THAT\u2019S WHAT YOU GET FOR HAVING FUN<\/strong>: Notes from a weekend in New Haven.<\/p>\n * It\u2019s possible\u2013I\u2019m not saying it\u2019s a good idea<\/em>, I\u2019m just saying it\u2019s possible\u2013to consider Alyosha Karamazov as a zoon politikon. This isn\u2019t really true of the other brothers.<\/p>\n * I seem to equivocate on the difference between \u201cbelief\u201d and \u201cfeeling.\u201d I\u2019m starting to suspect that I call things feelings if I mistrust them, and beliefs if I don\u2019t. That can\u2019t possibly be the right terminology. I need to find a better way of talking about the fact that certain types of longing do imply facts about the world while other types of longing lead to a pointillist, self-sunken, disconnected view of life. CS Lewis says this, in \u201cThe Weight of Glory\u201d:<\/p>\n <\/p>\n \u2026[W]e remain conscious of a desire which no natural happiness will satisfy. But is there any reason to suppose that reality offers any satisfaction to it? \u2018Nor does the being hungry prove that we have bread.\u2019 But I think it may be urged that this misses the point. A man\u2019s physical hunger does not prove that man will get any bread; he may die of starvation on a raft in the Atlantic. But surely a man\u2019s hunger does prove that he comes of a race which repairs its body by eating and inhabits a world where eatable substances exist. In the same way, though I do not believe (I wish I did) that my desire for Paradise proves that I shall enjoy it, I think it a pretty good indication that such a thing exists and that some men will. A man may love a woman and not win her; but it would be very odd if the phenomenon called \u2018falling in love\u2019 occurred in a sexless world.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n * I had a really challenging, awesome discussion of the Fall. This led into a dispute over whether responsibility could ever be a part of love (I now think I was right, and it can, because promises are a part of love<\/a>) and a dispute over whether the Fall changed humans intrinsically or solely changed our circumstances\u2013whether the exile is internal, a warping of humanity, not only the lack of the Garden but the lack of the kind of self who could stand the Garden.<\/p>\n And here I think I may have been wrong\u2013I think I may have been overly wedded to the language of the Fall as imposing an \u201cinclination to sin.\u201d As my interlocutor pointed out, if that\u2019s true, it\u2019s really hard to understand how Adam and Eve managed to sin at all\u2013as he pointed out, it\u2019s not like they held out for a long time! And there can\u2019t really be an intelligible reason for sin, I think\u2013all sins are like Iago\u2019s sins<\/a>.<\/p>\n But I do think it\u2019s right to say that we\u2019re not ourselves after the Fall. It isn\u2019t only our circumstances that changed. It\u2019s our ability to be distilled, to be the kind of love we as individuals might best exemplify; we aren\u2019t who we are, which is why, as Nietzsche says, we have to become what we are. I think this way of talking acknowledges the (to me) obvious damage in the self<\/em>, not only in our circumstances. (I\u2019m reminded here of the really excellent passage from Perelandra<\/em> in which the Earth man in Paradise wishes he could go outside for a smoke\u2013he wants to be free of the stress of God\u2019s regard.)<\/p>\n * Every college student should read Donna Tartt\u2019s novel The Secret History<\/em>. Ecstasy and its epigones.<\/p>\n * Apparently, I can enjoy a discussion of Cixous, Gadamer, and Lacan, as long as I can make it actually a conversation about Elaine Scarry <\/a>and the Weakerthans<\/a>. Score!<\/p>\n (Oh, and hey, people who have seen the Spanish art show at the Guggenheim: What does this image <\/a>make you think of? \u2026Yeah, me too.)<\/p>\n * Almost every kind of fun I like seems to involve intellectual or social humiliation. Oh well. Offer it up.<\/p>\n * An exception: eating food! New Haven is such a wonderful city in which to feed. If you ever have the pleasure of visiting (it is, really, one of my favorite places, and I don\u2019t care what anyone says!), make sure you get a hamburger at the Doodle<\/a>, stuffed mushrooms at Anna Liffey\u2019s (drinks also good, sincerely alcoholic and inexpensive, and perfectly situated a mere block from the confessionals of St Mary\u2019s!), and, if possible, baker\u2019s soup at Mory\u2019s. Just sink your muzzle in and experience creaturely happiness.<\/p>\n * Walter Olson, of Overlawyered fame<\/a>, is really awesome. I mean, I knew that. I just thought you guys might want to know too. \u2026I also got to see Cacciaguida<\/a>, who emphasized the power of Mozart; Alexander of Macedon<\/a>, who spewed humility in all directions; Kira<\/a>, who warred hilariously with the sky; this guy<\/a>, who got to see Ennio Morricone, for which I think I might kill him!!!!; this guy<\/a>, who forced me to back down on some of the belief\/feeling stuff above; and many other people who skated the thin ice between the beautiful and the sublime. I had a wonderful time. It was very humiliating.<\/p>\n<\/body><\/html>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" THAT\u2019S WHAT YOU GET FOR HAVING FUN: Notes from a weekend in New Haven. * It\u2019s possible\u2013I\u2019m not saying it\u2019s a good idea, I\u2019m just saying it\u2019s possible\u2013to consider Alyosha Karamazov as a zoon politikon. This isn\u2019t really true of the other brothers. * I seem to equivocate on the difference between \u201cbelief\u201d and \u201cfeeling.\u201d […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1071,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1838","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"yoast_head":"\n