Tag Archives: United States

February 15, 2013 · 11:26 am

The Presidency: Knowing When to Say When

Presidents Day is coming up here in the U.S. on Monday, and while these days there really are not any traditions to speak of for this holiday, it is a good opportunity to reflect on the limitations of that office.  Technically the holiday is the official celebration of the birthday of George Washington.  However its proximity to the birthday of Abraham Lincoln, not to mention laziness in both academia and in the popular press, has turned it into a day when we celebrate all of the U.S. Presidents.  Thanks to our incessant need for advertising of course, we are being bombarded this long weekend with images of Washington, Lincoln, and others – even non-Presidents like Benjamin Franklin – trying to sell us cars, bed linens, and so on.

That being said, Washington himself is someone for whom all Americans ought to be deeply grateful to Providence, particularly when we look at how the office of Prime Minister or President in other countries can lead to the implementation of policies completely at odds with the will of the people whom they govern.  Cousin George (he is a distant relation) did not make himself a king by setting up an American monarchy and accompanying aristocracy, even though he was certainly popular enough to do so.  Nor did he cling to power once he achieved it, but instead reluctantly served two terms and stepped down, leaving the office to his political successors rather than to his relations.

Yet historically speaking, our Presidents have not always known when to reign themselves in; we see occasions throughout our history when they have become drunk on power and their own opinion of themselves.  One reason why we have two-term limits for Presidents today for example, is because of the inability of President Franklin Delano Roosevelt to cede power.  We are often told that thanks to Roosevelt’s inspiration, America got through the Great Depression and World War II, and no doubt he must be remembered for that service.  Yet we should also be aware that he was incredibly power-hungry, as we learned from his breath-taking attempts to bend the Supreme Court to his will.

In the 1930′s when FDR and his brain trust came up with sweeping legislation to get Americans to work and to create the foundations of the social welfare system, to his fury he found that lawsuits were being brought against some aspects of his plans, challenging their constitutionality.  Upset that conservatives on the Supreme Court were determining aspects of Roosevelt’s “New Deal” to be unconstitutional, Roosevelt attempted to pass legislation that would have allowed him to pack the Supreme Court with his own appointees, in order to pursue his agenda.  You can learn more about this often-forgotten chapter of American history in Jeff Shesol’s fascinating book, “Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs. The Supreme Court”.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis – certainly not the most conservative of jurists – reacted to the news that FDR was going to attempt to manipulate the Supreme Court with the kind of gravitas with which the old look at the impatient, doomed-to-failure plans of those younger and more foolish than themselves.  On February 5, 1937, Roosevelt sent attorney Thomas Corcoran to hand-deliver a press release to Brandeis before the proverbial poo hit the fan, as Shesol describes:

The president has sent me, Corcoran said. He handed Brandeis a press release. If there had been any way to exclude you from the plan, Corcoran continued, the president would have done so; no offense was intended. Brandeis scrutinized the release, was silent for a moment, then looked up. He asked Corcoran to thank the president for the courtesy. But “tell your president,” Brandeis said gravely, “he has made a great mistake. All he had to do was wait a little while. I’m sorry for him.” Corcoran wondered what Brandeis meant by “wait,” but lacked the nerve to ask. With that, Brandeis shook the young man’s hand and passed through the red velvet curtain.

Fortunately for all of us Roosevelt’s plans eventually fell apart, and after he died during his fourth term in office, Americans had the common sense to pass legislation preventing a President from staying in power again for so long, in so doing looking back to the example of Washington for inspiration.

So as we near George Washington’s official birthday celebration, we Americans can still hope that the tension between the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial branches of government will provide at least the possibility for compromise, and also for prevent those in power from riding roughshod over the will of the people.  Unlike in countries such as Britain, France, and Russia, the head of the ruling political party in the United States does not always get his way.  And that, in my view at least, is a very good thing indeed, as no doubt Washington himself would agree.

