шторм и все суда оказываются под
угрозой гибели. Тогда Садко старается умилостивить Морского Царя
золотом. Однако всё напрасно и Садко оказывается в глубине моря. Он
опять играет на гуслях для Морского Царя, после чего тот предлагает ему
свою дочь в жёны. 1
Садко погружается в глубокий сон. После пробуждения он оказывается на
берегу родного Новгорода и видит Любаву. Возможно счастье, которое он
искал в другом месте, могло найти его только дома ?
Любава – образец прекрасной русской души. Она верна своему
возлюбленному и не разочаровывается в нем, независимо от ситуации.
Только такая любовь и преданность может принести истинное счастье.
Так что же значит “найти своё счастье”? Ответ на этот вопрос не
простой. У разных людей счастье понимается по разному. Одно лишь
очевидно. Трудно найти счастье вне себя, если ты несчастлив. Надеяться,
что другой человек может сделать тебя счастливым не верно и такой
путь не может принести нужные результаты. Если вы полагаетесь на
другого человека, чтобы стать счастливым, то вы рассматриваете другого
человека как средство достижения счастья. Без ощущения внутреннего
счастья вы обречены, так как каждый станет несчастным с "объектом" их
счастья и вероятно начнет искать другого, чтобы принести ему счастье.
В легенде Садко важными являются факты о ценности любви и
преданности, а поиск счастья также происходит в собственном сердце.
Именно там счастье должно быть прежде всего, перед тем как его находят
где-нибудь еще. Садко узнал это после возвращения к Любаве и хочется
надеяться, что эта истина будет также обнаружена всеми, кто ищет
счастье в их собственных жизнях.
1) “Sadko” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadko
2) Movie and legend “ Sadko”

Thursday, September 6, 2012

The Possibility of True Love

   That perfect someone, your soul mate. The one you have dreamed of all your life. Is it utter magic? Is this the stuff of which dreams are made? Or is it all a myth, a cruel joke being played on us by the Hollywood marketing machine and sappy romance novels?
  
   Robert Epstein, editor of Psychology Today, recently caused quite a stir when he set out to vex the myth of romantic love. His goal is to enter into an agreement with someone for six months, during which time they put themselves through "various exercises . . . the goal being to fall deeply in love by the end of the contract period.

   "We teach our children, and especially our little girls that a knight in a shining sports car is going to drive up one day, awaken perfect passion with a magical kiss, and then drive the blessed couple down the road to Happily Ever After, a special place where no one ever changes," says Epstein. "Hollywood tells us that ‘the One’ is out there for everyone, so no one is willing to settle for Mr. or Ms. Two-Thirds. We want our relationships to be like our antidepressants -- perfect and effortless."

   The evidence backs his statement. According to Psychology Today, over 60 percent of world's marriages are arranged. These marriages have far lower divorce rates, and the couples often find themselves falling in love. In contrast, "romantic" marriages have a 57 percent failure rate, with even less promising statistics for second marriages.1

   This topic was also dealt with in The Kreutzer Sonata by Lev Nikolayevich Tolstoy (1828-1910) which opens as a third-person narrative by an anonymous gentleman making his way across Russia by train. When the conversation among the passengers turns to the subjects of sex, love, and marriage, a lawyer claims that many couples live long, content married lives. However, Pozdnyshev, another passenger, violently contradicts his statement and announces that he has murdered his wife in a jealous rage, a crime of which a jury had acquitted him. Citing that the deterioration of their marriage began on their honeymoon when they first began a sexual relationship, Pozdnyshev reveals himself as a man with an insane sexual obsession—he links sex with guilt, regards it as a 'fall' from an ideal purity, and describes sexual intercourse as a perverted thing. He tries to persuade his captive audience that all marriages are obscene shams, and that most cases of adultery are occasioned by music, the infamous aphrodisiac. This latter idea explains the title of the story, which is also a musical composition by Ludwig van Beethoven (1770-1827). Pozdnyshev explains the circumstances that led to his tragedy: after marrying a pretty woman who bore him children, he came to hate, but lust for his wife. One day a musician named Trukachevsky, accepting Pozdnyzhev's invitation to visit their house, accompanied Pozdnyshev's wife on the violin while she played the piano. Convinced that the pair were having an affair,

