Author: plinyblogcom

Our sense of propriety and fairness enjoins us to, initially, disclose to the reader the basis and intended meaning of the concededly, bizarre title of this writing.

Readers of Greek Classical literature may recall the legendary tale of “Oedipus and the Sphinx.” In accordance with the myth, Oedipus came upon the town of Thebes, where he encountered the Great Sphinx, standing guard at its gates. Anyone wishing to enter Thebes was obliged to answer a riddle. If he could solve the formidable riddle, (which no one, yet had been able to do) the Sphinx would let him enter. If not, the Sphinx would devour him.  
The riddle went as follows: “What goes on four feet in the morning, two feet at noon and three feet in the evening?” The arcane answer is, Man, viz., as a baby he crawls on four feet, as an adult, walks on two feet, as an elder, uses a cane (i.e., three feet). Oedipus, as expected, had the solution.

We are, unquestionably, included in the elder category, and thus, as “Man,” in the myth, we walk on “three feet”, perhaps, even monstrously. The varied subjects to be discussed here and in the future, (we are planning other, similar, posts), for what they are worth, will all be “perorations,” or our personal, conclusory observations, based upon personal, long-term, idiomatic experience. We offer the first three perorations for the readers’ possible interest and critical appraisal.

• Old age is not a disease.

The popular, stereotypic pictures of the idealized, individual, man, woman and child, are tactically, and seductively, portrayed by the advertising industry, to enhance the marketing of goods; and such standard of idealized images are, in one form or another, eternally and scrupulously, reiterated. The super-attractive human images portrayed for such purpose are critically and ideally, selected and configured, for the mass media, posing alongside, or in utilization, of the goods, advertised for sale. Supplementing this idealized, commercial convention, are media images of the relatively rare, famous athletes, super-fit as well as especially, proficient in their particular sport.

The ordinary or commonplace individual, as an empirical matter, scarcely resembles these tactically demonstrated, avatars of youthful high fashion; not to mention the elderly, or senior citizens, whose bodies evince many years of progressive aging; whose abdomen may not be attractively firm, and whose gait is, observably, less than athletic. Those who would normalize those unnatural, projected images, selectively portrayed in television ads, or seen at the televised, sports arena, might be easily tempted to perceive that the senior citizen, by grim comparison, is, sadly, in decline, generally incapacitated, useless and of minimal worth.

Of course, it is unhappily the case, that aging is, in fact, naturally and inevitably, associated with observable decline in prowess and physical fitness. However, assuming reasonably good health, and a thoughtful perspective, old age can be a time of fulfillment and mature understanding; the latter, often painfully and destructively, needed, but missing, at younger ages. The resolution of life-long dilemmas, the review and appropriate rational hierarchy of aspirations, the calm acceptance of life’s basic truths, are all matters acquired, empirically, at the time of one’s maturity.  The physical prowess, inevitably, lost, due to aging, is acceptably compensated for, by a sense of internal satisfaction, derived from a mature audit and thoughtful understanding, of one’s past.

• Appropriate response to stimuli.

Stress is an automatic, physical, mental and emotional response to a chilling event. It is, as known, acceptably, a normal part of man’s life. Managing stress can help lead to a more balanced, healthier life. Analogous to the words of the famous song in the Comic Opera, “The Mikado,” My object is sublime, I shall succeed in time, to make the punishment fit the crime…” one should strive to make the extent of his emotional response, appropriate in degree, as is warranted by the objective nature of the stimulus.

It is common to experience personalities, who will inappropriately, and unhealthily, react with their most intense level of stress, to any presenting disappointment or negative event. Like, Mikado’s aspiration that the degree of punishment be appropriate to the seriousness of the crime, the rational individual should strive to make his level of emotional response to any stimulus, in accordance with the relative gravity of the event. A broken manicured fingernail is not equivalent to learning of a friend’s dire diagnosis; losing a favorite fountain pen is not as consequential as the death of a beloved pet. This admonition is not only protective of life and health but is determinatively, appropriate and rational.