George

Detail of “Portrait of George Washington” by Rembrandt Peale (c. 1823)
The White House

2 Comments

Filed under culture

Tagged as , , , , , , , , ,

January 16, 2013 · 11:21 am

Pulling Heartstrings on Social Media

Sometimes I may not appreciate being told what to do, but I always resent being told how I ought to feel.  Yet on a daily basis, in matters large and small, I find myself being told that I must have emotional reactions to things as grave as the civil war in Syria, or as trivial as which brand of loo paper will better my life, all couched in the same terms.  Whether you realize it or not, gentle reader, this insidious type of manipulation is happening to you as well, all the time. Only now, it is not only happening in print or television media, but in your social media world as well.

Yesterday afternoon, barring some unforeseen intervention, a dog who shall remain nameless was put down at an animal shelter which shall also remain nameless. Admittedly this is not some new occurrence: it happens every day, all over the United States and indeed around the world.  I only know about it because someone placed this information in my social media timeline. Yet what truly struck me was not so much the plight of the dog, but rather the way in which I learnt of her impending doom.

For you see, the shelter housing the dog tweeted out that unless the dog was rescued by a certain time yesterday afternoon, the dog would be destroyed. This tweet included a picture and brief description of the dog, as well as contact information should the person who saw the tweet decide to save the dog’s life.  Needless to say, I found this rather dramatic.

As an experiment, I decided to share the tweet and see what sort of responses it elicited from my followers.  I asked those who cared to respond what they thought about this tweet, but I did not include any editorial comments of my own.  Rather, I wanted to see what sort of reactions I would receive from a cross-section of people. Admittedly this was not a scientific poll nor a carefully controlled survey, but the results are still instructive.

Reactions were split almost exactly into two equal camps. Half of the respondents were moved by pity to say that the tweet emotionally affected them, and were saddened by their inability to do anything to help the dog. These ranged from expressions of wanting to adopt the dog if they could, to feelings of heartbreak, concern, and so on. I did not have the heart to point out that a visit to the shelter’s profile page would reveal that there were, in fact, dozens of other dogs with the same sad story of nearing death unless they were adopted by a certain deadline.

Others, however, had quite a different reaction to this tweet, including at least one dog owner.

One described the tweet as “cheap” and “sensational”. They felt that the attempt failed to make them feel guilty, however, though they could not explain why it had failed. Another compared the shelter unfavorably to those who post images of dead people on social media to shock people and attract attention for a particular cause, while another said they had never seen anything like it on Twitter before, and did not appreciate it. Still another described the tweet as merely “crass emotional manipulation”.

What was particularly interesting was the fact that some of those whose strongest emotional reaction was pity did not at first appear to realize the effect the impending deadline had on them.  Once this was pointed out to them, upon further reflection several suddenly realized that they were being manipulated. Once they had accepted that there was nothing they could do for the dog, and their initial sense of sorrow for the dog had given way to rationality, they recognized that they had been “handled”.

To my mind, there is something rather more macabre about announcing that you will be killing an animal, than simply doing it quietly. It reminds me a bit of posting a bill at a place of execution such as Tyburn in London, saying that so-and-so will be hanged, drawn, and quartered by order of Bad Queen Bess on such-and-such a day, should you care to come along and bring a picnic lunch. Though of course there is a very important difference here, and that is that animals, much as we may love them, are not human beings. To react to the putting down of a dog as something akin to execution is to hold an imbalanced view one’s place in the natural order.

More to the point of this piece however, this is an example of how a group of people can have completely different reactions to the same information, based on how that information is presented to them. Both editorial boards and advertising agencies have understood for a long time that by playing the emotional heartstrings, the public can be manipulated into doing whatever you want, whether it is selling newspapers to start a war, or asking people to watch a monkey throw excrement from behind a screen. William Randolph Hearst built San Simeon as a result of the former, and Piers Morgan is on CNN because of the latter.

Despite the supposed media-savvy nature of those of us who are Gen-X and younger, Americans are still far too easily influenced by those who whip up an emotional overreaction on the part of their target audience. This is nothing new, of course, for examples abound in American history. Yet so often we focus on national and international issues, analyzing what a pundit or a politician means in a major speech, that we miss the more mundane forms of that level of manipulation when we come across them in daily life.

Therefore pay attention in your social media, gentle reader, the next time you read a tweet or see a post that makes you feel emotional. All human beings feel emotions, but not all emotional reactions are ultimately beneficial. Take the time to ask yourself: do I really agree with what I am being asked to do or believe, here? For oftentimes you will discover that the rational, adult reaction is to take a deep breath, and not allow yourself to be manipulated.