    Pozdnyshev went into the country to attend the meeting of the local council, often recalling the look on their faces as they played the "Kreutzer Sonata." He returned home early, thinking that he would find the lovers in bed and consequently kill them; instead he found them sitting in the drawing room after they had played some music. Enraged nevertheless, Pozdnyshev killed his wife after Trukachevsky had escaped.2

    The idea of arranged marriages, which was one of the topics discussed on this train ride, is completely foreign to most people in the Western world; however, it is quite common to many cultures throughout the world and according to Robert Epstein it has a very high success rate.  While I am not necessarily advocating the idea of marriage, I do not believe that the “fairy tale” image of marriage is entirely accurate either. 

    It is important to keep in mind that one of the major influences impacting this novella was Lev Tolstoy’s religious belief which advocated celibacy rather than marriage as being virtuous.  In an essay entitled “The Lesson of The Kreutzer Sonata”, Tolstoy explains his view of the subject matter. Regarding carnal love and a spiritual, Christian life, he points out that not Christ, but the Church (which he despised and which in turn excommunicated him) instituted marriage. "The Christian's ideal is love of God and his neighbor, self-renunciation in order to serve God and his neighbor; carnal love – marriage – means serving oneself, and therefore is, in any case, a hindrance in the service of God and men".3

   When Tolstoy wrote this novella, he had been married for many years and had several children.  How did his wife, Sophia Andreyevna, feel about it?  "You are harassing and killing yourself," she wrote him on April 19, 1889, at Yasnaya Polyana (Tolstoy’s estate). "I...have been thinking: he does not eat meat, nor smoke, he works beyond his strength, his brain is not nourished, hence the drowsiness and weakness. How stupid vegetarianism is....Kill life in yourself, kill all impulses of the flesh, all its needs -- why not kill yourself altogether? After all you are committing yourself to *slow* death, what's the difference?"4  

    What is meant by true love?  If we mean that a person must surrender their own identity and simply serve the needs of their husband or wife in order to make sure that he or she is always happy, I am not sure that this is true love. People are constantly changing and evolving, so it is unrealistic to expect that someone can simply give up their identity and individuality in order to serve someone else.  I believe this is one of the problems that Anna Karenina experienced in her marriage and this led to her relationship with Count Vronsky.

    However, if we mean that two people work together as a team and continue to grow together instead of growing apart, I believe that true love is possible.  One of the challenges that many people face is the “fairy tale” understanding of relationships where everyone always lives happily ever after.  One of the most famous lines from the movie, “Love Story” was “love means never having to say you’re sorry.”  There are very few people for whom this would be understood as one of the definitions of love. 

    While everyone may not experience true love in their lives, does this mean that true love is not possible?  The Kreutzer Sonata would not be ideal reading for someone who is a hopeless romantic, but the issues which Tolstoy deals with in this novella have been addressed by countless people throughout the centuries. 

                                                     End Notes

1)     GinaMarie Jerome “Is True Love a Myth?” http://www.thirdage.com/relationships-love/is-true-love-a-myth (posted 7/11/2008, accessed 9/5/2012)

2)     Lev Tolstoy, “The Kreutzer Sonata” http://www.enotes.com/kreutzer-sonata-criticism/kreutzer-sonata-leo-tolstoy (accessed 9/5/2012)

3)     Lev Tolstoy “The Lesson of the Kreutzer Sonata” http://www.online-literature.com/tolstoy/kreutzer-sonata/29/ (accessed 9/5/2012)

4)     Aleksandra Tolstoya “Tolstoy: A Life of My Father” http://great-authors.albertarose.org/leo_tolstoy/ATolstaya.htm (accessed 9/5/2012)