• Success and Happiness

Our experienced conception and empirical understanding of the context of the word, “happiness,” can accurately, but perhaps, not adequately, be appropriately summarized, in four words, “it is strictly internal.” The mature and truly empirical measure of “happiness,” is not quantitative nor properly analogized to a scoreboard in a sports match; revealing the winner as the player who has earned the most points by the end of the competition.  Man’s evaluations, most especially, his ultimate, impactful inner life determinations, are not quantitative, but qualitative.

Prior to retirement, we were engaged in the private practice of a profession in New York City and met many hundreds of people. Our clientele was in large part, highly educated people, of every lifestyle and personality. We learned that provided one’s financial situation was reasonably acceptable, happiness and the feeling of success did not turn on material acquisition, but on other criteria. We encountered many people with great wealth and assets, who were disappointed in life, and those in similar circumstances who felt flushed with success and felt successful. We also met a great many individuals of more modest financial circumstances, who evinced success and happiness.

Over the decades of our professional practice, we were, empirically, able to confirm our understanding that success and resultant happiness, do not depend upon the extent of personal accumulation of assets (boats, real estate, money) but rather, upon the ultimate recognition and inner sense, of a life well spent, and a balanced and realistic, personal sense of self-fulfillment.

-p.

  We have often deliberated, on the subject of the likely origin and fundamental dynamics, of the age-old, iniquitous practice of race prejudice and bias, in general. To be candid, we disclaim any special knowledge or formal study in this area. However, subject to possible critique by those more academically qualified in this discipline, we would humbly, express our resultant understanding of this difficult and sensitive subject, and would modestly, venture to suggest a possible (long term) resolution of the age-old travesty.   

Let us assume, solely for the sake of academic examination, that the entire extant species of Homo sapiens, were somehow, rendered identical, in every conceivable characteristic, age, gender, and sexual persuasion, color, height, hair color, vocal tone, etc. We might then pose to the reader, the question as to whether he thought that personal bias, or racism under such circumstances, would be possible. It would be readily understandable if the response were in the negative.

However, those less optimistic, inalterably, believing in some innate and compulsive tendency, of Man to be selective in an eternal and natural perception of hierarchy, might pose some of the following possibilities: there is an innate inclination in man, to establish a “pecking order” and some manufactured rationalization would be created, to adjudge the necessary perceived differences; the human persona has the need for intimacy, and would create necessarily perceived, personal distinctions; the feeling of insecurity, responsive to complete uniformity, would tend to motivate the individual to subjectively, perceive nuance within the group; the emotional need or desire to bond with another person would, creatively, provide some criterion for his discreet selection, or a purported, natural drive for dominance, would find artificial criteria, for the determination of an imposed submission.

As the followers of this blogspace know, we are unwavering subscribers to the empirical school of epistemology, and of its renowned philosopher, John Locke. Locke declared that man is born with a clean slate (“tabula rasa”) and that (all) knowledge is acquired or learned, by man’s personal life experience. This proposition would lead to the ineluctable conclusion (the proposed theme of this writing), that racial and other biases are not the product of some innate inclination, or natural tendency attributable to the Homo sapiens, but, are instead, learned by means of human empirical experience. Such learning, like other experientially acquired knowledge, is, as a matter of course passed on to future generations. Our basic conclusion, if valid, is perforce, excellent news. What is learned, viz., racial prejudice and other biases, presumably, with appropriate method, can be altered, or unlearned?

It is relevant and necessary, in this context, to set forth the presumed circumstances and source of such presumed learning. As stated, above, we have no special training in cultural anthropology, but would, bravely venture, a possible (probable?) scenario, underlying the proposed early learning experience, leading to Man’s basic, development of prejudicial thought and consequent discriminatory action.  

Our deliberations have resulted in the (hopefully, valid) conclusion, that this most serious, life and death, determinative problem, is but a disastrous old anachronism. It is our confident assumption that Early Man would experience defensive terror and repulsion, upon encountering another animal or living thing, unfamiliar or “different.” It would naturally, be perceived as a threat to his life; a life, which was otherwise, short and precarious, filled with danger, actual and perceived, and ultimate mortal threat. Unfamiliarity or exotic nuance could well spell big trouble.