Sargent
“Marionettes” by John Singer Sargent (1903)
Private Collection

5 Comments

Filed under culture

Tagged as , , , , , , ,

January 4, 2013 · 10:31 am

The Example of Martha Washington

This morning a good friend posted a quote from the first of First Ladies, Martha Washington, which I wanted to share with you, gentle reader. We perhaps don’t think of Martha much as an influential figure these days, though she was certainly well-thought of not only in her own day, but as a model both for American First Ladies and indeed for American women who came after her, for many years. Of course, now that even the Daughters of the American Revolution are facing internal controversy over whether they should mention Jesus or not, it is not surprising that we find Martha is not as highly esteemed as she once was, and this is indeed a great shame.

Martha spent most of her life living in the countryside among the Virginia gentry, but she was a woman who rose to the occasion whenever the moment commanded it.  She was both emotionally and physically there, at some of this country’s darkest moments, during the War of Independence.  Yet whatever difficulty beset her, she continued to trust in Divine Providence that God would provide what was needed, and that it was her task to simply pick up and carry on.  In writing to her good friend, the writer and Revolutionary propagandist (and mother of five) Mercy Otis Warren, Martha observed:

I am still determined to be cheerful and happy in whatever situation I may be. For I have also learned from experience that the greater part of our happiness or misery depends upon our dispositions and not upon our circumstances.

Perhaps because she comes off as somewhat grandmotherly, seemingly less dynamic than Abigail Adams or Dolley Madison, Martha Washington does not attract the attention she once did. In an age when women who embrace traditional roles are openly mocked in certain quarters, Martha may seem too much a relic of the past, when women tended the home fires. And as it happens, one of the reasons we know less about her is because after her husband’s death, she burned as many of their letters to each other as she could lay her hands on, as they had agreed. When you consider how long they were married – 40 years – and how often he was away from home, you can imagine the voluminous correspondence that has been lost, which would have given us an even greater insight into her character.

Yet as is so often the case, actions speak louder than words.  For Martha was there at Valley Forge during the famous winter encampment, just when all seemed lost – something which might surprise those who simply think of her as this tiny, country lady who happened to be George Washington’s wife, and who assume (wrongly) that she did little but live in his shadow. She tried to rally and encourage the officers and men, and those of their wives who came to join them, through prayer, song, putting on plays and organizing dinners, visiting the sick, and trying to help the men find relief and the strength to go on despite severe poverty, cold, and deprivation. It is said that at one point she herself ran out of pins, and rather than complain or ask to send for them to Philadelphia, she began to use thorns from brambles around the camp to hold together her clothing.

Whatever contemporary society may tell you about the role of women, remember this great lady, who clearly had the courage to come through unbelievably difficult circumstances to help bring about the birth of this nation. She was a wife, mother, patriot and Christian who was too concerned with doing her duty by God and her neighbor to stay focused on negatives. And for that reason she is an inspiration for all of us, regardless of our sex.

VF

Detail of “Washington at Valley Forge” by Tompkins Harrison Matteson (1854)
Private Collection

Leave a Comment

Filed under culture

Tagged as , , , , , , , ,

November 30, 2012 · 10:56 am

Venice in America

Today is the Feast of St. Andrew the Apostle, brother of St. Peter and patron saint of many things, including fishermen, Scotland, and Russia.  However he is also the patron saint of one of the greatest and most significant architects of the modern age, Andrea Palladio, who was born on St. Andrew’s Day in 1508.  If you are not hugely interested in architecture, you may not be familiar with his name, but if you live in the Western world there is a reasonably good chance that the home you live in, or the civic buildings that make up the town where you live, were shaped and influenced by the ideas of this 16th century Venetian master.

Just as Jacobo Sansovino, whom I wrote about earlier this week, had a profound influence on the artists of his day, in convincing them that they were equaling or even surpassing the achievements of their ancient Greek and Roman forbearers, so too Palladio was a driving force in convincing architects that they could do the same.  Sansovino was himself a highly accomplished architect, of course, producing many beautiful and monumental structures in Venice between the 1530′s and 1560′s.  Palladio, who was a generation younger, had to bide his time while Sansovino held sway over the public taste of the capital, but eventually he became the head architect of the Venetian Republic after Sansovino’s death.