We would propose, that this protective fear, of anything or anyone “different,” was, foundationally, a natural, prehistoric caution, or fear, and that this primeval discrimination, or mortal fear of physical difference, was the contemporary, anachronistic, cause of human discrimination, or differentiated treatment. Upon the assumption that our thoughts have validity, this instance would by far, be the most atavistic, and repulsive, of all anachronisms; but if learned, perhaps, could be fixed, or, unlearned.

We would earnestly, hope that some technique, psychological or educational, be soon devised, for its eternally long, disgraceful and belated, termination.

-p    

The evolving context of American citizenship, as seen through the eyes of a thoughtful, elder American, can puzzle and elude his discernment and best comprehension. It has so morphed in his lifetime, that, at times, he has the sense of being a stranger, or, perhaps, an “immigrant” in his own native country.

(N.B. It is felt that we have commented sufficiently, on our views concerning the dehumanizing impact of electronic social interaction and automation. Additionally, in a recent essay, “Remembering Radio,” we made certain observations on the changing role, status and relationship of the family. We felt that it might be thought-provoking and useful, to express some personal thoughts and observations on our observed major changes in the general perception of American citizenship.)

It was not that many decades ago, that the words to “America the Beautiful,” were not merely the words of a patriotic song, but a description of the communally maintained image of the American citizen. The salute to the flag, performed at school and public events was observably, recited with feelings of national pride and meaningful enthusiasm. World War-2 saw a solidly unified Nation, assisting its country’s war effort in every way possible. Citizens, concerned about America’s progress in the war, bought war bonds and stayed closely tuned to the latest relevant radio news reports. Children, after school, collected scrap iron, rubber and other designated, discarded items for the war effort. America’s subsequent victory over the Axis Powers was a memorable event, universally and jubilantly, celebrated by all American citizens.

The decades rolled on, some more tranquil than others. The special nexus between Nation and citizen, fortunately, seemed to overcome the profound fractures in the body politic, during the Nixon and Viet Nam War eras. Political differences between fellow citizens, over the many years, were distinct, but socially tolerated. The “Left,” most often identifying with multiculturalism, relativism, environmentalism, governmental regulation and welfare; the “Right,” with Christianity, tradition, “family values,” and social conservatism.

Our best recollection is that, in the not-too-distant past, it was commonplace to hear American citizens observe, that while American politicians were polarized, its citizens were not. This, significantly, and regrettably, was prior to the advent of the two impactful and citizen-polarizing issues, concerning, woman’s right to an abortion and the government regulation of firearms. As we are able to recall, it was at, or about, such time that the general American population, rather than constructively engaging in amicable debate on the contested issues, opted to form insular groups of identical opinion, which groups were in conflict with other like groups of diverse opinion. Their mutual affiliation as fellow American citizens appeared to take second place in fealty, to their groupthink stances on these issues. Political candidates appeared to be nominated and popularly elected, based upon their respective positions on these determinative issues, rather than on the traditionally, rational question of who would be a better President for the good of the Nation.

The Trump election in 2016 and the inability of the American society to come together, even when confronted with a deadly virus, conclusively ended any of our long-standing delusion of a commonality of American citizenship. Social trends pushed America apart and split along partisan, racial and ethnic lines. It appeared that political disparities were now reinforced by the various levels of ethnic, racial and religious conflict. To complicate matters, Trump’s belligerent assaults on the fundamental and existential concept of the “truth,” was instrumental in disagreement between citizens not only regarding the disparate issues but, of factual truth itself.

The unprecedented violent insurrection, which took place at the Capitol Building, at the express invitation of the defeated Donald Trump, severely altered our long-standing faith and understanding, concerning the implicit identification, and instinctive loyalty of, the American citizen to his Nation. Yet something more was yet to come which, bizarrely and unfortunately, caused us to feel confused and possibly, retrograde about our traditional and steadfast understanding of the innate, universal connection between the American citizen, and his country.  