One of Palladio’s most influential contributions to the development of modern architecture and indeed modern living was in taking advantage of open spaces, rather than being afraid of them.  Keep in mind that in much of Europe from the fall of the Roman Empire in the West until the time of the Renaissance, most people lived together for protection, either in closely-packed walled towns, or in castles or other fortified structures in the countryside.  Foreign invaders or marauding neighbors bent on pillaging and destruction could sweep in at any moment, and there was safety in numbers.

What our eyes need to be trained to see is how different the world which Palladio created was from the times that had come immediately before it.  There is nothing of the fortress about a Palladian house.  There are no dark, thick walls designed for defensive purposes, with only interior courtyards to allow light and air.  Instead, his houses sit gracefully inside beautiful parks and gardens, surrounded by trees and flowers, green lawns and splashing fountains.

Nor were these houses gigantic, bloated structures, like the Baroque behemoths that were built to house the egos of absolute monarchs.  Rather, they were comfortable places to enjoy oneself with one’s family and friends by engaging in outdoor activities, reading, entertaining, or the like.  They are of course much larger than the average person’s home, but they are not overwhelmingly so.  The confidence with which these villas were built testifies to a similar spirit of self-confidence of the day that times were getting better, and that the darker ages of constant warfare between rivaling factions were becoming less frequent, at least in the Venetian Republic.

This in itself is a key component to the architecture which Palladio created.  His houses are built for aristocrats, but they are they are the aristocrats of a republic.  There was no hereditary king of Venice: the Republic was ruled by a Doge, an elected official whose powers were limited further and further as the centuries wore on.  While the Venetian Republic was not truly a representative democracy, in the sense that we would understand the term, it had a series of checks and balances in place to ensure that no one single individual or family could come to dominate the entire system.

Palladio’s ideas and methods were not just limited to a bunch of gondola-riding aristocrats half a millenia ago.  For in fact, many of the American Founding Fathers were hugely enamored of the Palladian way of living.  President Thomas Jefferson, for example, built his beloved estate Monticello, as well as the Virginia State Capitol building, and the main building of the University of Virginia, using principles derived from his own study of Palladio’s work.  James Hoban, the Irish-American architect of the White House, took his plans for the Executive Mansion directly from two Palladian-style country houses which had been built a few years earlier in Ireland.

Even today, Palladio’s legacy is all around us, not only as part of our visible history, but in continuing to influence architects who build homes and businesses, offices and churches by taking Palladio’s ideas and applying or re-interpreting them.  As is so often the case in these pages, we have here yet another example of why it is important to understand the cultural history of the West, something which the past forty-odd years of academically entrenched relativism has done such a bang-up job of trying to eradicate.  Over many centuries the ideas of this single Venetian architect have had a positive impact on both the look and livability of our homes, our public buildings, and indeed our cities.

Palladio understood that in order for contemporary society to succeed, it must be interconnected with the best aspects of the society which came before it.  He helped to radically change the way that his contemporaries lived by looking at how people had lived before, how they lived in his day, and figuring out he could bring together the best aspects of each.  In doing so, he succeeded in transforming not only a small Italian republic, but the lives of people in countless cities and towns large and small, all over the world.  His is but one example of why we should both study and try to understand our past, taking the lessons we learn there, and adapting them to the needs of the present.

Fratta

“La Badoera” Villa by Andrea Palladio (built 1556-1563)
Fratta Polesine, Italy

2 Comments

Filed under culture

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

November 29, 2012 · 10:29 am

The Forest and the Tree

As we approach the beginning of the season of Advent, in preparation for the commemoration of the birth of Christ, many of His followers will take the time to engage in communal activities to reflect upon and celebrate this most profound event in human history.  Yet perhaps because we have grown so accustomed to being able to worship as we please, we have become lazy in our understanding of how very much the Christian message is despised in some quarters.  At the same time however, if we get too caught up in the pettiness of the present age, we may lose sight of the fact that hope is the touchstone of Christianity itself.

In the city of Brussels, capital of what for the time being is known as Belgium, it has long been customary to erect a large Christmas tree in the middle of the city’s magnificent Grand Place.    This is a large, public square, bordered by the city hall and other stately buildings from various historical periods, where people gather to celebrate, protest, do business, commune with officials, and so on.  An annual Christmas market is held here, centered around the town Christmas tree, though of course the custom of having a municipal Christmas tree in the center of it is not unique to Brussels, for we can find the same practice in many large cities and small towns around the world.

Recently however, the burghers of Brussels have decided not to display a Christmas tree in the Grand Place.  Instead, this year’s installation is a “sculpture” – really a tower made up of television screens – which one can climb to the top during the day to enjoy the view, and which at night puts on a light and image display.  It sounds rather like the entrance to an amusement park to me, but there you are.

City officials deny that there is any political motivation behind this move.  However, some Belgian politicians and journalists have expressed their concern that this “Electronic Winter Tree”  was chosen to not cause offense to those who are members of other religions, such as the Muslims who make up 25% of the city’s population.  One could add, for that matter, that non-believers resident in Brussels were probably included in that equation, given that most of them are members of the European Parliament.

There are a number of obvious responses to this decision which any reasonable person could make.  However what this decision clearly betrays is really rather curious.  It is not so much a demonstration of a kind of trendy stupidity, which seems to hold sway over much of Europe these days.  Rather, it is a deeper ignorance Europeans have of their own history and culture – something they have long accused Americans of – as they rush seemingly with glee into their own personal demographic and cultural disaster zone.

If one were to stroll around the Grand Place today and look up at the buildings, being careful not to be blinded by the lights from the “Electronic Winter Tree” of course, one would immediately come to the conclusion that not only was one in a Christian country, but that in fact one was in a decidedly Roman Catholic country.  The tower of the town hall, for example, is crowned not by a flag, an orb, or a simple spire, but rather a statue of the Archangel St. Michael triumphing over the Devil, whom he is trampling with his feet.  The facade below him is a virtual forest crammed with hundreds of statues, including figures from local history and figures of saints from throughout Christendom, such as St. Sebastian, St. George, St. Florian, St. Christopher, St. Augustine, and many others.

This fact aside, what is perhaps the ultimate irony here has been lost as a footnote in the somewhat outlandish reporting I have read to date on this story.  For even though the Christmas tree is gone, the city’s Nativity Scene will still be put on display in the square.  Yes, you read that correctly: there is no city Christmas tree, but a life-size physical representation of the birth of Jesus, complete with the Christ Child, Virgin Mary, St. Joseph, the shepherds, and the magi, is out on the Grand Place for all to see.  There are even live sheep being kept in the stable, which is built of timber and filled with straw, to help draw the visitor into contemplation of the miracle at Bethlehem, in much the same way as St. Francis of Assisi did when he set up the first known Christmas crèche in the town of Grecio in 1223.

This brings us back to where we started, which is a challenge to reflect on how we as Christians on this side of the Atlantic engage in the public square with those who do not share, or who are virulently opposed to, our religion.  For the Christmas tree is but a symbol, adopted and modified through custom, that can just as easily be replaced by something else; it is not essential to Christian belief or practice.  If we are so focused on this one, single object as an inherent aspect of the celebration of Christ’s birth, then we are missing the point.

Aren’t we all just a little bit guilty of forgetting that it is the Incarnation we celebrate at Christmas, and not the first day of Winter?  If the Christmas tree, with its lights, decorations, presents, and so on, is nothing more than a tradition, from which we gain no spiritual insight or example, then it is meaningless.  By focusing on the tree, to paraphrase the old saying, we are in danger of missing the forest of witnesses, like those carved on the entrance of Brussels’ city hall, who preached, taught, suffered, and died so that the Christian message of salvation would spread to all the corners of the earth.

In that regard, perhaps what is going on in Brussels will remind us that we need to rediscover not only our Christian heritage, but our actual Christian faith.  We should not be afraid to proclaim it and defend it, but we need to make certain that it is the actual Birth of Christ that we are celebrating at Christmas, and not some sort of combination of retail therapy and local custom.  Otherwise, we will soon be left with nothing other than to wish each other a Happy Winter Solstice, and be done with it.

Nativity Scene on the Grand Place, Brussels

1 Comment

Filed under culture

Tagged as , , , , , , , , , , ,