It was no surprise, that when the perverse Russian Autocrat Putin, illegally, and unjustifiably, chose to declare war against Russia’s sovereign neighbor, Ukraine, that the United States, N.A.T.O. and the entire Western and European World, would be outraged and responsibly, to the extent possible, support Ukraine. Imagine our confusion and dismay when Donald Trump, the prior President of the United States, publically lauded Putin’s violent rape of a neighboring democracy, by, together with certain other perverse Trump acolytes, describing him as “smart.”

We, it seems, need to re-examine our long-standing perception of the context and status of the term, “American Citizen,” as well as our prior conception of its predictable and functional loyalty. Have we missed something, along the way?

-p.

Let us be absolutely, candid. Russia, as we know it, has historically existed as an uncomfortably self-conscious adolescent, attempting to shield from Western Civilization, its empirical status, as eternally backward and anachronistic. In the selfsame era, when London was busily spinning fabrics on its mechanically driven looms, during the so-called “Industrial Revolution,” Russia was still back in the age of medieval serfdom. It is our view, that an eternal self-conscious jealousy of its Western neighbors has always been Russia’s motivating neurosis, including its present bloody martial behavior.

Any American or European visitor to the gilded and overly ornate, art palaces of Saint Petersburg would note the tasteless, obscene crowding, of priceless old masters paintings on every available inch of wall space and the artless vanity of priceless fine art sculptures occupying every available area of floor space. The spectacle is obviously, intended to impress the visitor with Russia’s ultimate superiority (in number) over the famous Western art collections (no doubt, directly aimed at France). However, Czar Peter the Great, by the garish demonstration of such a huge, and therefore disturbing, tsunami of fine art paintings, accomplishes just the opposite impression. The visitor cannot help but observe the adolescent and artless attempt, not to display the excellence of the fine paintings, but, instead, to outdo Europe, in volume, (if not in taste), the latter, a clear admission of defensive insecurity.

It is our view that Putin, wrongfully and typically, has anachronistically, attempted, by his regrettable and bloody attack against the Nation of Ukraine, (not to downplay its consequential tragedy), once more, is reprising the unique historically Russian neurosis, of anachronistic fantasy. It has been almost a century, since some major Nation, for reasons of pure territorial aggrandizement, has set out to attack another sovereign Nation. There are very few who would lend a scintilla of credibility to Putin’s purported goal, of eliminating Nazis (was not that the allied goal back in the 1940s?)

We can, contextually recall, the widely distributed, photo of Putin, the balding, shirtless, autocrat on horseback. His own projected, fantasized and self- idolized, perception of a movie hero of the American Wild West, is belied, by his noticeably, less than movie star stance of a Clint Eastwood in the saddle, not to mention the distinctly, non-heroic, bared torso. Such is an additional Russian extension of the obvious St. Petersburg neurosis, only, in this instance, the goal is Hollywood, instead of the Louvre or the posh Paris salons.

One is encouraged by the support of all of the countries surrounding Ukraine, and others, financially, by the delivery to Ukraine of military weapons, and, as well, by the assertion of financial sanctions against Russia and its mob of reprehensible oligarchs. Reportedly, even traditionally neutral Switzerland has participated in sanctions against Putin’s irresponsible and costly exercise of adolescent egotism.

From a purely logical or historic point of view, Putin’s adolescent behavior might have the potential to appear sardonically humorous, were it not for its tragic price in human suffering, blood and treasure.

-p.

 If one were to look very carefully at a fully detailed World Map (a magnifying glass would be of much utilitarian assistance) and concentrate on the Northwestern- most area of Russian Siberia, you may just be able to discern a tiny isthmus, protruding in the general direction of the Arctic Circle. This small Russian-owned bit of land is the independent province of SCHMOR-KATZISTAN, a land exemplified by ice and permafrost snow. The capital (and only City) is the municipality of SCHMOR-KATZ, run by an autocratic President, MISTISLAV J. KUTYURNOSOFF, a/k/a (when not in earshot),” Goo-Goo Eyes Slava.”  The reason for the totally forbidden, and often used, nickname was the one and one- half inch thick eye lenses, worn by the always-stern Slavic Monarch; who by the way is also hard of hearing. The latter two weaknesses, not unlike the inherited blood disease, genetically suffered by the European Russian Czarist family, is believed to be, royally inherited. To true S-K patriots, therefore, both the need for, and the wearing, of such thick eyeglasses is a confirming sign of divine selection and assured august nobility.

The Nation of S-K, geographically and, by virtue of its extreme topography is, as a practical matter, divided into two distinct and separate national geographic regions. One of which is populated by 20,000 people who are ruled with an iron hand from the stated municipality, and who work, exclusively, at whatever small patches of soil  (the general condition of the land is perm a-frost or glacial)  to produce the only organic product that could be sustained in the Nation, big red sugar beets. The other one- half of the area of the Nation is a vast, empty, dark area, mostly, covered in ice and inhabited solely by hundreds of small penguins.

 The Nation is strictly insular and strictly self-sustaining, with one sole exception, set forth below, and conducts no trade or commerce with any other Nation or foreign province. It solely survives on a limited and repetitive diet, confined to, and consisting of, its home grown, sugar beets.  It may be noted that much culinary talent has been demonstrated in the creative and tasty preparations of sugar beet stew, beet cutlets, beet salad, beet soup, fried or boiled beets, stuffed (with chopped  beets) beets and many more, especially creative items on the official National Menu.

The one exception to the strict isolationist trade policy was the required importation from Mother Russia, of insulin, empirically made necessary, by reason of the regular and exclusive, dietary ingestion of sugar (sugar beets). Thousands of injective needles, filled with the needed insulin, are delivered by parachute, weekly, by European Russian transport planes. The prudent President, mindful of the criminal inclinations of Mother Russia, most specifically, its sociopathic oligarchs, would responsibly have the contents of the insulin needles checked for bogus ingredients, like cheap vodka, or borscht, for the protection of his people, He had especially engaged for this purpose, the services of the eminent scientist and chemist, Professor Oxana Kutyurnosoff.

Militarily, the frozen, sugar beet-growing Nation has four aging WW2 tanks, 1 propeller-driven bomber and 68 hunting rifles. All of said military equipment has been in unused storage, for many decades. Luckily, for its citizens, no Nation, historically, has ever chosen to invade or seek to acquire SCHMOR-KATZISTAN.

One day, an unexpected visitor arrived at SCHMOR-KATZ. It was, most discernably, a relative of the President, as one was able to tell by the one-inch thick monocle worn in his left eye. The relative, an outcast from a similarly configured, small Russian Nation, further to the South, extolled, for some days, the virtues of his recently departed country, regarding the variety of arable land and the rich produce grown. After some days of inspiring conversation, the two royal relatives discussed the possible invasion and acquisition of the richly endowed, Southern Nation. Eventually, examining maps, both of the Southern Nation, as well as that of SCHMOR-KATZISTAN, they put their highly magnified eyes together to construct an attack program, consisting of an initial bombardment, followed, by a land attack by the enlisted citizens of S-K, and the acquisition of the Southern Nation. The initial step of bombardment was essential since the Nation to be attacked, has a small standing army.

After some searching, an aged and very hesitant, S-K citizen came forward, who admitted he once flew an airplane but insisted that he might have forgotten how, and, further, insisted that he knew absolutely nothing about navigation.  The two thick-goggled conspiring relatives enlisted the unhappy former pilot, and, after a great deal of sputtering, the old aircraft took off. The two conspirators made ready their few bombs, and with their rapt, especially magnified, attention on the maps, awaited the proper moment. When they mutually determined that they were right above the target, they jacked opened the Bombay doors and rolled their five bombs out. Soon, they could hear the sounds of the explosions and, flushed with supposed success, happily directed the old former pilot to return to home base. Their planned intention was now, to rally their troops, for land invasion. However, shortly after their return, a ragged, smoky old beet farmer advised them that they had (erroneously) bombed the other part of S-K and had needlessly, killed and injured hundreds of innocent, small penguins.

 Pliny moral: Imperial conquest is never easy and always wrong.

-p.

The dutiful, sentient wrapper,
Enclosing the needful self-that’s
Peering out for felicitous information.
Thoughts of recent happy days,
While seeking that special windowsill
That opens wide to the sunny breeze.
-p.
[L.N. Shapiro, NYC 2/22]

We offer this essay on the subject of the radio, not knowing how many of our readers are of such an age as can recall the same, and, particularly, the contextual era of which this simple electronic device was a paramount part. Contemporaneous electric and computer marvels [including “echo technology”] have so overshadowed the simple device that it has been essentially, forgotten or ignored.

Any fair and useful homage to the radio could not be meaningfully and accurately rendered, without some basic discussion of the relevant context of the extant American society, most particularly, the American family.  It can fairly be said, that the subsequent exponential development and availability of more complex and utilitarian electronic devices, has so thoroughly metamorphosed society, as to make the contextual era of the family radio, (circa. 1940s to 1950s) unfamiliar ancient history.

Radios were customarily purchased from businesses, dealing in electrical appliances, except for those, which were installed in living or dining room, decorative furniture. In some homes and apartments, such item of showy furniture, containing the radio was located in a prominent place in the living room or family room, usually facing a sofa or armchair, but always, located where it was accessible by the family or any one of its members.

Radios came in all sizes, styles and shapes, dependent upon the intended destination in the home. Most were small and, perhaps, placed atop an “icebox,” (forerunner of the refrigerator) or an article of household furniture. The insides of these devices were relatively, bulky, containing tubes of various sizes, wires, and a mix of sundry electrical parts. (N.B.). This was prior to the advent of the portable radio, the latter device existing in an entirely, disparate contextual setting than is relevant to this writing.

Families in those days, usually, spent more time together and listening to the radio, was often done, by the assembled family; the latter ensemble, a veritable rarity, in contemporaneous times. Aside from the daily newspaper, or viewed on occasion, in the cinema, on “Movietone News,” the radio was the primary source of news information. The family listened, most intently, to the news during the worrisome years of the Second World War. One heard President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s, “Fireside Chats,” Churchill’s “Blood, Sweat and Tears” speech, and listened, for the latest news and commentary from the likes of, Walter Cronkite, H.B. Kaltenborn, Edward R. Morrow, Eric Severeid, David Brinkley, Howard K. Smith and many others, some, still familiar. We can poignantly remember that the youngest member of the family began to cry when he heard the report that Herr Adolph Hitler had threatened to launch German V-2 Rockets against New York.

As children, we looked forward to Sunday afternoons, when our favorite action programs were broadcast, such as, “The House of Mystery,” “Nick Carter, Detective,” “The F.B.I. In Peace and War,” and “The Shadow” (“The Shadow Knows”). The assembled family was mutually, entertained by regular Sunday evening comedy programs like those of, Fred Allen, Jack Benny and Red Skelton. Today, entertainment is ordinarily, sought outside the home and evaluated on a purely personal, basis.

The blitzkrieg advent, and exponential development and use of computers, most especially, handheld “smart” phones, marked the tragic end of radios and the radio era.  With it, died the warm characteristics of family sentimentality and togetherness, personal sharing, of intimate feelings, and the comfort and assurance of personal recognition and intimately expressed conversation. Conversation became unitary, and solo, as opposed to shared or socially expressed, and was, now, faceless and exclusively, on a one-to-one basis. Rather than expressed in predictably expected, chosen words, they were transmitted, as cold and uniform, computer-like data, reflected on small, lighted, handheld screens, each distant from the place of the other party to the conversation.

Copious computer developments, inarguably, made work and life far more efficient and faster, but at the exorbitant cost of intimate friendship, humanity and individuality, as existed in the radio era.

-p.      

On January 20, 2020, the CDC confirmed the first cases of Covid-19 (originating in the City of Wuhan, China) in the United States. Expeditious and diligent research and development successfully produced an effective vaccine and the Nation, and the World, developed and commenced, general prophylactic and curative protocols to treat and prevent the spread of the disease, which disease had intensified to the level of a “pandemic.”

It was empirically determined that wearing a well-fitting mask, along with the administration of the newly developed vaccine and physical distancing, helped protect the individual and others from the disease. Since such time, compliant citizens, wishing to avoid the illness and its possible spread to others, have wisely and dutifully, ascribed to the uniform practice of wearing a facial mask in all public appearances. We have nevertheless, not been able [despite respecting its salubrious purpose] to avoid the feeling upon continuously seeing uniform crowds of unidentified, masked individuals, as somehow, eerily dystopic, as often portrayed in science fiction or horror movies.

It may be the strange mystery of unfamiliar uniformity and the absolute unanimity of such previously unheard of practice, which still appears eerie and at times, no less than extraterrestrial. There are no neighborly faces to confirm, no polite smiles, a dearth of guttural communication and a surfeit of energetic head movements, the latter, as ersatz vocabulary. There is no doubt about the mask’s absolute necessity (except for thoughtless and irresponsible complaints about alleged feelings of loss of “liberty” from citizens of the Nation, who really should know better). Yet the scenario, nevertheless, remains mysterious and anti- (or, “un”) social.

Removed (with valid medical reason) from sight, are those portions of the physiognomy, customarily utilized to impart expression or reaction, and meaningful interface (or is it, “inter –mask”) communication is barely possible. Not only is there a dearth of the usual “small talk,” but, often an actual lack of identity between the muted, putative conversationalists.

Masks are effective roadblocks to the communication of human reaction, emotion, agreement or the opposite, attraction and love, interest, boredom, apathy, care,  approval or otherwise, degree of emphasis or significance, or human reactive communication.  It may generally, be said, that the (necessary) protective action of masking, has the dual negative effects of arresting normal societal interaction, as well as the intended disease. We find, especially strange, the sight of group of young masked toddlers, looking like identical Russian toys, dystopic and mechanical.

The significant losses directly attributable to this continuing, horrific, viral event, in addition to the most tragic, viz., the losses of life and health, are beyond counting. Oversubscription of hospitals and clinics,  career and economic loss, academic and school loss, business failure, political complications, and aggravated divisiveness, family and organizational disruption, travel restrictions and their proscription, theatrical failure, and cancellation of public events, business loss and insolvency, product and food shortages, limitation in social interaction, economic inflation, mortgage and debt defalcation, frustrated business transactions, and a veritable plethora, of regrettable others.

Although not definitively included, among the worst implications of the pandemic, for whatever it is worth, the empirically mandated, “masquerade” phenomenon nevertheless, is the most cinematic.

 –p.

It would appear that the celebrated Serbian tennis star, Novak Djokovik, while, reportedly excellent at the sport of tennis, may be somewhat, less proficient in his understanding of mature social and community responsibility. The tennis star, asserts, with ardent eloquence, that he, as an individual, has the right to refuse vaccination (for Covid), since he, alone, has the ultimate right to determine what substances go into his body; he is willing, therefore, to forego his right to participate in the leading world tennis matches, like Wimbledon and the French Open. It is our view that his ardor and willing sacrifice are only comparable to his intransigent naiveté and lack of sense of community responsibility.

At some point in time in the history of the Homo sapiens, it was empirically determined that living in society, was far preferable to the precarious attempts at surviving alone. Mutual protection, joint food gathering and social interaction were among the salient benefits reaped by living with others in community. Living together in society, however, necessarily meant the evolution of the pragmatic need for mutually agreed rules of conduct and social responsibility.  

It was Rousseau, who famously created the term, “The Social Contract,” pursuant to which, members of society willingly agree to surrender certain personal rights, deemed for the society’s public good, in exchange for the many benefits of living in that society. By practical necessity, the designated leadership of the community retains the ultimate determination as to the designation of the subject matter properly included in the category of “the public good.”

The outbreak of the worldwide epidemic of a virulent, highly contagious virus (the “Covid Pandemic”), mandated the societal enactment and promulgation of relevant, health-oriented, prevention and treatment measures. Among the preventative measures, were, vaccination [timely developed and approved], plus the public prophylactic behaviors of masking and distancing. It was determined that these protocols were responsibly necessary not only for personal protection but as well, for the prevention of spread to others (i.e. “the public good”).

Mr. Djokovik should realize that his ardent declaration of personal rights are valid and recognizable only to the extent that they relate, exclusively, to matters of his own personal interest, but no further. In the sport of tennis, he may reside in his own, private bubble, but as an individual, necessarily partaking of the many services and benefits of society, he is bound by societal obligation, as responsibly analogized in the concept of the “Social Contract.” No one, living in society, is an absolute sovereign over himself; not even naive sports celebrities.

We were especially surprised, by the media reports of the large conglomeration of truckers blocking the highway between Detroit and Windsor Canada, in angry protest against an applicable mandate requiring the wearing of masks. In addition to compliance with the self-same “Social Contract,” these protesters, are members of a profession, so highly regulated, that their claims of outrage, demanding liberty from restrictive authority, seem bizarre and thoughtless. The same is empirically inconsistent with the protesters’ constant, daily experience. Truckers, of all people, live with and by, rules regulations and ordinances, respecting licensure of themselves and their vehicles, labor and commercial rules, traffic laws, driving and highway restrictions, inter-state laws, employment agreements, labor regulations, hourly strictures, and conceivably, the provisions of applicable trade union agreements.

Alas, in today’s world, mature perception, a close concomitant of human enlightenment, appears to be a rarified and esoteric commodity.

-p.

                                                                                                                                                          We are steadily (and rather, impatiently), convalescing from the joyless experience of a six-day sleepover at St. Luke’s Hospital. As should be understandable, such an unexpected break from one’s routine lifestyle naturally causes him to take particular notice of, and to re-examine, his customary routine and practices. A salient feature of our personal choice of activities is our preference for the writing and dissemination of the present style of authorship, known as the “blog.” As the number assigned to this writing indicates, we have produced and distributed, in excess 0f 640 “Blogs.” We have accordingly elected to dedicate the subject of this writing to the subject blog, itself. 

As writing blogs it is prominent among our choice of activities, [and, as we have penned so many], it would appear to be evident that we greatly enjoy the activity; what we nevertheless, detest, is the name, “Blog.” The latter’s sound is the diametric opposite of being euphonious, viz., a sound like “splat,” or “glug,” and would be suitable for the description of something blocking traffic, an artery, or perhaps the current of a small stream. We would have preferred a more pleasing name like, “mini-essay,” “literary reflection,” or perhaps, something like “selected thoughts.” However, like other mainstream American citizens, we traditionally accept the inherited lexicon, as it, acceptably, exists.

Aside from its cacophonous name, the literary form is to be lauded for its many ubiquitous qualities, making it a highly desirable style of written communication; a written form, in our view, somewhere in the mix, between the literary forms of the “belle lettre,” and a personal editorial, written by an author familiar to the reader. It may be observed that there exists no prescribed style nor form to this style of writing, which is ordinarily familiar to a writer’s regular reader; the subject, or content, varies with the author’s inclination.

Because the style of authorship is traditionally informal, it is equally suitable for literary consumption, by both the truly serious and the casual reader. The unpredictable and varied subject matter makes each distinct reading, a fresh and exciting experience. Equally, important, the permissive, liberal format makes possible the author’s utilization of subjects as diverse in distance as the local Dairy Barn is to the Milky Way or, indeed, as light years distant in humanity and moral character, as a Mr. Rogers is to a Donald Trump. All subjects, political, social, literary, gender, anthropological and meteorological, are grist for the Blog’s mill; historical references, current events, personal recollections, social and artistic criticism, civil rights, morality, virtually, any topic of anticipated interest to the reader, may be appropriately discussed and, hopefully, enjoyed.

Lastly, the facile mode of dissemination, viz., by computer e-mail, makes distribution to regular readers, quick and simple, and invites thoughtful and relevant response.    

-p.